Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 PC Minutes 8-28-07ITEM #1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 28, 2007 7:10 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Given PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Nielsen, Chair 1. PLANNING COMMISSION REORGANIZATION Puckett, Chair Pro RECOMMENDATION: Tem That the Planning Commission follow the procedures contained in the staff report to elect a Chairperson and Chairperson Pro Tem. Commissioner Puckett nominated Commissioner Nielsen as Chairperson. Commissioner Kozak seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Kozak nominated Commissioner Puckett as Chair Pro Tem. Commissioner Murray seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Kozak, Murray, Nielsen, and Puckett Staff present Elizabeth Binsack, Community Development Director Doug Holland, City Attorney Dana Ogdon, Assistant Director of Community Development Terry Lutz, Principal Engineer Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner Justina Willkom, Senior Planner Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner Eloise Harris, Recording Secretary None PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR Approved 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 14, 2007, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 3. APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REPORT REGARDING OLD TOWN PROJECTS APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 1 DEPARTMENT FROM JUNE 6, 2007, TO AUGUST 28, 2007. 4. TUSTIN HISTORIC REGISTER NOMINATION - 405 WEST MAIN STREET. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the nomination of 405 West Main Street to the Tustin Historic Register Plaque Designation Program. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Murray, to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 3-0. Chair Nielsen abstained due to his absence from the August 14, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Continued to the 5. CONTINUED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-010 September 11, REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION TO OPERATE A 30- 2007, Planning LANE BOWLING ALLEY, ARCADE, AND RESTAURANT Commission WITHIN AN EXISTING 28,000 SQUARE FOOT TENANT meeting SPACE LOCATED WITHIN THE DISTRICT AT TUSTIN LEGACY. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT 2405 PARK AVENUE IN THE SP-1-MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICT (PLANNING AREA 19 - COMMERCIAL) ZONING DISTRICT. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to the meeting of September 11, 2007. Nielsen Invited anyone in attendance, who might not be able to attend the September 11, 2007, Planning Commission meeting to come forward to give testimony. No one approached the lectern. It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Puckett, to continue the item to the September 11, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Adopted 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-009 REQUESTING Resolution No. AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A VETERINARY CLINIC 4063 AT 3051 EDINGER AVENUE IN THE PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL (PC-IND) ZONING DISTRICT. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4063. 7:16 p.m. The Public Hearing opened. Ashabi Presented the staff report. Puckett Asked if the veterinarian is operating with another veterinarian at this time. Ashabi Answered in the affirmative. Puckett Asked if the original veterinarian will stay at the location after Dr. Hanson moves. Ashabi Answered in the affirmative. Nielsen Asked what percentage of the total tenants in Jamboree Plaza are veterinarian uses. Ashabi Answered that staff does not have an exact number; there are four entitlements compared with approximately 30-40 uses within that center. Nielsen Asked if the conditions of approval provide stipulations for an overnight attendant in the veterinary clinic. Ashabi Responded that an overnight attendant is proposed when there is boarding on-site. Nielsen Asked whether or not that stipulation was in the conditions of approval. Ashabi Pointed out that condition 5.6 states that "a maximum of ten patients would be boarded in the clinic for overnight care with a technician on-site for supervision." Nielsen Invited the applicant to the lectern. Jen Long-Cortez, Stated that she was present on behalf of the applicant, Dr. Stephen J.L. Hare Hanson; thanked staff for working with the applicant over the past Associates few months in preparing the conditional use permit package; noted the staff conditions of approval have been reviewed by the applicant who accepts all those conditions contained in Resolution No. 4063. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 3 Ms. Long-Cortez Dr. Hanson is currently working in the advanced critical care and continued internal medicine building but is working with an imaging-MRI veterinary specialist who was providing care that is different from what would remain in the same building. Dr. Hanson has contracted with Steri-Cycle of Torrance; waste will be picked up by that entity. If the Planning Commission has any questions, Dr. Hanson is available to answer those questions. Puckett Asked if this would be an emergency room for animals. Ms. Long-Cortez Answered this would not be an emergency hospital but regular care for animals with existing conditions. Dr. Hanson, Indicated there is an emergency facility within the complex that is applicant open 24 hours providing emergency care; his practice is operated on an appointment basis; he is occasionally contacted to handle emergencies on a special, as-needed basis. Nielsen Verified with the applicant that this is a neurological clinic. Dr. Hanson Answered in the affirmative. 