Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPLEMENTAL ITEM #1 REVISIONS TO THE 12-22-20 DRAFT MINUTES ITEM #1 DECEMBER 22, 2020 DRAFT MINUTES REVISIONS TO PAGE 10 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION PACKET Mason Mason added that the comments previously mentioned were speculation, not factual. Chu Chu asked for the number of notices mailed out to the neighboring businesses and residents. She referenced the opposition letters/emails received the day of the meeting. Aguilar Aguilar confirmed any property owner within the 300-foot radius of the exterior boundary lines of the parcels received a notice with regards to this project site. Willkom Willkom stated that the City received a total of seven (7) emails and/or e- Comments which came from five (5) individuals. Three (3) of the individuals commented that the City of Tustin does not need an additional gas station since there are many in the area. Willkom reminded the Commission that their purview is related to land use, not the economic feasibility. She stated that one of the individuals works for Cal Trans and his concern was related to site distance visibility. Staff consulted with the City's Traffic Engineer and was informed that the on-site circulation, along with traffic flow on adjacent streets, have been fully analyzed, and no site distance issues are anticipated. Willkom added that another one of the e-Comments came from the applicant of the project. Daudt Daudt touched on the consideration points for the Commission's deliberations. The Tustin City Code (TCC) does enumerate certain criteria that the Commission must evaluate and make findings in favor of "if' the Commission is moving towards approval of the project. He further explained that these consideration points are generally focused on the physical impacts and compatibility of a project with the surrounding neighborhood, etc., but it does not address the economic impact or the desirability of a particular use or business in relation to other established businesses within the area. Through the TCC, the analysis is looking at the land use components of a project, and whether or not a project, as conditioned, can be deemed to be a project that would not have a negative or adverse impact physically, in the surrounding neighborhood or incompatibility issues in a physical sense, or based on zoning conditions. Chu Chu asked who would be operating the proposed business (i.e. 7-Eleven Corporation or franchisee). Aguilar Per Aguilar, an existing franchisee will be operating the project location, ` Gt a fFaRGANcoo Kozak Kozak commented on the adjacent freeway and the desire to place a gas station on the proposed site, which was previously occupied by a gas station. Minutes—Planning Commission January 26, 2021 —Page 4 of 5