Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-13-07MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 13, 2007 7:02 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Chair Floyd Chair Pro Tem Puckett Commissioner Kozak, Lee, and Nielsen Staff present Elizabeth Binsack, Commuinity Development Director Doug Holland, City Attorney David Kendig, Deputy City ;Attorney Dana Ogdon, Assistant Community Development Director Terry Lutz, Principal Engineer Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner Justina Willkom, Senior Planner Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner Eloise Harris, Recording Secretary PUBLIC CONCERNS Michele Young, Thanked the Planning Commissioners for their responsiveness 200 South A and support during her appeal process regarding an ancillary Street,Tustin structure on her property and the proposed use of fibercement siding. CONSENT CALENDAR Approved 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 2007, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 2. 2007 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL REPORT California State Law requires each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development and any land outside its boundaries which bears a relationship to its planning activities. Section 65400(b) of the Government Code requires that the City's planning agency provide an annual report to the City Council on the status of the General Plan and progress in its implementation. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 1 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission review and authorize staff to forward the Annual Report on the Status of the Tustin General Plan to the City Council for consideration. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Nielsen, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued to 3. CONTINUED APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT March 27, 2007, DIRECTOR'S DECISION THAT THE PROPOSED USE AT Planning 15201 WOODLAWN AVENUE FOR SOLID WASTE AND Commission RECYCLING SERVICES, INCLUDING THE GARAGING Meeting AND MAINTENANCE OF REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES, IS NOT A PERMITTED USE PURSUANT TO THE PACIFIC CENTER EAST SPECIFIC PLAN. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to the March 27, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. Kozak Stated he understood the concerns raised in the letter from the tenant adjacent to the proposed project site; and, asked if the Planning Commission will be considering the original proposal or an alternative proposal at the March 27 meeting. Reekstin Answered that the Commission will be considering the original proposal. Adopted Resolution 4. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17080 AND DESIGN REVIEW Nos. 4053, 4054 06-011 AS FOLLOWS: 1) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17080 (as amended), and TO MERGE TWO EXISTING PARCELS DEVELOPED 4055 (as amended) WITH 57 APARTMENT UNITS INTO ONE 4-ACRE PARCEL FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBDIVIDING AND DEVELOPING A 75-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, AND 2) DESIGN REVIEW 06-011 FOR APPROVAL OF BUILDING ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN AND AMENITIES OF THE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT 14421- 14471 RED HILL AVENUE IN THE MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) ZONING DISTRICT. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 2 1. Adopt Resolution Nm. 4053 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) as adequate for Tentative Tract Map 17080 and Design Review 06-011 for development of the proposed 75-unit residential condominium project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4054 approving Design Review 06- 011 for architectural/site design and amenities of the proposed condominium project. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 4055 recommending that the City Council adopt the MND for Tentative Tract Map 17080 and Design Review 06-011 and approve Tentative Tract Map 17080 to merge two existing parcels into a 4-acre (net area) site for the purpose of subdividing and developing 75 residential condominiium units. 7:07 p.m. The Public Hearing opened. Ashabi Presented the staff report, noting that a few typographical corrections were provided to the Commission before the meeting. Floyd Asked if any public input had been received other than the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) letter that was provided. Ashabi Answered in the negative. Floyd Asked if there was any acknowledgement of receipt of the letter of response dated March 8, 2007. Ashabi Indicated the letter was e-mailed and a hard copy mailed, and no further comments have been received from OCTA. Nielsen Asked if access on Red Hill north and south might be an issue; and, requested clarification of how the parameters might be measured. Ashabi Stated that the traffic analysis referred to the current conditions when the project would be implemented; the left turn would be allowed in the future. Nielsen Asked if left-hand turn pockets would be provided for access into the project. Ashabi Deferred that question to the Traffic Engineer. Lutz Noted that the report indicates that the number of left turns into the project would be adequate in both directions; this would be required for the striping plan when the improvements on Red Hill are designed. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 3 Nielsen Asked what the distance might be from the turn pocket to the intersection. Lutz Indicated he was not sure of the exact distance, but there is more than adequate distance for the number of cars anticipated for left turns both south- and northbound. Nielsen Stated his concern was not related to turning left out of the project but more the left-hand northbound turning into the project. Lutz Indicated that during the design process it was noted that the driveway should be moved as far north as possible in order to accommodate that left turn. Nielsen Asked, regarding the 2020 reference, what future projects are planned for Red Hill and Walnut to improve the circulation in that area. Ashabi Indicated the improvements include a traffic signal. Lutz Stated that Red Hill will be a major arterial, six-lane facility with no parking on either side; it is anticipated that improvements on Red Hill involve a Capital Improvement Project and may include raised medians; the signal operation would include a protected left turn all around as opposed to the protective permissive left turns that exist today and have caused a bit of a problem from an operational standpoint. Nielsen Asked what the parking restrictions are expected to be along Red Hill and Walnut. Lutz Indicated there will definitely be limitations on Red Hill and probably on Walnut. Nielsen Asked if that is an ongoing study. Lutz Answered the Red Hill study is current and action is anticipated within the next year regarding parking restrictions. Nielsen Questioned whether or not the traffic analysis was weighted based on The Legacy being fully developed and the daily trips taken into consideration. Lutz Answered in the affirmative. Lee Asked how the on-site parking will relate to the trash plan and whether or not a different waste plan was considered; during the 24-hour period, perhaps half the parking spots would be occupied by trash cans. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 4 Floyd Asked if the residents would be placing their trash cans next to the garage and someone else delivering the cans to one of the eleven proposed stalls. Ashabi Answered that an employee of the association would be relocating the trash carts from the alleys to the designated parking areas and returning the trash cans upon collection. Floyd Asked for clarification regarding the location of the eleven bins at the end of the collection phase. Ashabi Stated the trash cans will be returned to the spaces in front of the garages. Floyd Requested more information regarding the eleven larger collection areas. Ashabi Indicated that these will be residential carts, one for waste and one for recycling. Director Added that the trash cans will be individual and no large bins will serve the facility. Floyd Asked if the waste management company would be going to each unit to pick up the can. Director Answered in the negative; the trucks will pick up waste from the eleven duel-use stalls. Floyd Asked what will be in the eleven stalls. Director Responded that on trash day the bins will be in the stalls. Floyd Stated he had never heard of an HOA employee, only board members. Ashabi Indicated that this person would be a permanent employee hired by the property management company; and, added that the option of large trash enclosures were considered at the beginning of the process and would have been located at the terminus of each alley; because of the traffic impacts with trash pickups, the alternative plan was chosen. Floyd Asked if this was suggested by City staff. Ashabi Answered that the alternate plan was proposed by the applicant. Nielsen Stated his understanding that those stalls will have no parking on trash collection day when the receptacles are placed in the stalls; at Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 5 the end of the day the employee will return the receptacles which will allow parking in the stalls. Floyd Asked if there would be a Plan B if this does not work. Director Stated the project involves a limited number of units, and the residents will be able to work with the waste hauler to schedule the time at which the trash is picked up; the residents may have to pay more for trash hauling services to be able to accomplish this proposal. Lee Referred to the removal of the reference to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Ashabi Verified that the above reference in the document was a typographical error. Lee Asked if the roof material will be terracotta. Ashabi Confirmed that the roof material will be s-tile terracotta. Kozak Asked if the project site runoff referred to in Condition 4.5 of Resolution No. 4054 will be allowed to enter the storm drain or be released onto Walnut or Red Hill after it is treated; there are storm drains in the streets to which runoff should be connected. Ashabi Responded that the applicant will be required to submit a Water Quality Management Plan; the runoff would have to be treated before being released into the street system. Kozak Stated that he understood that but, once the water is treated, asked for clarification whether the water would be directly released into the storm drain or into the storm drain by way of the street. Floyd Suggested perhaps that was a question for the applicant. Kozak Noted that the conditions of approval allow alert-hand turn from the project site onto Red Hill perhaps being prohibited in the future if determined necessary which allows flexibility in future planning; also, it would be his opinion that a raised landscape median should be continued on Red Hill; in the traffic analysis a section looks at aspects of adding a protected left-hand tum pocket on northbound Red Hill into the project, but this has not been included as a condition of approval and should be; Red Hill is a very busy street, with 20,000+ vehicles per day and 16,000 on Walnut; it seems that making left-hand turns will be very difficult both out of the project and into the project off Red Hill. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 6 Director Suggested the following lartguage be included as part of Condition 4.1: "Said improvement plan shall include all recommendations and mitigation measures included in the Traffic Study prepared for the project and attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration." Kozak Indicated that adding that language would address his concerns. Asked whether Condition 4.10 means that on-street parking will be restricted along the project frontage along both Walnut and Red Hill. Lutz Answered that on-street parking will be restricted along the property frontage; this can be addressed in the improvement plan at which time the striping of the left-turn pockets can also be addressed. Puckett Commented that he believes the residents will adapt to the waste management plan, which will include signage and enforcement regulations. Floyd Invited the applicant to the lectern. Jim Magstadt, Presented a PowerPoint show describing the project; and, SunCal-Red Hill introduced his team. LLC Floyd Asked what will happen with the overflow if there are more than two cars per unit and whether or not the CC&Rs are written to prohibit more than two cars per unit. Mr. Magstadt Answered that the HOA will require that two cars be parked in the garage; a third car would require a sticker; if that third car is on the street for over a certain period of time, the car could be towed; the guest stalls are geared so that guests may only park for a limited time period. Floyd Verified that the units have no garage driveway; this may create a problem for homeowners who have third cars and want to use the guest parking; and, asked if there will be overnight street parking in the project. Mr. Magstadt Stated there are 3.4 stalls per units. Floyd Asked for clarification regarding parking on the street. Mr. Magstadt Indicated that street parking will be restricted by the City. Floyd Clarified that he was referring to on-street parking inside the project. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 7 Mr. Magstadt Answered that there will be guest parking along the street throughout the community. Nielsen Thanked the applicant for the presentation and everyone else who was in attendance. Asked if the construction will take place in two phases and what the time frame might be. David Hewitt, Stated that once approvals are obtained for building permits, it will Southland Realty take approximately eight to ten weeks to demolish the existing Group project; the estimate would be 12 to 14 months for construction of all 75 units. Nielsen Noted the information provided indicates 120-day notice to the existing tenants and free rent for the final month; and, asked if that plan has changed at all. Mr. Hewitt Replied in the negative; and, added that under state and federal law the builder has an obligation to give 60 days notice to vacate a unit; all the tenants are presently on 30-day month-to-month leases; the tenants have been met with, receive periodic progress reports, and will receive a $500 moving allowance. Puckett Stated he is excited about this wonderful project. Ms. Sully, The Stated her firm is part of the team and referred to the following Sully Group changes to the conditions of approval. Resolution 4054, Condition 4.10: suggested that parking should not be a condition of approval on this project. It is up to the City to implement parking restrictions. • Resolution 4055, Condition 1.8: asked that the clause "or issuance of a grading permit" be omitted from the condition. • Resolution 4055, Condition 2.3: asked that the following language be added in the middle of the paragraph. "Any damage to the existing improvements within the construction easement caused by the City's construction shall be restored to its original condition at the City's expense." Noted that, with the minor changes above, the applicant agrees to all the conditions of approval. Floyd Invited anyone else who wished to speak to come forward. Matt Nisson, Stated he had no objections to the project but had concerns 14462 Red Hill Ave. regarding the closure of the Walnut driveway; adding 342 daily trips Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 8 to Red Hill as a result of closing that Walnut driveway will create a larger traffic nightmare; the parking is also a concern in view of the project changing from the original plan of two bedroom units for empty-nesters and young professionals to 50 units with three bedrooms; he visited the SunCal project in Fullerton, which is very attractive, but parking is a :very large problem with cars on all the side streets and no vacant spaces anywhere. Ed Eloe, 1542 Indicated that the apartments already existing on Red Hill have Copperfield been using Copperfield for overnight parking; the tenants from the proposed project parking along Copperfield will exacerbate the problem; the existing residents are very concerned about the expected increase of on-street parking; because Copperfield will be aligned with the entry point of this project, people will also use Copperfield as an access street to get into the project. Ashley Vikander, Stated the parking in the neighborhood is a huge concern and will 14412 Grassmere be seriously impacted by the on-street parking prohibition on Red Lane Hill; thanked the developers for meeting with residents and responding to their concerns in many ways; indicated that her concerns relate more to the chemicals and security during