HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 CODE AMENDMENT (CA) 2024-0005 - ORDINANCE NO. 1556 (STREAMLINE TUSTIN)Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
MEETING DATE
TO
FROM
Agenda Item 11.t.al
Reviewed: a`V�
AGENDA REPORT City Manager
Finance Director J
FEBRUARY 4, 2025
ALDO E. SCHINDLER, CITY MANAGER
JUSTINA L. WILLKOM, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT 2024-0005 (ORDINANCE NO. 1556) TO IMPROVE
THE EFFICIENCY AND CLARITY OF THE CITY'S ENTITLEMENT PROCESSES
RELATED TO ALCOHOL PERMITS, SOIL REMEDIATION, MURALS AND
GRAPHICS, AND TEXT ERRORS.
SUMMARY:
The proposed Code Amendment 2024-0005 (Ordinance No. 1556) is a City -initiated update
to Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9 (Land Use) of
the Tustin City Code . The amendments, part of the ongoing "Streamline Tustin" program,
aim to enhance the efficiency, clarity, and modernity of the Zoning Code in alignment with
the City's Strategic Plan.
Proposed updates include:
1. Alcoholic Beverage Sales Establishments: Streamlining the Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) process by allowing approval without a public hearing if no objections are received
within 10 days of public notice.
2. Soil Remediation: Removing the requirement for Zoning Administrator approval, given
oversight by State and county agencies.
3. Murals and Graphics: Clarifying language to accommodate new technologies and media
for murals.
4. General Updates: Eliminating duplicate text and correcting typographical errors for
improved clarity.
On October 8, 2024 the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended City
Council approval of proposed Code Amendment 2024-0005.
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
City Council Agenda Report
CA 2024-0005: Zoning Code Streamlining
February 4, 2025
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Conduct the first reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 1556.
2. Schedule the ordinance for a second reading and adoption at the next regular City Council
meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
The proposed Code Amendment (CA) 2024-0005 is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"; Cal. Pub. Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.)
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., title
14, Section 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility
that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed amendments are anticipated to have a neutral to positive fiscal impact on the
City's General Fund.
Cost Savings: Streamlining the CUP process for alcoholic beverage sales
establishments will reduce administrative costs by minimizing staff time spent preparing
reports and conducting public hearings for uncontested applications.
2. Revenue Neutrality: The removal of soil remediation CUP requirements is not expected
to significantly impact revenue, as the City historically receives few applications for such
projects. Other permitting agencies, such as the California Department of Toxic
Substances Control, retain primary jurisdiction over these activities.
3. Operational Efficiency: Improvements to the clarity and organization of the Zoning Code
will enhance staff efficiency, allowing resources to be allocated more effectively without
requiring additional funding.
Overall, the amendments support operational efficiency and reduce unnecessary regulatory
costs without negatively affecting the City's revenue streams.
CORRELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN:
The proposed amendments align with Goal E: Organizational Excellence and Customer
Service of the Tustin Strategic Plan. Specifically, this effort supports strategy three (3) to
"conduct a review of the development approval process to identify streamlining opportunities
and implement a plan of improvement."
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
City Council Agenda Report
CA 2024-0005: Zoning Code Streamlining
February 4, 2025
Page 3
By refining the CUP process, eliminating unnecessary regulatory steps, and modernizing
code language, this amendment enhances efficiency, improves customer experience, and
ensures high -quality service delivery for residents and businesses.
APPROVAL AUTHORITY:
Pursuant to Tustin City Code (TCC) section 9295 regarding municipal code amendments,
the City Council shall hold a public hearing, upon receipt of the recommendation of the
Planning Commission. After the conclusion of such hearing, the City Council may, within one
(1) year, adopt the proposed amendment or any part thereof in such form as the Council
deems desirable.
DISCUSSION:
The goal of Streamline Tustin is to implement changes to the TCC that make the
development's review process more efficient, provide more clarity, and/or modernize the
TCC. Proposed CA 2024-0005 is intended to streamline the application review process for
businesses that wish to sell alcohol beverages, revise typographical errors in the TCC, clarify
ambiguity, remove unnecessary processes, and modernize outdated parts of the TCC. The
following summarizes each of the proposed amendments.
Murals or Painted Wall Signs
The Zoning Administrator has the authority to approve, by CUP, painted wall signs that
include murals or graphics. However, in recent years new technology has been introduced
that does not require the use of traditional materials, such as paint. For instance, current
technology allows for murals and graphics to be created using video and light displays, 3-D
modeling, laser etching or vinyl wraps. The proposed amendment clarifies that the Zoning
Administrator can consider murals or graphics that are painted or composed of other material
deemed appropriate, provided the mural or graphic depicts a scene or image that does not
promote a product or business.
Alcoholic Beverages Sales Establishments Process Streamlining
To reduce the processing times and improve customer experience, staff proposes to amend
the Zoning Administrator review process for CUP applications related to alcoholic beverage
sales establishments.
Currently, staff processes alcoholic beverage CUP requests by scheduling a public hearing
before the Zoning Administrator after an application is deemed complete. The CUP process
typically takes two to three months, depending on the applicant's responsiveness to initial
comments regarding the plans they submit. However, a significant amount of time attributed
to the process is preparation of a staff report, scheduling a public hearing, and public
notification.
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
City Council Agenda Report
CA 2024-0005: Zoning Code Streamlining
February 4, 2025
Page 4
To streamline the process, staff proposes that, after the project is deemed complete, the City
would post and mail public notices stating that the Zoning Administrator will consider the CUP
request for alcohol beverage sales establishments, consistent with Government Code
Section 65091. If an objection is not received within 10 days from the date of the public
notice, then the CUP could be conditionally approved. If an objection is received within 10
days, a hearing would be scheduled before the Zoning Administrator. Staff believes this
process is appropriate because conditions of approval for alcoholic beverage sales mitigate
potential impacts to surrounding areas; and the City rarely receives opposition to alcohol
related applications. Staff anticipates that the proposed amendment will reduce the approval
timeline by approximately one month.