7:21 p.m. The Public Hearing closed. It was the consensus of the Commission that this is a good use for this site; all the Commissioners support staffs recommendation. It was moved by Murray, seconded by Kozak, to adopt Resolution No. 4063. Continued to 7. ZONE CHANGE 06-002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096, September 11, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024, AND DESIGN 2007, Planning REVIEW 06-020 REQUESTING: Commission meeting 1. ZONE CHANGE 06-002 TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-4) ZONING DISTRICT TO MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) TO REDEVELOP THE SITE WITH 77 CONDOMINIUM UNITS; 2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096 TO SUBDIVIDE THE 4.1-ACRE SITE (NET AREA) INTO A 77-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT; Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 4 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 TO CONSTRUCT STRUCTURES OVER 20 FEET IN HEIGHT WITHIN 150 FEET OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONING DISTRICT; AND, 4. DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 FOR APPROVAL OF BUILDING ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN AND AMENITIES OF THE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4064 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) as adequate for Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 for development of the proposed 77 residential condominium unit project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4065 approving Conditional Use Permit 06-024 for constructing buildings over 20 feet in height within 150 feet of Single Family Residential (R-1) zoning district and Design Review 06-020 for the architectural/site design and amenities of the proposed condominium project. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 4066 recommending that the City Council adopt the MND for Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06- 024, and Design Review 06-020 and approve Tentative Tract Map 27096 for the purpose of subdividing and developing a 4.1-acre (net) site with 77 residential condominium units. Nielsen ~ Stated for the record that he spoke with the developer and also several of the neighbors of the surrounding properties. Puckett Indicated that he also spoke with various residents but not at the same times as Chair Nielsen. Nielsen Asked if the one-page shade and shadow study represented the entire study. Ashabi Answered in the affirmative. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 5 Nielsen Asked what the maximum unit density would be for that particular site if the zone is changed to R-3 Residential, whether it would be the actual number of units that are being proposed or a higher density. Ashabi Noted that the General Plan allows up to 25 dwellings per acre, which would allow more units. Nielsen Questioned whether more units could be allowed with the zone change. Ashabi Answered in the affirmative. Nielsen Asked if hours of operation for construction would be normal hours of operation. Ashabi Stated the construction hours for the City are from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Nielsen Asked if additional mitigation measures are proposed during the construction process. Ashabi Answered that might be a question for the applicant. Nielsen Stated he noticed in the staff report. that the wall on the western property line being six feet in one section and 6' 8" in another; and, asked which figure was correct. Ashabi Indicated that 6' 8" is the maximum allowed and that is preferred for this location; the condition of approval should be revised to 6' 8" requirement. Nielsen Noted that on the western property line of those two-story homes with lofts with windows in the loft area the windows would be smaller; and, asked if the windows would be opaque. Ashabi Answered that the preliminary plans have not addressed the type of glazing, just the size and location of the windows. Nielsen Asked if there are other projects in the City that have the R-3 zoning next to R-1 properties with 10-foot setbacks. Ashabi Stated that the only R-3 property within proximity of this site would be to the north of Mitchell. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 6 Nielsen Indicated that his question was whether or not there are any projects or residences currently anywhere in the south side of the City that have R-3 residential next to R-1 residential with 10-foot setbacks similar to this project. Ashabi Responded that the question might require some research Director Noted that staff can provide the standards for R-1 versus R-3; there may be varying differentials of setbacks where those might occur; for example, if the setback is five feet or ten feet, individuals can go up to that setback. Nielsen Clarified that his question was geared toward whether or not this is something new or something that has been done before in this area of the City. Director Stated that staff would need to research this question. Murray Asked for the rationale for the increase in the setback from the 10 to the 15 in that one area that staff recommended. Ashabi Responded that this is a reverse corner lot; the determination of the frontage of the lot is the narrow dimension of the lot; the majority or larger streetscape is along Browning Avenue which required that 15-foot setback. Nielsen Questioned whether