Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC MINUTES 01-14-25 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 MINUTES COUNCIL CHAMBER& VIDEO CONFERENCE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 14, 2025 6:01 p.m. CALLED TO ORDER. Given. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Pro Tern Douthit All present. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Douthit, Higuchi, Kozak, Mason, Mello PUBLIC INPUT: None. Hurtado confirmed no public input was received. Approved the CONSENT CALENDAR: December 10, 2024 meeting minutes. 1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES— DECEMBER 10, 2024 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the December 10, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Mason, to approve the Minutes of the December 10, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Motion carried: 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: 2. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) 2024-0003, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19353 (SUB 2024-0004), DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2024- 0013, GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY, AND DENSITY BONUS REQUEST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A TOTAL OF 1,336 APARTMENT UNITS, WHICH INCLUDES 334 AFFORDABLE UNITS WITHIN NEIGHBORHOOD D SOUTH OF THE TUSTIN LEGACY SPECIFIC PLAN Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 1 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: Irvine Company City of Tustin Attn: Kevin Roberts 300 Centennial Way 550 Newport Center Drive Tustin, Ca 92780 Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: Lots 11, 12 and 13 of Tract 18197; generally bounded by Warner Avenue to the North, Legacy Avenue to the East, Compass Avenue to the West and Tustin Ranch Road to the South, within Planning Area 13 and 14 of Neighborhood D, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15182, projects pursuant to a specific plan, a residential project that is undertaken pursuant to and in conformity with a specific plan, and the Specific Plan's EIR, is exempt from CEQA. REQUESTS: 1. Development Agreement (DA) 2024-0003 to facilitate the development and conveyance of a 19.4-acre project site. 2. Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) 19353 to subdivide the 19.4- Acre into six numbered lots and one lettered lot,for the development of 1,336 apartment units, a 0.66-acre publicly accessible park, open space areas, and other project amenities. 3. Design Review (DR) 2024-0013 for the design and site layout of 1,336 apartment units, a 0.66-acre publicly accessible park, open space areas, and other project amenities. 4. Density Bonus request to increase the allowable density from 708 units to 1,336 units (88.75% Density Bonus) by providing 71 very-low and 263 low-income units; and related waivers to increase the maximum setback, reduce private open space requirement,and reduce the required parking stall dimension. 5. Determine that the location, purpose, and extent of the proposed disposition of 19.4-acres site on Lots 11, 12 and 13 of Tract 18197, within Neighborhood D of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan, for the development of 1,336 apartment units, is in conformance with the City's General Plan and The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 2 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4514, determining that the location, purpose, and extent of the proposed disposition of a 19.4-acre site within Neighborhood D of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan for the development of 1,336 apartment units is in conformance with the City's adopted General Plan and the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. 2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4515, recommending that the City Council approve: a. DA 2024-0003 to facilitate the development and conveyance of a 19.4-acre site within the boundaries of Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. b. VTTM 19353 to subdivide approximately 19.4-acres into six (6) numbered lots for the development of 1,336 apartment units, and one (1) lettered lot for a 0.66-acre public accessible park, and to facilitate right of way dedications, publicly accessible pedestrian walkways (paseos), and other project amenities. c. DR 2024-0013 for the design and site layout of six (6) apartment buildings and associated parking structures, a 0.66-acre public accessible park, a cafe, publicly accessible pedestrian walkways (paseos), and other project amenities. d. Density Bonus request to increase the density from 708 units to 1,336 units (88.75% density bonus), by providing 334 affordable units (71 Very Low-Income units and 263 Low-Income units), and waivers to increase the maximum setback, reduce the requirement for private open spaces, and reduce the required parking stall dimensions. Ashabi Presentation given. Ms.Jennifer Ms. Lee, applicant, also provided a PowerPoint presentation from the Irvine Le, Irvine Co. Company. Commission Chair Higuchi, Chair Pro Tern Douthit, Commissioners Mason and Mello disclosed ex parte communications with the applicant. Mello Mello asked the Irvine Company about communication with neighboring areas regarding the proposed project's architecture, in comparison to Tustin Legacy. He also inquired about the affordable housing and who would be responsible Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 3 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 for maintaining and operating the affordable units: 1. Has an affordable housing developer been identified, or is a selection process planned? 