Additionally, it should be noted that the TCC currently authorizes the Zoning Administrator to
forward CUP requests to the Planning Commission for their review, if the Zoning
Administrator deems it appropriate. Staff is not recommending any change in this regard.
Soil Remediation Activities Streamlining
The TCC currently requires that the Zoning Administrator review and approve a CUP for soil
remediation activities. Soil remediation activities fall under legal authority of other agencies,
such as the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the State Water Resources
Control Board, and the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA).
Historically, when the City reviews soil remediation CUPs, there are few conditions of
approval, if any. Furthermore, potential "impacts" associated with a soil remediation project
are already covered by the existing TCC, as a remediation program would need to comply
with the City's noise ordinance, maintain a safe line -of -sight at driveway aprons, not emit
noxious odors, etc. To reduce unnecessary regulatory barriers, staff recommends removing
the CUP requirement for soil remediation activities. The City's Public Works staff was
consulted on this proposed Code Amendment, and has no concerns.
Consistency with the Tustin General Plan
The proposed CA 2024-0005 is consistent with the Tustin General Plan in that the Code
Amendment complies with the following goal and policy:
Land Use Element Goal 2: Ensure that future land use decisions are the result of
sound and comprehensive planning.
Policy 2.2. Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning Ordinances,
and other City ordinances, regulations and standards.
Planning Commission Action, October 8, 2024
On October 8, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed Code Amendment 2024-0005 at a
public hearing and recommended approval to the City Council. No opposition was received.
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
City Council Agenda Report
CA 2024-0005: Zoning Code Streamlining
February 4, 2025
Page 5
PUBLIC NOTICE:
A one -eighth (1/8) page public notice was published in the Tustin News on January 23, 2025,
informing the public of the City Council meeting. In addition, the public notice was posted at
Tustin City Hall, the Tustin Library, and the Tustin Area Senior Center.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed CA 2024-0005 would be consistent with the City's General Plan and will
implement the City's Strategic Plan goal by streamlining development processes. Staff
recommends that the Tustin City Council conduct first reading by title only and schedule the
second reading for the next regular City Council meeting for Ordinance No. 1556, amending
Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9 (Land Use) of the
TCC, thereby implementing the Streamline Tustin Program.
Signed bE�y:
(Ju d
. In'v�e 041.
E4A5...
Justina L. Willkom
Community Development Director
ISigned by:
9 jxiaA7l bL_ vt(t"
MUDE5ECDAME3...
Jorge Maldonado
Associate Planner
Attachments:
for
E,d
Signed by:
ay
C3F97677838E410...
Jay Eastman
Assistant Community Development
Director - Planning
1. Planning Commission Minutes, October 8, 2024
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4505
3. Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
ATTACHMENT 1
MINUTES
COUNCIL CHAMBER & VIDEO CONFERENCE
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 2024
7:00 P.M. CALLED TO ORDER.
Given. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Mason
All ROLL CALL: Chair Higuchi
present. Chair Pro Tenn Douthit
Commissioners Kozak, Mason, Mello
PUBLIC INPUT:
Hurtado Hurtado confirmed no public input was received.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Hurtado Hurtado confirmed no public input was received.
1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES— SEPTEMBER 24, 2024
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the September 24,
2024 Planning Commission meeting, as provided.
Motion: It was moved by Mello, seconded by Mason, to approve the Minutes of the
September 24, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried: 4-0-1 with
Mello abstaining from the vote.
PUBLIC HEARING:
2. CONTINUED ITEMFROM THESEPTEMBER 24, 2024 MEETING: HOUSING
ELEMENT REZONE PROJECT IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMS 1.1A, 1.113,
1.1F AND 1.1G OF THE 6TH CYCLE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT OF
THE GENERAL PLAN
Under State law, the Housing Element must show that the City can
provide its fair share of regional housing over an eight -year period (2021
to 2029). The City's share of housing is established by a process called
the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The current RHNA
mandates the City to accommodate the construction of at least 6,782
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 1
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
dwelling units on vacant or underutilized residentially zoned properties.
The City's current zoning can only accommodate 4,614 new dwellings;
which results in a shortfall of 2,168 units. Pursuant to State law, the City
must establish a "rezone program" in the Housing Element that specifies
properties that will be rezoned to residential to resolve the shortfall.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the following resolutions, all of which
recommend that the City Council approve the applications necessary to
implement Housing Element Program 1.1 and meet the City's RHNA
obligation:
Tustin Legacy— Sites 1A, 1B and 2
1. Adopt Resolution No. 4494, recommending that the City Council find
the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Tustin
Legacy Specific Plan (TLSP) Amendment 2024-0002 is adequate.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 4495, recommending that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 1547 for Specific Plan Amendment (SPA)
2024-0002 to allow for additional high -density residential
development on three sites in the TLSP, Housing Element Sites 1a,
1b, and 2, with a minimum density of 20 units per acre (du/acre) on
the selected sites. Amendment to the TLSP would to be consistent
with existing State housing law, including the provision for State
density bonus.
Enderle Center — Site 17
3. Adopt Resolution No. 4496, recommending that the City Council find
the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for General Plan
Amendment (GPA) 2024-0001, Code Amendment (CA) 2024-
0003, and Zone Change (ZC) 2024-0001 is adequate.