construction and the construction fencing behind her house; it would be good if the block fence could go up first to provide more protection to the residents and their pets; and, asked what the City regulations are for construction hours; stated the building height is still a concern but the reduction was appreciated; privacy is still a concern regarding the windows; thanked the Commission for allowing her to speak tonight. Mr. Nisson Asked what assurances there would be that the garages be used only for parking cars and what penalties would be assessed for noncompliance. Ms. Vikander Added that there is apost-construction concern regarding the sun and shade study; the current landscaping in her backyard is built to optimize the sun and shade; there will be a significant impact on the landscaping that may require homeowners to re-landscape at considerable expense. 8:19 p.m. The Public Hearing closed. Director Suggested that staff addres$ the concerns expressed as follows: • The language suggested for Resolution No. 4054, Condition 4.1, would be acceptable. • Language could be added to Condition 4.5 as follows: "On- site flow shall be diverted into an approved storm drain subject to review and approval by the City Engineer." Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 9 Condition 4.10 could be eliminated and "left blank intentionally" inserted; the parking restrictions on Red Hill and Walnut would be shown on the street improvement plans. Resolution No. 4055, page 5, J3 stating that "residents shall not store or park any non-motorized vehicles, trailers, motorized vehicles that exceed ..." is meant to ensure that residents park only their cars in their garages. Floyd Suggested in response to Mr. Nisson's concern that the HOA would be responsible for making sure that residents' cars are parked in their garages or charged with a violation of their CC&Rs and the conditions of approval. Holland Stated the language suggested regarding Condition 2.3 would be acceptable with the addition of "solely," i.e. "the damage caused solely by the City." Director Referred to Condition 1.8 and the Southern California Edison easement; City staff would be amenable to modifying that condition of approval as long as the easement would not impede issuance of the grading permit; if recordation of the map would solve that, staff would be willing to eliminate that language. Stated that construction hour concerns should be addressed to the Community Development Department's Building Division; pre- construction meetings provide information regarding construction hours and construction hours are posted on-site; there are times when the hours may be waived; adjacent neighboring properties would be noticed regarding any such waiver. Regarding the fencing, the developer should work with the neighboring development to coordinate the construction. The developer worked at great length with the City regarding the window design, and staff asks that the Commission approve what is before them this evening; if someone were to request a window change in the future and the HOA approved it, that would meet the City ordinance and a permit would be issued. Floyd Agreed that it is not possible to dictate what might happen in the future. Nielsen Asked for reiteration of the left-turn pocket language in Condition 4.1 of Resolution No. 4054. Director Reread the modification as follows: "Said improvement plan shall include all recommendations and mitigation measures included in Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 10 the Traffic Study prepared for the project and attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration." Floyd Asked the Traffic Engineer to address the residents' concerns regarding the removal of the Walnut entrance. Lutz Responded that two entrances can present operational problems; the Orange County Fire authority indicated one access would not be an issue in terms of emergency vehicle access. Floyd Suggested that most projects in the City have only one entrance. Lutz Added that capacity stacking will be provided on Red Hill and stacking within the project will be a matter of metering onto Red Hill. Nielsen Stated he lives in that area of town and during rush hour traffic stacks up in many locations on Red Hill. Lutz Agreed that there may occasions when traffic impedes travel, but it was determined this project would not make an impact during the peak hours. Puckett Asked for a staff response to the concerns of the neighbors regarding mitigation of parkiing on Copperfield. Lutz Stated that staff has been considering permit parking along Copperfield and other streets in order to protect those residents from the Red Hill parking restriction impacts. Floyd Reiterated that, if there is no restriction on the number of cars a homeowner may have within that project, the overflow will wind up in the surrounding residential areas. Nielsen Added that the larger issue involves existing parking problems in that part of the City. Lutz Indicated that Newport Avenue is also being studied regarding parking restrictions. Added it was discovered during the parking study along Red Hill that the apartments adjacent to Copperfield apparently have adequate on-site parking but are parking on Copperfield for convenience; permits on Copperfield would force those people to use their on-site parking. Nielsen Indicated that Copperfield has an issue with the high-density on both sides of the street and also the cutting through Copperfield to avoid the signal at Walnut and Red Hill; and, asked if that issue was considered. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 11 Lutz Stated the cut-through traffic was not analyzed as much as the parking issue; cut-through happens in all cities; staff discourages it; the way to accomplish some mitigation in this case would be to make the signal at Red Hill and Walnut more efficient, including re- striping dual left-turn lanes from westbound Walnut to southbound Red Hill. Kozak Noted that those recommendations are discussed in the Traffic Study. Floyd Invited Mr. Magstadt back to the lectern to address Ms. Vikander's issue regarding the setback on her backyard property. Mr. Magstadt Stated that the developer has maximized the setback in order to develop the property; the fencing and landscaping are the first things put in; a temporary fence will be put in before the concrete block is built; the block wall will be an improvement over the existing wood fences. Floyd Asked if the developer would work with the homeowners in this regard. Mr. Magstadt Answered in the affirmative; the temporary fencing also will be secure in terms of pets and children. Lee Asked if the developer had considered putting trash cans in front of the garages rather than have them collected into the parking stalls. Mr. Magstadt Stated the developer tried to make it convenient for the residents; this procedure will be more organized and eliminate the problem of neighborhoods not having cans collected promptly and put in place; the transfer of the cans to the stalls and back to the homes is not a job that will be hard to fill. Nielsen Congratulated the developer on an aesthetically pleasing project that will upgrade the neighborhood and reactivate the area; he still has concerns regarding the traffic, and it would be a good idea for the City to take a look at the Red Hill circulation; the trash collection plan is an innovative idea; it will be interesting to see how it works; he supports the project. Kozak Offered his compliments to the project, staff, and the developer; this project can serve as a model for that part of the City; commended staffs responses to the neighbors' issues and concems; the materials and architectural styles introduce a contemporary look and feel to the area; the setbacks and screening along the west end of the project are excellent; he supports the project. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 12 Lee Echoed the other Commissioners' comments; this will be an attractive community in an area of need; moved for approval of the project. Puckett Stated that, in all his years on the Planning Commission and City Council, he cannot remember being more excited about a project than this one; the paseos are one example of the attractiveness of this project; the neighbors will be looking at a very nice project rather than the back of a building; the project will enhance the area, and he looks forward to its completion and hopes more areas will be upgraded with such projects. Floyd Thanked the applicant for bringing the project to Tustin; while this has been a long project, stiff makes sure all the projects meet the City's high standards; asked that the applicant continue the good relationship with the homeowners in the surrounding area. Verified with the applicant that the modifications to the conditions of approval met with his approval. Noted that Commissioner Lee had made a motion and asked for a second. Commissioner Puckett seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Magstadt Returned to the lectern to state that staff was tough but fair. Floyd Called a brief recess. 9:03 p.m. Chair Floyd resumed the meeting. Adopted Resolution 5. CODE AMENDMENT 06-005 (SIGN REGULATIONS) No. 4056, 4-1; Nielsen, no AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S SIGN REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 4 OF ARTICLE 9 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODiE. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS PERTAIN PRIMARILY TO THE REGULATION OF TEMPORARY SIGNS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, INCLUDING REAL ESTATE OPEN HOUSE SIGNS, POLITICAL SIGNS, AND HUMAN SIGNS. LESS SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INCLUDE: A REVISED DEFINITIONS SECTION, A REVISED HEARINGS AND APPEALS SECTION, LARGER PERMITTED BANNER SIGNS FOR SOME FREEWAY-FACING BUILDINGS; AND THE ADDITION OF A PERMITTED SIGN TYPE - TEMPORARY SIGNS FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 13 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4056 recommending that the City Council adopt Code Amendment No. 06-005 to amend Chapter 4 "Sign Regulations" of Article 9 of the Tustin City Code. 9:04 p.m. The Public Hearing opened. Reekstin Presented the staff report. Director Indicated that she and the City Attorney would like to provide refinement to the noncommercial and political sign language in the ordinance before the ordinance goes to the City Council. Floyd Asked if that would involve another ordinance. Director Answered in the negative; it would be the same ordinance but maybe on page 22 language would be added regarding noncommercial signs and noncommercial political signs to clarify that one relates to noncommercial signs in the right-of-way and the other noncommercial political signs in the right-of-way just to make it clear that one relates specifically to political signs. Kozak Asked if it would be necessary to revise the motion. Director Responded in the negative; no technical change is planned; the provisions would apply to not erecting the signs more than 45 days before and removed five calendar days after, etc. Puckett Stated that 45 days before and five days after will be a welcome improvement. Floyd Asked for clarification regarding the map that was provided showing where signs may be placed. Reekstin Indicated that the graphic was meant to represent different types of public rights-of-way that might exist along City streets and not at one particular intersection. Floyd Referred to human signs and asked what the Code currently allows regarding enforcement. Director Responded that the current Code does not permit human signs. Floyd Verified that all the human signs on the street corners are illegal. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 14 Director Answered in the affirmative, depending upon where the person is standing; human signs should be 200 feet back from the intersection and not twirling. Nielsen Suggested that directional signs will be limited, generic signs can be any color with arrows and identification, and open house sign limitations have been eliminated. Director Answered that Commissioner Nielsen was correct. Floyd Suggested that open house signs will now be the directional signs. Holland Pointed out that was what the ordinance was intended to do: change the open house signs to directional signs; the intention was to add the exception in order to distinguish between directional signs and commercial signs 9:15 p.m. The Public Hearing closed. Nielsen Suggested that the original intent was, for public safety and aesthetic reasons, to address the primary clutter of real estate signs; the rest of the Code is well thought out, particularly political signs and other noncommercial signs; it seems the City is forcing the real estate industry to buy different colored signs with no limitation and changing very little of the wording; in his view, the changes are insignificant and the Code could stay as it was. Floyd Stated that his observation regarding the concerns of the community in general was that the real estate signs became so prolific they became advertising units for a particular agent or house; with the change, there will no longer be individual signs for every agency; this option seems better than the possibility of prohibiting the signs which had been one option. Nielsen Indicated he understood Chair Floyd's point but still does not feel the revisions will not change what the Commission originally intended to change. Lee Agreed with the intent of the changes; and, stated it will be interesting to see what develops; this seems a good start and the best option yet presented. Kozak Suggested that the public outreach after the City Council adopts this ordinance notifying the Chamber of Commerce and the Real Estate Association of the changes could perhaps include the sign manufacturers in order to provide some guidance to make decisions consistent with the ordinance. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 15 Floyd Indicated that staff would not be allowed to direct anyone to a sign company, only provide the ordinance as the current standard. Kozak Thanked the Chair for that clarification; and, stated he was only suggesting that, as part of the public outreach, the companies that produce the signs could be provided the new information. Reekstin Indicated that staff would be able to provide such outreach. Kozak Thanked staff for the work they will be doing on the administration citation ordinance regarding enforcement of the standards and conditions in the new ordinance; in general terms, there were aspects of the ordinance previously sent to the Council with which he was not in complete agreement; however, on balance it was a good ordinance and contained a solid approach to resolving the issues and bring some structure to what seemed to be a situation that was out of control in some areas; the Planning Commission identified the definitions for the human signs which would be consistent with the First Amendment public free speech rights and that is an improvement; there has been agreement at the legislative level regarding political signs; therefore, with all the process that has been gone through, he is ready to support the ordinance with the clarifications that staff will make and looks forward to getting this on the books. Puckett Congratulated staff on taking the time to meet with the Chamber and the real estate industry to resolve issues; increasing the ordinance to include the sphere of influence will be a plus; the time limitations for political signs is long overdue; he supports the ordinance. Floyd Agreed that this has been a long process and he hopes the Council will adopt this ordinance; it may not be perfect but comes close and will reduce the sign blight. Nielsen Noted that he understands staff worked hard on a difficult issue; there was input from the Chamber and the real estate industry which he appreciated; however, his view is that this forces something on the real estate community and will not accomplish much on the real estate side; the rest of the ordinance is good. Floyd Stated the next issue addressed should be regulating the human signs. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak to adopt Resolution No. 4056. Motion carried 4-1. Nielsen voted no. Adopted Resolution 6. CODE AMENDMENT 07-001 (PLANNING COMMISSION/ No. 4057 HISTORIC RESOURCE COMMITTEE CONSOLIDATION) Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 16 AMENDMENT TO 'fUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 9252 SUBSECTION C RELATED TO ASSIGNING CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL MAY MODIFY THE CODE AMENDMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS ARE NOT "PROJECTS" PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (GEQA) AND ARE EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4057 recommending that the City Council adopt Code Amendment No. 07-001 amending Section 9252 Subsection C of the Tustin City Code related to assigning cultural and historic resources responsibilities to the Planning Commission. 