2. Will there be a preference for Tustin residents or workers when renting out these units? Ms.Jennifer Jennifer Le, representing the Irvine Company,explained their community outreach Le efforts: mailers sent in December 2024, a project website and email address for information and inquiries, ongoing responses to community questions and calls, one-on-one meetings for those with concerns, and a commitment to maintaining open communication. Mr. Mario Mario Chavez Marquez, architect, discussed the project's design and aesthetics, Chavez highlighting the Irvine Company's approach to integrating with neighboring Marquez communities. Key elements included: modern classicism, larger landscape setbacks along streetscapes, dynamic horizontal and vertical movement, reduced building mass at key corners, and strategic use of materials to enhance the human scale and pedestrian experience. Ms.Jennifer With regard to Mello's question on the affordable housing developer, Ms. Lee Le stated the Irvine Company is partnered with USA Properties;there are regulatory requirements applied, auditing, record keeping that go along with operating an affordable housing community. Due to that, USA Properties has been selected as the operator of the program. Mello Mello also asked if USA Properties would be administering the actual affordable housing program (i.e. screening people). Ms. Jennifer Ms. Lee reiterated that USA Properties would be operating the program, which Le will include screening those who apply for an affordable housing unit. As of now, there is not a particular requirement for preference with Tustin residents. State regulations guard against having a requirement (i.e. being a Tustin residents), but the Irvine Company can look into, in terms of a preference criteria. Mason Mason's questions and comments focused on whether the Irvine Company has handled similar density in past projects, efforts to match the height and massing of Amalfi, and comparisons to Irvine Spectrum and Promenade. She noted buildings 5 and 6 appear "bare" compared to the detailed layering/materials of the first four buildings, drawing parallels to Graystone Apartments on Red Hill and Warner Avenues. Mason also expressed concern about buildings 5 and 6 being located across from the park. Ms. Jennifer The Irvine Company has done similar projects with a similar density. This Le particular project, they worked very hard to keep the height and the massing similarto Amalfi Apartments. Essentially creating more homes within the same mass and density, but it is similar to some of Irvine Company's other communities (i.e. Irvine Spectrum and Promenade). Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 4 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 Mr. Marquez In responseto Mason's comments, Mr. Marquez explained thatthe architectural design includes smaller windows for the affordable units because that is consistent with what is provided by affordable developers, whereas the Irvine Company can provide larger plate windows for market rates; he indicated there are less balconies for the affordable units, and less variation in massing, principally because affordable housing developers typically have standardized unit floorplans. He stated that materials will be added to the affordable apartments that are similar to the market apartments, like brick, which will enhance cohesion; and all of the apartment buildings will have a consistent Landscaping palette ensures complementary and cohesive aesthetics. The Irvine Company will collaborate with USA Properties on trim details to add variation,though building movement is limited by the unittypes USA Properties uses. Douthit Douthit's questions and comments generally included: market demand in central Orange County (i.e. Amalfi Apartments)- occupancy rates being high in Tustin and Irvine; is there insight on the occupancy at the proposed project; it appears there is a high demand for this project; he asked about market demand studies on the affordable housing units, and if they get leased instantly at 100 percent and if the tenants stay; he asked about the turnover with the Irvine Company properties and if the residents stayfor longer durations than one year; Ms. Jennifer Ms. Le confirmed Douthit's statement regarding occupancy being high. Usually Le Irvine Company's communities are leased up at 95 percent. The remaining five is regular turn over. Occupancy for the affordable units runs similar in terms of demand, although slightly lower than 95 percent, the Irvine Company is providing affordable housing at the low and very low-income levels and are at very high demand. Residents tend to stay longer at the Irvine Company communities. Higuchi Higuchi's questions and comments covered several topics: whether affordable housing units are subject to school impact fees, including the $5.17 per square foot fee and the project's annexation into TUSD CFD 15-S2, resulting in a $6 million payment to TUSD if affordable housing is included. He inquired about Lease rates for very-low-income units, the asked for details regarding the Katherine Spur property in the