4. Adopt Resolution No. 4498, recommending that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 1549 for CA 2024-0003 to establish a Housing
Overlay (HO) district (overlay zone) in conjunction with the planned
community commercial district (base zone) to implementthe housing
implementation program of the 6th Cycle 2021-2029 housing
element of the general plan.
5. Adopt Resolution No. 4499, recommending that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 1550 for ZC 2024-0001 to amend the City's
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 2
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
zoning map to apply the Housing Overlay (HO) district to the Enderle
Center Rezone Project area.
The Market Place — Site 18
6. Adopt Resolution No. 4500, recommending that the City Council find
the FEIR for GPA 2024-0001 and East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP)
Amendment 2024-0001 is adequate.
7. Adopt Resolution No. 4501, recommending that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 1551 for SPA 2024-0001 to accommodate
residential development on 18 acres of The Market Place Rezone
Project site and create a new high -density residential land use
category to implement the Housing Implementation Program of the
6th Cycle Housing Element of the General Plan.
General Plan Consistency (Enderle Center & The Market Place)
8. Adopt Resolution No. 4497, recommending that the City Council
adopt City Council Resolution No. 24-79 for GPA 2024-0001 for
minor text amendments to ensure consistency with the proposed ZC
2024-0001 (Housing Element Site 17 - Enderle Center) and SPA
2024-0001 (Housing Element Site 18 —The Market Place)
Eastman Presentation was given by Assistant Director Eastman.
Higuchi For public clarification, Higuchi asked Eastman if a 400-500-unit project was being
brought to the Commission. He also asked if a developer were to bring a housing
project at the Enderle Center to the City today, without the housing overlay being
approved, could the project be approved. Higuchi clarified his understanding that,
due to the location on a transportation corridor, and the sites being zoned
commercial, a developer could bring forward an affordable housing and prevailing
wage project, and circumvent the whole zoning process. Higuchi inquired on the
number of public hearings, including public hearings related to the housing overlay,
would need to be held prior to a project being approved. If the proposal was a
market rate housing project, would the project be presented to the Commission?
He asked for confirmation on appealing the Commission's decision of the item to
City Council. Higuchi asked Eastman to reiterate the process if the item were to be
denied by the Commission and the February deadline was missed. What would
the first course of action betaken by Housing and Community Development (HCD)?
If the City's Housing Element were to be de -certified, would that leave the City
open to Builders Remedy?
Eastman In response to Higuchi's questions, Eastman stated "no" that the City is not
approving a 400-500-unit project tonight. He stated that Senate Bill (SB) 6 and
other state laws do allow for residential development on commercially zoned
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 3
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
properties if certain criteria are met (i.e. affordable housing, prevailing wage, etc.).
Therefore, theoretically, a developer "could" develop on one of these three
commercial sites, under certain housing law, but the current zoning does not allow
for it. In response to the number of public hearings, as it relates to the rezoning, the
item would be presented to the City Council in November for review and approval,
and if the City Council approves the item, there would be a second reading on the
item, and then it would take 30 days for the rezoning to go into effect. After that, if
a developer wanted to propose an affordable housing component, then there
would not be any necessary hearing process. If the proposed item had a
commercial component (i.e. Enderle), then that item would require some review
because commercial is not exempted from discretionary hearings. If the proposed
item was market rate housing, it would be permitted by right under the proposed
zoning and therefore would not need to be presented to the Commission. With
respect to what happens if the City would deny approval of the proposed rezoning
program; the City's Housing Element would be de -certified by HCD. Eastman
stated that if the City's Housing Element were to be de -certified, that would leave
the City open to Builders Remedy, lawsuits, lack of grant funding, etc.
Willkom Willkom added, if the developer proposes housing, then the housing is permitted
by right. However, if the proposal includes a subdivision map, the proposal would
need to be presented to the Commission, not the City Council. She confirmed the
appeal process Higuchi previously mentioned.
Mason Mason asked if the item is approved and goes to City Council, could a developer
demolish any of the three areas included in the rezone. She further asked, if the
area is zoned commercial, with a housing overlay, would the developer need to
come back to the Commission for attempting to rezone the entire area housing.
Mason mentioned rumors of the Enderle Center being up for sale. She also asked
if there was a development plan in place, and if so, would the project return to the
Commission. Mason stated the Commission has lost a lot of the ability to make
decisions for the City due to laws coming from Sacramento. She asked staff if the
community would have the opportunity to speak up against a future item.
Eastman The EIR that staff prepared does not include demolition of existing structures,
therefore additional environmental assessment would need to be completed bythe
developer to make that clear. The demolition of commercial and rebuilding of
housing, is something that is definitely possible. The housing overlay only applies
to "up to 7 acres" of the parking lots as discussed in his presentation. There is the
desire to incorporate the retail component within the Enderle Center. Eastman
clarified that regardless of this rezoning, the Enderle Center is privately owned
property, and property owners have the right to redevelop their property as long as
Eastman they meet all applicable codes. As of now, the City has not received a development
project for the Enderle Center. To answer Mason's question on the development
process; yes, the Community could speak up against the development. Any
development that is proposed will have to submit a traffic analysis for the City,
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 4
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
which would include any technical issues related to mitigating project impact,
including from a traffic standpoint.
Mello Mello asked about TLSP Neighborhood D North, and where the excess capacity is
coming from and what it is currently zoned. He inquired as to whether there would
be any change to open space. He referred to the chart within the Power Point
presentation, specifically the allocation of the 6,782 units by income levels, and
asked why there were no acutely -low or extremely -low units. Mello asked if the
City has been assigned RHNA numbers that the City has to build to acutely -low or
extremely -low units and if it would be required by a developer.