staff considers that afront-facing setback. Ashabi, Commented that it would also provide more privacy to those residents that are adjacent to that property. Nielsen Invited the applicant to the lectern. Jim Magstadt and Stated this is the second in-fill project the developer has presented Karen Sully to the Planning Commission; provided a PowerPoint.presentation during which he referred to 50-foot setbacks that actually included the yards of the neighboring residents; and, stated his team was available to answer any questions. Kozak Thanked the applicant for his presentation; and, asked for more information regarding the applicant's objection to the 15-foot setback along Browning in Condition 1.8 and also about the fencing along the westerly and southerly boundaries near the single-family residences; for example, whether or not the new fence is being proposed in addition to any existing fences and the 10-foot setback, Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 7 and whether or not there are garage openings that face the residents. Mr. Magstadt Stated the residents were informed of the original proposal for asix- foot block wall; the applicant volunteered to meet the 6' 8" maximum with any special treatment the neighbors might want on the wall. None of the garages face the adjacent residences. All the driveway areas are internal. The applicant stated specific suggested revisions to the conditions of approval would be addressed at a later time. Holland Noted that the Commission is conducting one hearing and now would be the appropriate time to hear any objections regarding any of the conditions of approval so the public would have the opportunity to comment on those objections. Kozak Asked for clarification whether or not the screening would be within the 10-foot setback. Mr. Magstadt Stated the landscaping within the neighbors' yards will be augmented with a row of screening trees along the applicant's property. Kozak Verified that the 10-foot setback would be heavily landscaped. Mr. Magstadt Confirmed that would be the case; and, stated the applicant is prepared to plant whatever trees are necessary to satisfy the screening desired. Murray Stated that this is anice-looking project and very appealing from an aesthetics standpoint; and, asked about the lighting plan. Mr. Magstadt Answered that a lighting plan was submitted to the City; the applicant has retained a lighting specialist; the lighting is geared so that none reflects into the adjacent properties; decorative lighting has been proposed to meet some of the City's new lighting standards. Murray Stated proper lighting is necessary not only regarding the neighboring communities but also from a security standpoint; it is important that conditions not be built in that might prompt security issues. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 8 Mr. Magstadt Indicated the applicant would work closely with the Police Department regarding lighting and other security measures to protect the residents. Puckett Stated that, when he met with Ms. Sully, the plan was to have a meeting at the Citrus Cafe; and, asked for the attendance at the August 21St meeting. Mr. Magstadt Answered that he thought there were about 15 people at that meeting and all were adjacent neighbors; in summary, attendees expressed concerns regarding height, density, setbacks, privacy issues regarding windows, maintaining the existing fences, area- wide traffic, and neighborhood parking. Nielsen Asked if the smaller windows along the western property line will be opaque. Mr. Magstadt Answered in the affirmative. Nielsen Asked if there had ever been any discussion of widening the setback against the western property line. Mr. Magstadt Responded that the neighbors would like 30-foot setbacks; the City requires a 5-foot setback and the applicant voluntarily designed 10- foot setbacks; given the size of some of the backyards, some of the setbacks are as much as 50 feet; since Mitchell Avenue is 40 feet from curb to curb, the applicant feels that the setbacks being proposed are substantial. Nielsen Asked if there was an estimate of the timing from the beginning to the completion of the project. Mr. Magstadt Answered the project would take 12 to 15 months for the four phases. Nielsen Asked if any mitigation measures were planned regarding construction noise. Ms. Sully Stated that during construction, the typical requirements imposed by the AQMD and the City's Building Department would be followed; that includes dust control, watering the site, abiding by the construction hours; there is a condition regarding the construction plan which would deal with traffic control and truck traffic to and from the site, parking, staging areas, etc. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 9 Nielsen Asked, towards the end of the project when the final phases are being completed, what would be the plan for storing the construction equipment and material. Ms. Sully Indicated that would be managed on-site. Nielsen Asked if the applicant had any objections to the conditions contained in the staff report. Mr. Magstadt Indicated there would be about eight changes requested. Murray Asked what mitigation measures might be addressed to deal with dirt and all road problems that typically occur during a construction project. Ms. Sully Indicated that all off-site debris would be removed, street sweeping, whatever the construction plan calls for; that plan will be developed during the plan check process. Nielsen Asked the applicant to state the requested changes to the conditions. Ms. Sully Requested the