DA. He also asked about the project timeline, including when the ENA was awarded to the Irvine Company, and requested a reminder on the RHNA requirements. Ms. Jennifer In response to Higuchi's questions, Ms. Le confirmed that affordable housing Le units are subjectto school impactfees and theTUSD CFD 15-S2. She explained thatTUSD CFD fees amountto approximately$1.2 million annually, in addition to one-time fees for the life of the CFD. Rent rates for affordable units are set Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 5 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 by State and Federal guidelines, ranging from $1,500—$1,900 per month for Low-income units and $1,250—$1,600 for very-low-income units. Ashabi Per Minoo Ashabi, the Katherine Spur is a residual railroad right-of-way adjacent to residential properties along Edinger Avenue. While a portion of the abandoned rail line is owned by a homeowner's association, the remainder belongs to the Irvine Company. She noted that there is interest in transferring the title to the City, and confirmed Higuchi's question about the transaction between the Irvine Company and the City regarding Katherine Spur. Ms. Jennifer The Katherine Spur property is approximately 5.6 acres and is dedicated for Le open space purposes or other agreed upon uses. Le stated the ENA was awarded in May of 2024. Eastman In response to Higuchi's question about RHNA requirements, Eastman explained that the City must provide a total of 6,782 units over an 8-year period, broken down as follows: 1,724 very-low-income units, 1,046 low- income units, 1,232 moderate-income units, and 2,880 above-moderate- income units. He stated that the 263 low-income units in the proposed project represents approximately 25% of the City's low-income obligation. Eastman noted that the City has not yet calculated the housing units for which permits were issued in 2024, so an exacttabulation of the City's RHNA progress to date is not available. Mello Mello asked how the City is doing,with regards to RHNA, in the rest of the City. He would like to see updated tables when the numbers are available (or when due to City Council). Eastman Staff calculates RHNA annually in January for the proceeding calendar year, and reports the number of units built in Tustin to HCD by April 1st each year. Eastman noted that an updated table will be provided to the Commission at a Later date. Higuchi Higuchi asked the applicant why they are bifurcating the affordable units in two separate buildings versus integrating them into the project. Ms. Jennifer Ms. Le explained that separating the affordable units into two smaller buildings Le was more efficient and easier to operate and manage. Additionally, for the feasibility of financing an affordable project, particularly when applying for tax credits, the configuration of the affordable housing is an important consideration in various ways. Kozak Kozak asked abouttraffic circulation and whatthe applicant has doneto identify traffic issues during the peak flows in the morning/afternoon and the impacts Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 6 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 on surface streets. He also asked if there would be a traffic signal to enter/exit at the parking structure. Ms. Jennifer Per Ms. Le, there are entries to each driveway with signals already in place at Le Tustin Legacy. The Irvine Co. worked closely with the City's Engineer and Traffic Engineer to ensure that any projected trips are within those anticipated by the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan, and therefore the streets and infrastructure and traffic signals have already been planned to accommodate those volumes. Douthit Douthit asked about gates in front of the paseos to block pedestrian access during nighttime hours, and if the applicant would have to return to the Planning Commission to install gates. For resident access only. Eastman Eastman stated that as part of the Development Agreement (DA), paseos would be created with a public easement for public access, which would be recorded. To ensure public safety, access may be limited to daytime hours, allowing only residents to enter the paseos at night. The easement, granted to the City, would be formalized in a separate document and recorded, with negotiations between City staff and the applicant to finalize the details. Mason Mason asked if this proposed project is the highest density affordable housing proposal received in Tustin. Eastman Eastman believes this is the highest density affordable housing in Tustin of this size, although a comparison has not been done. He verified that it is a substantial project from an affordable housing standpoint. Ms. Jennifer Ms. Le mentioned that staff and the Irvine Company invested significant time Le and effort to provide a variety of housing types at Tustin Legacy while maintaining consistency with the surrounding area. While the project's units per acre are on the higher end for the Irvine Company in Tustin, the height and mass are consistent with Amalfi. From an infrastructure standpoint, all necessary planning for trips and utilities has been included in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. The City has adequately planned for this level of density, and the Irvine Company is here to implement the City's vision. Mello Mello asked who owns Segment