Eastman In response to Mello's question regarding Neighborhood D North, Eastman stated
there is no change in zoning. Neighborhood D North is a subset of Neighborhood
D. Currently, there are no units allocated at the Neighborhood D North. Staff's
recommendation as part of the rezoning is simply applying residential capacity; the
zoning and land use do not change. Any area that was identified forthe linear park,
for example, does not change. Regarding income levels, Eastman clarified that the
allocated very -low income category includes the extremely -low income and
acutely low-income categories. Acutely -low income is a fairly new category.
Eastman clarified that the City is only rezoning properties to accommodate units to
meet RHNA.
Douthit Douthit asked the City Attorney if the Commission recommended denial to the City
Council, what would the outcome be? He also asked if staff consulted with the
Tustin Preservation Conservancy or the Tustin Historical Museum on any historical
aspects of the Enderle Center.
Daudt In response to Douthit's question, Daudt stated the following, in general: This item
includes staff's recommendation for a General Plan Amendment and under State
Law, the recommendation from the Planning Commission has to be done by written
recommendation to City Council for approval of the proposed SPAs, in order to
implement the policy direction that City Council provided through its adoption of
the Housing Element. If the Commission wanted to change course, the City would
not be able to proceed forward with a recommendation tonight, in opposition,
because State law requires a written recommendation of denial of essentially what
the City Council has directed the Planning Commission to consider, in terms of
rezoning, etc. If denial was the direction of the Planning Commission, that
recommendation would potentially putthe City in jeopardy of meeting the February
deadline for the rezoning the City has already committed to, which then would lead
the Cityto the potential negative consequences previously mentioned during staff's
Daudt presentation. Daudt provided several options/resolutions against implementation
of the recommended items (additional delays) if there is a consensus that the
Commission does not want to move forward with the item to the City Council for
their consideration.
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 5
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Willkom In response to Douthit's previous questions, Willkom stated, as part of the
environmental review process, City staff does need to look at Cultural Resources
analysis or a study.
Mason Mason asked for clarification on historic preservation buildings that are over 50
years old. Hypothetically, she asked what if there was no longer a crisis anymore,
with regard to the legislature? How does the City revert back to rezoning "just
commercial" at the Tustin Market Place?
Willkom Willkom reiterated what Eastman previously mentioned in his presentation. The
City's obligation is to rezone the three sites to accommodate the units assigned to
Tustin. The City is not required to build the units. This Housing Element is for an
eight -year period (2021-2029). At the end of the planning period, HCD will most
Likely come up with another set of regulations that the City will need to look into.
In conclusion, the City is implementing what has already been approved by the City
Council and has been certified by HCD.
8:12 p.m. Higuchi opened the Public Input portion of the meeting.
Public The public's concerns/comments generally included the following: spoke on why
Input. the City is bringing this forward so close to the deadline; density bonus was not
discussed; why not amend the RHASP and DCCSP instead of the Enderle Center;
there were questions as to whether or not the Enderle Center has been sold; there
were comments that all development would be for low-income residents;
recommend staff look at the City of Huntington Beach because they are fighting
the State and have been granted an extension; request that the City approve part
of the HE rezone sites and ask HCD for a one year extension; locate the units to
another site; felt left out of the public process; use only the southeast parking lots
for housing at the Enderle Center; amend the HE sites inventory to not include the
Enderle Center; what is to prevent the State from requiring more from cities; traffic
along 17t" Street is terrible; the daughter of an Enderle Center business owner
stated her father is losing his life's work and 40 years of investment because the
property owners are evicting him as soon as the rezoning is adopted; the number
of units proposed is too high; appreciation for the pressure the state is putting on
the City; prefer notto have high -density atthe Enderle Center; question where new
residents will park and concern for the number of parking needed; high -density
housing increases crime rates; increase the housing in areas that need reinvestment,
such as off McFadden; lots of misinformation and lack of knowledge with business
owners; developers get kickback for building low income; questions what benefit is
Public to the City of Tustin; how much notice will residents receive before construction
Input. begins; public felt unprepared for meeting, but appreciated the detailed
presentation; resident of the Landing in Tustin Legacy said the Legacy development
is fantastic and the density is good; referenced the proposed development by The
Irvine Company on lots 11, 12, 13 should be similar to the Landing, and not Amalfi;
put residential similar to the landing on areas in Tustin Legacy south and east
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 6
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
(west?) of the Landing, which are zoned for office but likely not needed due to
COVID; increase land area for housing so as to reduce density of housing in the
Legacy; and lack of understanding the process and why questions aren't being
answered.
9:14 p.m. Higuchi closed the Public Input portion of the meeting.
Higuchi Higuchi asked Daudt if there is an opportunity to negotiate an extension with HCD
or force them to give the City an extension by filing a litigation. He also asked if
Huntington Beach is exposed to Builders Remedy currently.
Daudt In responseto Higuchi's questions, Daudt stated there is no opportunity for the City
to request an extension. Any effort to force HCD to give the City an extension, or
to use litigation to change how state laws are applied, would be unsuccessful.
Daudt briefly discussed thatthe City of Huntington Beach is a charter law city which
is distinct from the City of Tustin being a general law city. As a general law city,
Tustin is bound more to State and Governor mandates. In concept, a charter city
has more control over local municipal affairs. The disputes in Huntington Beach are
Largely centered around their rights as a charter city, as opposed to State mandates.
The City of Tustin being a general law city would not be able to make similar
arguments as Huntington Beach. The City of Huntington Beach is subject to
Builders Remedy to the extent that they do not have a certified housing element.