following: Resolution No. 4064: • In the environmental document, asked if the header should read that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt this resolution. If so, some of the Findings would need to reflect that, specifically Item II on page 2. • Findings should be incorporated from the State Guidelines, Section 15074b, to support adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Holland Noted that the additional language has been added to the resolution; also, there are certain aspects of this project for which this Commission could be the final determinant; it would be appropriate for the Commission to adopt the resolution as written. Ms. Sully Resolution No. 4065: • Finding E on the first page conflicts with Finding H. Exhibit A of the Conditions of Approval: Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 10 • Condition 1.4: the timeframe should run consistent with the Tentative Map. • Condition 4.2: the reference to the video of the existing storm drain should be deleted; staff agreed to delete this on a prior occasion. • Condition 4.5: the reference to removing the handicapped street parking along Mitchell Avenue should be addressed during the street improvement plan and this condition be deleted. • Condition 5.2: typo clarification that northerly property line be changed to southerly property line. • Condition 7.3: the correction regarding the 6' decorative block wall be changed to 6' 8". Resolution No. 4066: • Finding L reference to parcel map should be changed to tentative tract map. Nielsen Asked if staff needed time to address the requested changes. Director Answered in the affirmative. Kozak Referred to the revised page 2 and the addition of Item G for Resolution No. 4064 and asked that staff and the applicant provide clarification and a better understanding as to why that was added; and, stated he had not seen that before as a standard condition. Director Stated that language is from the California Environmental Quality Act. Kozak Asked if the City Attorney agreed with that added language. Holland Stated that the most substantial change that is being suggested is that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects staff's independent judgment; that is a Finding that is suggested under State law and staff is concurring with that recommendation. Kozak Thanked staff for that information Director Stated that Resolution No. 4066 would be corrected; the 6' for 6' 8" correction is preferred, but there is no need to modify the language; it would be appreciated if the developer would work with the Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 11 adjacent properties regarding animals and other occurrences; a collaborative relationship would be appreciated; Condition 5.2, so noted; the modified resolution provided at the dais removed Conditions 4.5 and 4.2. Since staff may need more time to prepare their additional responses, the Commission may wish to begin public testimony at this time. Nielsen Invited the public to speak, asking that a few spokespeople be chosen to avoid repetitiveness; since there are approximately 75 people in attendance, this would speed the process. Kay Shafer, Stated this project is too high, too dense, too close to existing Cloverbrook homes, and the architecture does not match the neighborhood; the resident existing traffic along Browning, Mitchell, and Walnut is a problem; placing this development near Nelson Elementary School will create hazardous conditions for the children; parking is already a problem and will be impacted by increasing the number of units and potential residents of this project. A petition signed by 94 residents was presented by Ms. Shafer and is incorporated herein by reference. Stephanie Indicated her concern was that the development does not meet Sattlerlee, current standards; Ordinance No. 906 states that a project must not Cloverbrook exceed one story or 20' in height within 150 feet of her property; resident special circumstances do not exist; the zone change being requested emphasizes the fact that other properties with similar zoning classification are not granted similar privileges; she and her husband chose to buy their home in Tustin for the large backyards and frontyards without large building looming over them; any conditional use permit issued should expire within one year; the developer should not be allowed to wait for market .conditions to settle. Jim Herron, Stated that his property abuts the development and will be directly Cloverbrook impacted; the privacy in the backyard was the main attraction for resident buying the house in 1975; that privacy will be destroyed by three- story condominiums 10 feet from the property line; several Realtors have indicated the proposed project will have a negative effect on Cloverbrook property values; he wonders if secret deals are being made between the City and the developer; he would like a more compatible development that would not block the morning sun, limit privacy, and destroy the beauty of his home. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 12 Jack Shafer, Commented that initially residents were told the proposed project Cloverbrook would be townhomes; now they are calling them condominiums; resident townhomes have one common wall; condos have four or more common walls; a Cape Cod style project does not fit into this neighborhood; he is not against building something that follows current zoning rules and restrictions; the 47-foot setback the builder referred to includes Mr. Shafer's backyard. Rick Satterlee, Noted that he also was surprised by the developer's referring to his Cloverbrook personal backyard as meeting a setback; every house around the resident proposed project is single story; three-story structures looming over these homes will lower property values and forever change the neighborhood; he is opposed to the zone change, 10-foot setback, and height variance due to the negative impact on the existing established R-1 zoned neighborhood; the community would perhaps support the project with the elimination of the third story, the provision of increased rear setbacks, and a maximum of 70 units in keeping with the current R-4 zoning; the staff report states there will be 22 visitation spaces, but only 18 are shown on the current site plan; the plans should include an entrance/exit on Mitchell. Julie Herron, Stated the existing complex has never been a problem; the Cloverbrook proposed development is wrong for the neighborhood; it is resident surprising that the City would allow such amega-complex to be built near a school; she would like to know if this project is part of a redevelopment project that would include different percentages of low-cost housing or a high-cost condominium project; the residents are opposed to the height, the enormity, the imposition being placed by the wall so close to the property line; it feels as though no one is respecting her values or property. Judith Jones, Added her opposition to the high density suggested for this project; Mitchell resident it is incompatible with the neighborhood; the suggestion for an entrance/exit on Mitchell would exacerbate existing traffic and parking problems. Toby Moore Stated that his primary opposition to the project was expressed in a Pinebrook resident letter to staff; the rebuttal provided by staff did not adequately address his concerns regarding the faulty assumptions based on the Traffic Study; the City must take into consideration that CEQA regulations have not been met; unless additional mitigations are put in place, he would recommend a full environmental impact report prior to any approval by the Planning Commission. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 13 Margaret LeBeau, Indicated that she has lived happily for 20 years at Rancho Sierra Browning resident Vista Apartments and would like to stay there a while longer; her concern is what will happen to the average senior citizen living on a fixed income when there are no affordable apartments available in Tustin; she has had her name on a waiting list for five years at the apartment complex on Sixth Street; she asked to be moved up on the list and was told that would not be possible; a $500 relocation expense does not go far to cover moving costs. David Levy, Submitted and read a statement into the record which is Browning resident incorporated herein by reference. Lisa Curlee, Stated that she is a condominium owner on Mitchell and the parent Mitchell resident of an elementary student at Nelson; traffic and parking are ongoing issues on Mitchell and at the school. Thelma Hatfield, Noted that she lives in the Tustin Park Villas condominiums across Mitchell resident the street from the proposed project; a 77-unit project at this location would be a disaster waiting to happen; the traffic on Browning is so bad that motorists cut through the neighborhoods to get to the I-5 freeway; when she goes to church on Sunday, there are no parking spots on Browning. Phyllis Burhenn, Indicated she has specialized in the Summerfield homes for more North Hills Realty than 33 years and has no doubt this project would have a negative effect on the homes along Cloverbrook, Pinebrook, and Sandfield and perhaps even on Copperfield. Nielsen Asked if staff was ready to respond. Director Responded that given the extensive public comments, the Commission may want to think about how to proceed; staff would like to take the opportunity to digest the comments received, especially the technical comments related to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Traffic Analysis, affordable housing, etc.; staff may not be prepared to respond in detail to each comment this evening; the Commission might want to take a recess to allow staff to discuss the issues and provide general comments or continue this item for two weeks to allow staff to come back and provide written responses. 9:25-9:40 p.m. Recess Nielsen Noted for the record that he lives in Summerfield Homes but is beyond the 500-foot arc; legally, he has no conflict of interest and does not believe the impact will be as great as has been stated; the Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 14 comment suggesting the City must be making secret deals with the developer is false; the Commission and staff have done their utmost to make everything as public as possible. Asked if staff was ready to respond or would prefer the applicant return to the lectern. Director Suggested the applicant should proceed. Nielsen Requested that the applicant return to the lectern to address the issues stated by the residents. Mr. Magstadt Reiterated that the applicant has demonstrated a willingness to hold additional meetings if necessary; the applicant will look at the comments to try to solve some of the concerns; if staff needs more time to study these issues, the applicant would be willing to volunteer to continue the item; perhaps a subcommittee of the Planning Commission and neighbors would be appropriate; the developers want to be good neighbors and good owners. Nielsen Thanked the applicant; a subcommittee would not be advisable, because the Planning Commission does everything in public so