One of the Katherine Spur property. If taking fee ownership of this property all the way to Edinger Avenue, it provides an opportunity to link up communities through a bridge that goes over the railroad station to Tustin Legacy. Ms. Jennifer Per Ms. Le, Segments One, Two and Three are owned by the Irvine Company. Le Segment Four is owned by a homeowner's association. Segment One is under continuous ownership by the Irvine Company until the association ownership (to Edinger Avenue). To make things clearer, Ms. Le referred to the back of the Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 7 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 DA, which had the exhibit displays a portion of the property to be dedicated to the City. 7:01 p.m. Opened the Public Hearing portion of the meeting. Laura Ms. Laura Keirstead, residentof the Landing,joined via Zoom and hercomments Keirstead generally included: supportive of the project; not enough places for kids to play (one too many dog parks); concern with the closeness of the garage at Compass Avenue, which faces the Landing; suggested guest parking inside the property versus along Compass Way which would cause overflow of parking in the neighborhood. Willis Mr. Willis Gromwall, resident of the Landing, opposed the project due to the Gromwall following: higher density than Amalfi; should have more development similar to the Landing; concern with the location of the affordable units being directly across from his single-family home; increased car/foot traffic; and staff should reconsider the project and force the Irvine Company to build lower density. Gabriel Gabriel (last name unknown)joined via Zoom. He was in support of the project. There is high demand for housing in Tustin and Orange County. Fits the Legacy Master Plan vision. Agrees there should be a playground. Great location to surrounding amenities. Manny Mr. Manny Velasco, resident of the Landing, in support of the project, not in Velasco favor of the entrance on Compass Way. Be mindful of traffic flow for traffic to and from Irvine Valley College. Harsh Mr. Harsh Chalhoun, resident of the Landing, opposed of the project. His Chalhoun comments generally included:traffic will be even more impacted on Armstrong Avenue and the street of the Landing; concern with children's safety; number of units should be reduced and not high density; and it is his understanding that Legacy schools have limited capability to take in more children. Vincent Lin Mr. Vincent Lin, resident of the Landing, voiced his concern; traffic on Tustin Ranch Road when it converts to Von Karman (traffic study should consider this issue); concern there will be parking issues; need for guest parking; local schools currently at capacity—will the schools be expanded or will families be forced to send kids out of district. 7:18 p.m. Closed Public Hearing portion of the meeting. Higuchi Higuchi's final comments included questions about the need for another dog park, how the Irvine Company plans to handle guest parking, and whether additional spaces would be rented to households with multiple cars or if car Limits are defined in lease agreements. He also asked staff if there is a parking Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 8 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 program at the Landing, whether affordable housing is provided there, and if there are plans for a Phase 2 at the Tustin Magnet Academy. Ms. Jennifer In response to Higuchi's question about the dog park, Ms. Le explained that the Le dog park was a top amenity requested based on feedback from over 60,000 units managed across Orange County and beyond. Additionally, the City had planned a tot lot for Tustin Legacy Park Phase 2, north of the project site. If the Planning Commission prefers, the applicant is open to working with staff to incorporate other amenities they had originally envisioned. Regarding parking, the project's integrated parking structure allows residents to park on the same Level. as their units, while guest parking is provided on the ground level with 134 spaces in total. Disclosures will outline the availability of parking and the number of spaces per unit, with each unit guaranteed one parking space. A technology system will help the Irvine Company manage parking demand,track by license plate, and allow residents to apply for additional spaces, which are typically granted in Irvine Company communities. Eastman Eastman stated that there is no public parking permit program at the Landing. Regarding the Landing, the units are market rate, not affordable. Concerning the Tustin Magnet Academy, the City is in discussions with TUSD about their needs and capacities. The City has an agreement with TUSD regarding fees as projects come online, and TUSD is aware of the proposed project and the anticipated development of future housing in Tustin Legacy. Staff continues to collaborate with TUSD to address future needs. Eastman clarified that the next phase of the Lineal Park, located north of the Landing, will include a children's playground, which will be built before the proposed project is completed. Mason Mason asked if the project site (19+ acres) was ever considered to be broken up and sold in pieces. Eastman The project site was anticipated to be sold as one piece. Higuchi Higuchi asked the applicant if the overall density of the affordable housing project is lower than the market rate project. Ms. Jennifer Per Ms. Le, the proposed project was calculated overall because it is one Le property in order to meet the City's requirement. The density was estimated based on a quick calculation to be approximately 60-70 dwelling units per acre. Mello Mello sought clarification on whether staff had reviewed the density areas within Tustin Legacy and identified which areas would be available to the City. He also asked if the City has a timeline for continuing to dispose of properties within the master association or if decisions are driven solely by market demands. Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 9 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 Eastman Eastman explained that the City has evaluated the entire Tustin Legacy area as part of the Specific Plan, identifying the capacity for each neighborhood. The City Council has expressed interest in accelerating the process of moving projects forward. While there is no set timeline, the City is exploring ways to effectively implement land sales and development. Eastman also added that Public Works has confirmed, as it relates to a prior question, that there is no City parking permit requirement for the Landing. Higuchi Higuchi asked if the City would know if the Landing had an HOA parking permit program. Eastman Eastman believed the Landing's HOA likely has a parking program for private streets, but he is not sure since he does not live in the project. In response to questions he clarified that the disposal of properties is at the discretion of the City Council.There is an expectation to meet density requirements under RHNA and housing numbers. Mason Mason referred to the Specific Plan and mixed-use and if the applicant was open to adding more commercial retail space and referred to the units around the Spectrum. Ms. Jennifer Ms. Le stated that the Irvine Company evaluated opportunities for the project Le site and noted that commercial amenities associated with residential housing are typically subsidized. The proposed project, however, provides these as resident and community amenities, so additional spaces were not considered. She also highlighted the site's proximity to the District and surrounding shops and businesses. Closing The Commission's closing comments included concerns about the affordable comments: housing wing being standalone and not aesthetically pleasing, traffic impacts, and the lower density of the affordable units compared to the market rate. There was also concern regarding the intersection at Flight, consistency in applying technical analysis across Tustin Legacy, and the Economic Impact Analysis.The Commission acknowledged the project as a quality development, with positive feedback on the publicly accessible open space and coffee shops. They commended staff for the timeline and efficient processing of the Irvine Company's application, emphasized that the Irvine Company should be responsible for maintaining the entire project, and suggested that the three parcels should have been marketed separately for better economic benefit to Tustin. Motion: It was moved by Mello, to approve Resolution No. 4514, with the revision to Condition of Approval No. 12.2F, and Resolution No. 4515, as provided, seconded by Douthit. Motion carried: 5-0. Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 10 Docusign Envelope ID:8FCCA46C-B2BA-4A93-9A07-5A875199E974 OTHER BUSINESS: Eastman Eastman informed the Planning Commission of two public hearing items moving forward to the City Council on February 4,2025 (Tustin Auto Center DDA freeway signage) and Code Amendment 2024-0005 (Streamline Tustin). He added that three public hearing items are anticipated for the PC on 1/28/25 (Indoor Recreation— Fencing, Objective Design Standards, and Skilled Nursing Facility). PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND REPORTS: Douthit Douthit suggested the Planning Commission be noticed whenever public hearing items are mailed to the public. He notified staff of the roof at the Del Taco on Red Hill Avenue and San Juan beginning to collapse. Mason Mason asked if there have been any discussions regarding 17t" Street Corridor Specific Plan or what steps need to be taken to get a conversation initiated. Eastman Eastman stated that the 17th Street Corridor Specific Plan was not part of the City Council's discussion in December. However, other discussions have taken place, and staff anticipates moving forward with a comprehensive general plan update, which could potentially include the 17th Street Corridor. Eastman noted that there are various approaches the City can take to achieve Mason's goal, but this will require substantial community engagement, discussions, and a significant budget. Kozak Kozak recognized staff and the City Council for their hard work and support in 2024. Mello Mello thanked staff and his fellow Commissioners for a good meeting. Higuchi Higuchi also thanked staff for their work on the agenda item. He also sent his well wishes to Justina and her family. 8:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, January 28, 2025. Signed by: Signed by; tkz, n.u.. c4. O�41-1' EfD148F2601EF34A4.c 0� =NQA2623&54A5-- . ----------------------------- --------------------- JUSTINA L. WILLKOM ERIC HIGUCHI Planning Commission Secretary Chairperson Minutes— Planning Commission Meeting —January 14, 2025— Page 11