Mason Mason's closing comments/questions generally included: what is the deadline for
rezoning; is there a 17t" Street corridor specific plan; is there a way to get a 17tn
street specific plan initiated, and how long would it take; can some of the items be
approved tonight and others be continued to a later date; how often can the City
resubmit alternative sites, and is the State open to that as long as the City is hitting
the 6,782 number of units?
Willkom In response to Mason's questions, Willkom stated that originally HCD provided the
City with three years to rezone, but around the time of the adoption of the Housing
Element the State legislature added an additional 120 days. The current deadline
is three years plus 120 days, which falls in early February 2025. Willkom added
there is no 17t" Street corridor specific plan. The process to adopt a specific plan is
Lengthy — studies of the area and available infrastructure, etc. would need to take
place before a specific plan can be adopted. She estimated it would take one to
two years, or longer, depending on the entire process. Willkom explained the City
Willkom Council has the ability to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation or
overrule the recommendation. The RHNA obligation is 6,782 housing units and it
is firm. As to changing the rezoning to a different site at a later date, Willkom
clarified that the City would need to go through the revision of the Housing
Element, which includes lengthy process prior to submitting it to the state for their
approval. Willkom reiterated that tonight's item is to rezone sites in order to meet
the RHNA obligation by the State's deadline. The City is not obligated to actually
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 7
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
build the units, the City is only required to rezone to accommodate the allocated
number of units.
Mason Mason asked if a developer were to propose a project at one of the rezone sites,
would there be a public hearing, or could the develop just build their project?
Willkom Willkom clarified that if the Council approves the rezoning, then a housing project
would be permitted by right. However, if a housing project includes a subdivision
map, that subdivision map needs to go to the Planning Commission for approval.
Additionally, the housing project would need to go through the City permitting
process, and during the permitting process the applicant would need to comply
with all of the City regulations, including building standards, development
standards, and objective design standards.
Higuchi Higuchi provided a recap of what was discussed already during Eastman's
presentation and staffs discuss with the Commission.
Willkom Willkom stated the process has been ongoing for several years. Tonight, the
Commission is considering the rezoning and the EIRs for the rezone project, and
state law requires that the City allow for residential development by right.
The Commissioners expressed their views and thoughts on the Rezoning Program.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Mello, to adopt Resolution No. 4494. Motion
carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Mello, to adopt Resolution No. 4495. Motion
carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Mello, to adopt Resolution No. 4496. Motion
carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Mello, to adopt Resolution No. 4497.
Motion carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4498.
Motion carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4499.
Motion carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4500.
Motion carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4501.
Motion carried 4-1, with Douthit dissenting.
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 8
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
9:45 p.m. Recess.
9:53 p.m. Resumed meeting.
Item cont.
3. CONTINUANCE REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE MULTI -FAMILY
to the next
RESIDENTIAL PARKING & PRIVATE STORAGE STANDARDS CITYWIDE
scheduled
(CA 2024-0006) AND IN THE DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL CORE (SPA
meeting.
2024-0005) AND RED HILL AVENUE (SPA 2024-0006) SPECIFIC PLANS
On December 5, 2023 the City Council was presented an assessment of
barriers to development in the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan
(DCCSP) and Red Hill Avenue Specific Plan (RHASP) areas. The
assessment was prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) and
recommended, among other things, changes to multi -family parking and
private storage area requirements.
On July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission held a workshop to discuss
changes to the multi -family residential parking and private storage
requirements consistent with the EPS report. Staff has since prepared draft
amendments to the Zoning Code to implement the Commission's
recommendations.
However, refinements to the proposed revisions are currently under
consideration. Therefore, staff is requesting that this item be continued to
the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission continue the proposed Code Amendment
(CA) 2024-0006, Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) 2024-0005, and SPA
2024-0006 to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
Motion: It was moved by Mason, seconded by Kozak, to continue the proposed CA 2024-
0006, SPA 2024-0005, & SPA 2024-0006 to the next regularly scheduled
Planning Commission Meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
Adopted 4. CODE AMENDMENT 2024-0005 (ORDINANCE NO. 1556) — CODE
Reso. No. STREAMLINING AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
4505.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4505, recommending
that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 1556, amending Section 9299 of
Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9 (Land Use) of the
TCC to implement the Streamline Tustin Program to reduce the Zoning
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 9
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Administrator timelines for approving alcoholic beverages sales
establishments when there is no public opposition, remove the requirement
for Zoning Administrator approval of soil remediation projects, clarify
Language regarding murals, and eliminate duplicated text and provide
clarity.
Barragan Presentation given.
Mello Mello inquired as to whether or not soil remediation companies are allowed to use
self -directed remediation such that Department of Toxic Soil Contamination
(DTSC) is bypassed.
Barragan Barragan was not familiar with self -directed remediation. He will research and
provide a response at a later date. The most recent soil remediation project was
under the oversight of DTSC, along with other agencies. The only conditions the
City applied to that project was relative to the City's Noise Ordinance.
Willkom Willkom added, for any soil remediation project, the developer needs to obtain a
permit from the City and typically the permit processing involves the Orange
County Health Care Agency and depending upon the contamination level, DTSC
may or may not be involved.
10:08 p.m. Opened/Closed the Public Hearing.
Hurtado No public input received.
Higuchi Higuchi made favorable comments to City staff.
Motion: It was moved by Mason, seconded by Douthit, to adopt Resolution No. 4505.
Motion passed 5-0.
None. REGULAR BUSINESS
OTHER BUSINESS:
Willkom Willkom thanked her staff: Jay Eastman, Samantha Beier, EPD staff, and
supporting staff for all oftheir hard work on the Rezone item. It is definitely a team
effort to get to this point! She informed the Commission of the Tustin Mayor's
Thanksgiving Breakfast November 211. Welcome to our new Deputy Director of
Public Works/City Engineer— Kenny Nguyen.