that everyone can be aware of what is happening. Asked if staff was ready to respond. Director If the Planning Commission wished to continue the item, staff could provide comments at a later time. Nielsen Indicated that the best suggestion might be to continue the item; and, asked the City Attorney for his input. Holland Responded that, at the discretion of the Commission, a motion to continue the meeting could be made with instructions to staff to prepare a comprehensive set of responses to comments. Nielsen moved, seconded by Murray, to continue this item to the next Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Puckett Added that the Planning Commission approved a similar project at Red Hill and Walnut which he supported; in this case, there were so many residents who voiced their concerns that additional time seems the best way to proceed; he thanked the residents for their attendance and showing that government works. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 15 Nielsen Provided direction to staff Noted he also appreciated the residents coming forward to share their concerns. REGULAR BUSINESS 8. FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION: TOUR OF OLD TOWN RESIDENTIAL AREA The primary purpose of the discussion is to identify possible future agenda items related to the Old Town Tustin Residential area. The discussion also provides a forum for the Commission to generally discuss the tour and to make recommendations for future tours. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission receive this report and provide direction to staff. Reekstin Puckett Provided a brief report. Stated it will be hard to top the first tour. Kozak Noted staff did a wonderful job of putting together a selected route to observe the various styles of architecture and other historic features in the residential area of Old Town; the Commission talked briefly at the last meeting about their individual observations and experiences; one of the things discussed was combining a tour with a workshop regarding the work program for the historic preservation responsibilities of the Commission; perhaps a tour of the commercial district of Old Town could then convene into a workshop where issues related to the Design Guidelines could be discussed and a path formulated. Nielsen Agreed with Commissioner Kozak's suggestion. Murray Stated it is important that the Commission get a feel for the contiguous areas of Old Town to get a perspective on the new responsibilities the Commission has been given. Nielsen Indicated the Old Town commercial district seemed to be the consensus for the next tour; and, suggested expanding the tours to Tustin Ranch and the Southwest area of the City. Puckett Added that another tour of The District to include the residential areas would be appropriate. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 16 Director Stated that staff could arrange the Old Town commercial tour, then perhaps a Legacy tour of The District and the Lennar developments where some milestones have been hit that staff would like the Commission to see. The Old Town tour could perhaps be scheduled for the second meeting in September. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to receive and file the report. Motion carried 4-0. Provided staff HISTORIC REGISTER AND COMMENDED PROPERTY direction PROGRAMS The Tustin Preservation Conservancy's interest in assuming responsibility for administering the Tustin Historic Register Plaque Program and the Commendation Program was expressed in a letter dated July 24, 2007. The Conservancy Board has offered to receive plaque requests from local residents and business owners, use the City's Historical Survey to research the property, and order the plaques from the same manufacturer that has been providing the plaques. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission receive this report and provide direction to staff. Linda Jennings, Congratulated Chair Nielsen and Chair Pro Tem Puckett on their Tustin Preservation selections this evening; and, reiterated her remarks from the July Conservancy 24, 2007, Planning Commission meeting regarding the Conservancy providing assistance to staff by taking over the historic plaque and commendation programs. Kozak Thanked Ms. Jennings for staying for the duration of the meeting to get to this item; and, asked if the Conservancy would be bringing their recommendations back to the Commission. Ms. Jennings Answered that would certainly be an option, if the Commission so desires, perhaps on a quarterly basis; and, asked whether or not the rectangular plaque requested by the Historic Preservation Committee for altered buildings has been designed. Nielsen Reiterated that he regretted missing the Old Town tour; the Conservancy is active in this field; the Tustin Historical Society and the Conservancy should perhaps prepare a proposal whereby they would be doing research and looking at the properties being Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 17 considered, with the Planning Commission as final arbiter and manager of the process. Puckett Stated his agreement with Chair Nielsen; the Commission should be the entity receiving the recommendations and making the final decision, perhaps on a quarterly basis. Murray Noted that collaboration between the Conservancy and the Historical Society would be important, but the Planning Commission should have an ownership in the decision. Kozak Agreed with the collaborative idea and to have guidelines established regarding who will do what. Ms. Jennings Stated the Tustin Historic Society