9:29 p.m. The Public Hearing opened. Director Presented the staff report. Floyd Asked if there are currently five members on the Historic Resource Commission (HRC). Director Answered in the affirmative. Floyd Asked if those committee members had been notified of this change. Director Answered in the affirmative. Floyd Requested further inforrrnation regarding the activities and responsibilities of the Committee. Director Stated the Planning Commiission will have the ability to do all the things listed in the staff report which was the HRC work program; once the ordinance is adopted, the Planning Commission may decide what the Commission would like the program to be. Floyd Indicated his feeling was that the Commission should continue to do exactly what the HRC has been doing. Nielsen Stated he agreed with Chair Floyd but felt the Commission should also look at the entire duties in a workshop format. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 17 Floyd Agreed with Commissioner Nielsen; and, added that this should be an extended workshop to explore the additional responsibilities this will entail. Puckett Asked if these responsibilities would be included within the regular meeting format of the Planning Commission. Director Answered in the affirmative. 9:39 p.m. The Public Hearing closed. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4057. Motioned carried 5-0. None REGULAR BUSINESS STAFF CONCERNS REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN AT THE MARCH 6, 2007, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Director reported The City Council appealed the Planning Commission's approval of the fibercement siding at 200 South A Street; the hearing before the Council is scheduled for April 3, 2007. The City Council approved Design Review 06-013 related to the Pasadena Well site. Floyd Commented the beautiful design of this structure brings a new standard to Tustin; and, asked where the design might be available for viewing. Director Indicated that staff could forward the PowerPoint presentation to the Planning Commissioners. Floyd Asked that staff provide the presentation; all the Commissioners should have a chance to see it. Director Noted that the tour of The District at The Legacy is planned for 5:30 p.m., March 27, 2007; everyone should meet in front of the Council Chamber and travel to the site together in a City-owned van. Holland Stated that the change in the Planning Commission meeting date presented a conflict for Jason Retterer who would no longer be attending; introduced David Kendig who will now be attending the Planning Commission meetings; and, provided a brief description of Mr. Kendig's professional experience. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 18 Floyd Asked that Mr. Holland send the Commission's regards and best wishes to Mr. Retterer; and, welcomed Mr. Kendig. COMMISSION CONCERNS Nielsen Stated he attended the opening of Old Town Flooring, a nice event with excellent hospitality. Complimented staff for putting together quickly and efficiently the mountain of information provided on the agenda items this evening. Indicated he would appreciate further study regarding the parking studies taking place in the area where the Red Hill project is occurring and having that information provided to the Commission. Lee Thanked staff for their hard !work. Indicated he had meetings in Santa Clarita and decided to take the train which resulted in a 14-hour day; the Metrolink does not provide enough stops in Tustin; pressure should be put on the Orange County Transportation Authority to remedy this situation. Puckett Stated he and other members of the Commission attended the Comerica Bank ribbon-cutting; the Bank officials were very impressed by the work of the Tustin Chamber in bringing people out to this event. Noted that Tuesday night is a good meeting night. Commented that it was nice to see Boy Scouts in attendance this evening; and, added that he hoped they enjoyed their experience of seeing the community in action. Asked if the appeal of the 200 South A Street siding will require Michele Young to start from the beginning; or, could the Council approve the proposal. Director Answered the Council can approve what the Planning Commission approved, deny the Commission's recommendation, approve the original redwood siding, or take any action they choose. Floyd Stated he attended the Chipotle ribbon-cutting; and, encouraged all the Commissioners to attend such openings. Noted that Comerica Bank wrote a letter to the Tustin Chamber stating they had never seen such a turnout from a City; having City officials attend such openings helps the businesses and proves that the City supports local business establishments. Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 19 Kozak Thanked staff for the thorough reports. Noted the General Plan Annual Report was included as part of the Consent Calendar; this is a very impressive document that required a great deal of hard work and staff is to be commended. Indicated he is looking forward to the tour of The District. Offered greetings to Doug Holland, best wishes to Jason Retterer, and welcome to David Kendig. 9:53 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held Tuesday, March 27, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way, with a tour of The District beginning at 5:30 p.m. Bre loyd Chairperson //~/c~iC(~cy.~ Elizabeth A. Binsack Planning Commission Secretary Minutes -Planning Commission 3-13-07 -Page 20