Nishikawa Nishikawa, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, announced his retirement
in December 2024. Congratulations Ken!
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 10
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND REPORTS:
Kozak Kozak attended the Tustin Tillers Parade.
Mello Mello thanked staff and fellow Commissioners for their input/hard work on the
Rezone project.
Mason Mason would like an update on how the City is communicating with the public (i.e.
social media, public noticing, etc.); 17t" Street Corridor needs a specific plan; and
Historic Preservation Program — including historic buildings from 17t" Street.
Douthit None.
ADJOURNMENT:
10:14 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday,
October 22, 2024.
Signed by:
" C/
D148F2601 EF34A4...
ERIC HIGUCHI
Chairperson
ESigned by:
, txS6" b. (AUJOA
ED45DA2623B54A5...
JUSTINA L. WILLKOM
Planning Commission Secretary
Minutes — Planning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2024 — Page 11
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 4505
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1556,
AMENDING SECTION 9299 OF PART 9 (ADMINISTRATION)
OF CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF ARTICLE 9 (LAND USE) OF
THE TUSTIN CITY CODE (CODE AMENDMENT 2024-0005)
TO IMPLEMENT THE STREAMLINE TUSTIN PROGRAM
The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. That Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9
(Land Use) of the Tustin City Code (TCC) establishes the authority of the
Zoning Administrator to approve, conditionally approve or deny requests
when such requests constitute a reasonable use of property not permissible
under a strict literal interpretation of the regulations.
B. That routine revisions to the TCC are required to provide clarity, create
consistency of terms and definitions, comply with new State laws, streamline
approval processes and amend Code requirements to reflect current market
trends.
C. That CA 2024-0005 proposes the following changes to TCC: reduction on the
zoning administrator timelines for approving alcoholic beverages sales
establishments when there is no request for a public hearing, eliminate the
conditional use permit requirement for soil remediation project, clarify that
mural can utilize other current technology such as laser etching, video
displays, 3-d modeling, vinyl wraps, and minor typography clean up.
D. That on October 8, 2024, a public hearing was duly noticed, called, and held
by the Planning Commission on Code Amendment (CA) 2024-0005 relating
to Code Streamlining and Improvement Program.
E. That the code amendments are reasonable and serve the purpose of
streamlining project and development plan reviews by providing clarity and
consistency within the TCC.
F. That the proposed amendments comply with the Tustin General Plan in that
they comply with the following goal and policy:
Land Use Element Goal 2: Ensure that future land use decisions are the
result of sound and comprehensive planning.
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Resolution No. 4505
Page 2
Policy 2.2: Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning
Ordinances, and other City ordinances, regulations and standards.
G. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed code amendment is not
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"; Cal. Pub.
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of
the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., Title 14, Section 15000 et
seq.) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt
Ordinance No. 1556, amending Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter
2 (Zoning) of Article 9 (Land Use) of the TCC (Code Amendment 2024-0005)
relating to the Code Streamlining and Improvement Program to provide clarity,
consistency of terms and definitions, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of
Tustin held on the 8t" day of October 2024.
Signed by:
D148F26�1EF34A4...
ERIC HIGUCHI
Chairperson
Signed by:
�ttiS to a bi WiIjOWt
ED4SDA2623B64A6...
JUSTINA L. WILLKOM
Planning Commission Secretary
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Signed by:
343ADCC696E946B...
MICHAEL DAUDT
Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A: Draft Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Resolution No. 4505
Page 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Justina L. Willkom, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission
Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4505 was passed and adopted
at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 8th day of October
2024.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER AYES: Douthit, Higuchi, Kozak, Mason. Mello (5)
PLANNING COMMISSIONER NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONER ABSTAINED:
PLANNING COMMISSIONER ABSENT:
Signed by:
�ttiS to a bi W(IjOWt
ED45DA2623B54M...
JUSTINA L. WILLKOM
Planning Commission Secretary
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 1556
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 9299 OF
PART 9 (ADMINISTRATION) OF CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF
ARTICLE 9 (LAND USE) OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE,
CODE AMENDMENT (CA) 2024-0005 TO IMPLEMENT THE
STREAMLINE TUSTIN PROGRAM.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. That Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9
(Land Use) of the Tustin City Code (TCC) establishes the authority of the
Zoning Administrator to approve, conditionally approve or deny requests
when such requests constitute a reasonable use of property not permissible
under a strict literal interpretation of the regulations.
B. That routine revisions to the TCC are required to provide clarity, create
consistency of terms and definitions, comply with new State laws, streamline
approval processes and amend Code requirements to reflect current market
trends.
C. That CA 2024-0005 proposes the following changes to TCC: reduction on the
zoning administrator timelines for approving alcoholic beverages sales
establishments when there is no request for a public hearing, eliminate the
conditional use permit requirement for soil remediation project, clarify that
mural can utilize other current technology such as laser etching, video
displays, 3-d modeling, vinyl wraps, and minor typography clean up.
D. That on October 8, 2024, a public hearing was duly noticed, called, and held
by the Planning Commission on Code Amendment (CA) 2024-0005 relating
to Code Streamlining and Improvement Program.
E. That on , 2024, a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held
by the City Council on CA 2024-0005 relating to Code Streamlining and
Improvement Program.
F. That the code amendments are reasonable and serve the purpose of
streamlining project and development plan reviews by providing clarity and
consistency within the TCC.
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
Page 2
G. That the proposed amendments comply with the Tustin General Plan in that
they comply with the following goal and policy:
Land Use Element Goal 2: Ensure that future land use decisions are the
result of sound and comprehensive planning.
Policy 2.2: Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning
Ordinances, and other City ordinances, regulations and standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 2. Section 9299(b)(3) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (k) to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
(k) P'r amted Wall signs to include murals or graphics that are painted or made
of other material deemed appropriate by the Zoning Administrator and
which do not promote a product or business, but rather depicts a scene or
image.
SECTION 3. Section 9299(b)(4) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (a) to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
(a) Reserved. Soo! Femediiatie ;-aG iCivitIes, subject to the same fiRdiRgs-as
roi. . 1 fee a ^^nrlitiGRal use peFmii
SECTION 4. Section 9299(b)(4) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (e) to read as follows (deleted text in strikeout):
(e) Reduction of nonresidential or commercial parking requirements within the
Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan. All or a portion of the required
number of commercial parking spaces may be satisfied by depositing with
the City a Parking Exception Fee to be used for public parking
accommodation within the area. The amount of the Parking Exception Fee
shall be determined by Fee Resolution of the City Council. T",�g
n' stFatelh"ll make a deter�atiOR that r,rer,esed pFeje^ The
Zoning Administrator shall make a determination that the proposed project
requesting payment of the Parking Exception Fee meets the following
findings:
The proposed project is an infill project located within the Downtown
Commercial Core Specific Plan.
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
Page 3
2. The proposed project is considered to be relatively small.
3. The proposed project has incorporated building or site design
enhancements that make it an outstanding addition to the Downtown
Commercial Core Specific Plan.
4. The proposed project is aesthetically superior to one that provides all
required parking on site.
5. The project applicant shall agree to pay an annual fee for each
commercial parking space not provided on site.
SECTION 5. Section 9299(c)(2) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC is hereby
amended to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
(2) Public Hearing and Noticing Requirements.
(a) For applications other than Alcoholic beverage sales establishments,
ukJpon determination that an application is complete, the Community
Development Department shall schedule the matter for consideration by
the Zoning Administrator. If a public hearing is required for the type of
application considered, notice of such public hearing shall be given
pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. Minor adjustments shall be
considered by the Zoning Administrator without a public hearing.
Adds Ral n� a as Spe-Gifi ey FRFn Rt (`ede Con R 65091
r-cuarti8rrar-rrvt+ti-1��a��p ccrrr - errn-rT ccti8rr-vvv�r
magi be r etG GGmr�l y wi��,h__ G �S+f the `ali a
�Ty,�rI ��y #�eq-u+r=
ERVi�neRtaI Quality An+ I R the-eyelA� Of - r�flin� betweeR Feq �iFed
*' �rccr-irr cvc-n-r-v-rcr�rn-rrc�accvcccrrrcc�-arrccr
RGt+�gtimes, the I�eF time shall he itiio
1.
For Alcoholic beverage sales establishments, upon determination that an
application is complete, the Community Development Department shall
provide a notice of the Zoning Administrator's pending decision to approve
or deny the application, pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. If no
request for a hearing is received by the Community Development
Department within ten (10) days of the date of the notice, the application
may be approved by the Zoning Administrator without a public hearing. If
the Zoning Administrator intends to deny the request, or a request for a
hearing is received within ten (10) days of the date of the notice, then the
Community Development Department shall schedule the matter for a public
hearing before the Zoning Administrator. Pursuant to Section 9299b, the
Zoning Administrator may forward an application for alcoholic beverage
sales to the Planning Commission for consideration and action.
(c) Additional noticing time as specified in Government Code Section 65091
may be required to comply with noticing requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act. In the event of a conflict between required
noticing times, the longer time shall be given.
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
Page 4
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day after its
adoption. The City Clerk or his or her duly appointed deputy shall certify to the adoption
of the Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published as required by law.
SECTION 7. CEQA Exemption. The City Council finds that the proposed Ordinance is
not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"; Cal. Pub. Resources
Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant
effect on the environment.
SECTION 8. Severability. If any section, sub -section, clause or phrase in this Ordinance
is for any reason held out to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby declares that it would
have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, clause, phrase or portion
thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Tustin on this day of , 2024.
AUSTIN LUMBARD
Mayor
ATTEST:
ERICA N. YASUDA
City Clerk
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
Page 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1556
I, Erica N. Yasuda, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council
of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1556 was duly
passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the _ day
of , 20247 by the following vote:
COUNCILPERSONS AYES:
COUNCILPERSONS NOES:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSTAINED:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSENT:
ERICA N. YASUDA
City Clerk
Published:
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
ATTACHMENT 3
ORDINANCE NO. 1556
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 9299 OF
PART 9 (ADMINISTRATION) OF CHAPTER 2 (ZONING) OF
ARTICLE 9 (LAND USE) OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE,
CODE AMENDMENT (CA) 2024-0005 TO IMPLEMENT THE
STREAMLINE TUSTIN PROGRAM.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. That Section 9299 of Part 9 (Administration) of Chapter 2 (Zoning) of Article 9
(Land Use) of the Tustin City Code (TCC) establishes the authority of the
Zoning Administrator to approve, conditionally approve or deny requests
when such requests constitute a reasonable use of property not permissible
under a strict literal interpretation of the regulations.
B. That routine revisions to the TCC are required to provide clarity, create
consistency of terms and definitions, comply with new State laws, streamline
approval processes and amend Code requirements to reflect current market
trends.
C. That CA 2024-0005 proposes the following changes to TCC: reduction on the
zoning administrator timelines for approving alcoholic beverages sales
establishments when there is no request for a public hearing, eliminate the
conditional use permit requirement for soil remediation project, clarify that
mural can utilize other current technology such as laser etching, video
displays, 3-d modeling, vinyl wraps, and minor typography clean up.
D. That on October 8, 2024, a public hearing was duly noticed, called, and held
by the Planning Commission on Code Amendment (CA) 2024-0005 relating
to Code Streamlining and Improvement Program.
E. That on February 4, 2025, a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held
by the City Council on CA 2024-0005 relating to Code Streamlining and
Improvement Program.
F. That the code amendments are reasonable and serve the purpose of
streamlining project and development plan reviews by providing clarity and
consistency within the TCC.
1378023.4
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
CA 2024-0005
Page 2
G. That the proposed amendments comply with the Tustin General Plan in that
they comply with the following goal and policy:
Land Use Element Goal 2: Ensure that future land use decisions are the
result of sound and comprehensive planning.
Policy 2.2: Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning
Ordinances, and other City ordinances, regulations and standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 2. Section 9299(b)(3) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (k) to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
(k) Pa Wall signs to include murals or graphics that are painted or made
of other material deemed appropriate by the Zoning Administrator and
which do not promote a product or business., but rather depicts a scene or
image.
SECTION 3. Section 9299(b)(4) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (a) to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
Reserved. -
SECTION 4. Section 9299(b)(4) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC hereby
amends subsections (e) to read as follows (deleted text in strikeout):
(e) Reduction of nonresidential or commercial parking requirements within the
Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan. All or a portion of the required
number of commercial parking spaces may be satisfied by depositing with
the City a Parking Exception Fee to be used for public parking
accommodation within the area. The amount of the Parking Exception Fee
shall be determined by Fee Resolution of the City Council. The Zoning
dminiotrn�- shall make a detr�rminntiGR that nrepese t nrejeGt The
rn�rcr �riuiir-murc�c�v ��rrtmuRvrr�nu� ca—prvJcc�
Zoning Administrator shall make a determination that the proposed project
requesting payment of the Parking Exception Fee meets the following
findings:
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
CA 2024-0005
Page 3
1. The proposed project is an infill project located within the
Commercial Core Specific Plan.
2. The proposed project is considered to be relatively small.
3. The proposed project has incorporated building or
enhancements that make it an outstanding addition to th
Downtown
e
provides all
required parking on site.
5. The project applicant shall agree to pay an annual fee for each
commercial parking space not provided on site.
SECTION 5. Section 9299(c)(2) of Part 9 of Chapter 2 of Article 9 of the TCC is hereby
amended to read as follows (new text underlined; deleted text in strikeout):
(2) Public Hearing and Noticing Requirements.
(a) For applications other than Alcoholic beverage sales establishments,
jUpon determination that an application is complete, the Community
Development Department shall schedule the matter for consideration by
the Zoning Administrator. If a public hearing is required for the type of
application considered, notice of such public hearing shall be given
pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. Minor adjustments shall be
considered by the Zoning Administrator without a public hearing.
AddTtiGn�E)tiGi g e as speGified OR _eyemm nt Gode Co�nr� 65091
`"'�� ���y},� +; crrn-rTerrc-wa�v+c,' vrr-vvv�T
may be required tt��i' ttGiRg requiremeRtcrnTvrltil. Cali a
ERVirenmon� Quality Gt In the event of a nE)nflint bet�eioorro ryiiroit
�rrcrr ��-ccr-n-r-crn. cvc-rrr-v-rc+-cvrmTcrvccavccr-rrcq-arrccr
netiGi_ng tice?� thag r time
For Alcoholic beverage sales establishments, upon determination that an
application is complete, the Community Development Department shall
provide a notice of the Zoning Administrator's pending decision to approve
or deny the application, pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. If no
request for a hearing is received by the Community Development
Department within ten (10) days of the date of the notice, the application
may be approved by the Zoning Administrator without a public hearing. If
the Zoning Administrator intends to deny the request, or a request for a
hearing is received within ten (10) days of the date of the notice, then the
Community Development Department shall schedule the matter for a public
hearing before the Zoning Administrator. Pursuant to Section 9299b, the
Zoning Administrator may forward an application for alcoholic beverage
sales to the Planning Commission for consideration and action.
Lc) Additional noticing time as specified in Government Code Section 65091
may be required to comply with noticing requirements of the California
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
CA 2024-0005
Page 4
Environmental Quality Act. In the event of a conflict between required
noticing times, the longer time shall be given.
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the 31 st day after its
adoption. The City Clerk or his or her duly appointed deputy shall certify to the adoption
of the Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published as required by law.
SECTION 7. CEQA Exemption. The City Council finds that the proposed Ordinance is
not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"; Cal. Pub. Resources
Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs., Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) because it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant
effect on the environment.
SECTION 8. Severability. If any section, sub -section, clause or phrase in this Ordinance
is for any reason held out to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby declares that it would
have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, clause, phrase or portion
thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Tustin on this day of , 2025.
AUSTIN LUMBARD
Mayor
ATTEST:
ERICA N. YASUDA
City Clerk
Ordinance No. 1556
Docusign Envelope ID: ECC776D0-50E5-49AD-B095-50BB8D28F930
Ordinance No. 1556
CA 2024-0005
Page 5
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DocuSigned by:
7�~'Z17"
D 4&,E6DIKE�8N D I G
City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1556
I, Erica N. Yasuda, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council
of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1556 was duly
and regularly introduced and read by title only at the regular meeting of the Tustin City
Council held on the _ day of , 2025, and was given its second reading, passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of ,
2025, by the following vote:
COUNCILPERSONS AYES:
COUNCILPERSONS NOES:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSTAINED:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSENT:
ERICA N. YASUDA
City Clerk
Ordinance No. 1556