is not interested in the architecture; they are primarily interested in the Museum; the research has been done on these buildings already; Carol Jordan was the Historian with the Historical Society and did all that research; a collaboration with the Society would probably not be an advantage. Suggested that the easiest thing to do would be to have the Conservancy receive the applications, process them, and provide them to staff on a quarterly basis for presentation to the Commission. Nielsen Reiterated that the Historical Society at least be given the opportunity to say no. Kozak Agreed with Chair Nielsen. Director Asked if staff was being requested to get the Society's input and develop draft guidelines. Nielsen Answered that, if the Conservancy has a proposal, the Tustin Area Historical Society be contacted regarding their possible involvement; if not, the information from the Conservancy will be given to the Commission; the Commission will create a logistical plan for the plaque program with the Commission as the final arbiter. Director Asked if Chair Nielsen would like draft guidelines prepared by staff; and, if the Historical Society is interested, have staff bring the guidelines back to the Commission for further direction. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 18 Nielsen Stated that if the Society is interested, get their input; if not, the Commission will have the Conservancy's input as necessary. Received and filed 5. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOPS report At the Planning Commission's request, staff will hold various workshops for the Planning Commission in the coming months. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission provide input to staff regarding future workshop topics. Director Indicated this item was continued in order to receive input from Chair Nielsen. Nielsen Mentioned the design guidelines referred to above be the first item to be considered. Kozak Noted that he commented last time that if the Commission were to look at prioritizing the workshops in terms of preparing the Commission to address issues that will be coming forward in the 'future, one of the issues would be infill projects similar to the one of the agenda this agenda; that may be something for the Commission to think about in terms of putting that as a priority. Nielsen Agreed that was an excellent idea. COMMISSION CONCERNS Murray Congratulated Chair Nielsen and Chair Pro Tem Puckett on their being selected to their respective positions. Noted the excellent community showing at this meeting; it was very interesting and enlightening; he appreciated the citizens coming out to express their concerns about a very important project; he will be interested in the proposal for a resolution at the next meeting. Stated he enjoys continuing to see great things at The District. Thanked Linda Jennings for attending and waiting through a long meeting to reach the Conservancy item. Kozak Added his congratulations to Chair Nielsen and Chair Pro Tem Puckett. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 19 Kozak continued Thanked staff for their hard work on all the agenda items and bringing back a couple items to allow Chair Nielsen's participation. Suggested that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Kenny Wilson, the Beckman High School football player, and expressed his condolences to his family and friends. Pointed out the building east of the Post Office where there are banners, neon signs, and window signs that are plastered all over the front of the structure; Code Enforcement should mitigate this problem. Puckett Offered his congratulations to Chair Nielsen and thanked the Commissioners for their confidence in his ability to perform the duties of Chair Pro Tem; this group may be the most diverse and best-qualified in his long experience of serving on the Planning Commission and City Council. Stated he attended the ribbon-cutting at the Chaparosa Grill yesterday; an excellent restaurant in the District; he and his wife enjoyed their 42"d wedding anniversary there. Noted that the Whole Foods ribbon-cutting is scheduled for tomorrow and Oggi's for Thursday. Added that the resident participation at tonight's meeting was a good display of government in action; it is good to see the process at work. Nielsen Thanked his fellow Commissioners for his selection as Chair; and, congratulated Chair Pro Tem Puckett. Agreed with Chair Pro Tem Puckett regarding the knowledge and wide variety of expertise on the current Commission. Noted that staff keeps the Commission well prepared, making the job much easier. Thanked staff for spending a long evening; it was necessary; the neighbors in Summerfield homes and the apartments on Mitchell were very concerned about the project; it is good to see people get involved and provide input that will result in a project that meets as many needs as possible; it is important that the project mesh with the neighborhood. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 20 Nielsen continued Thanked all the residents and the developer for their participation in the process. Noted he was also at the Chaparosa Grill and can attest to the great food. Added that it is good to see more businesses opening in The District; seeing the project come to fruition is wonderful. Commented on the sad passing of Kenny Wilson whose life touched many people; thoughts and prayers go out to his family; asked for a motion to close the meeting in his memory. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Kozak, to adjourn in memory of Kenny Wilson. Motion carried 4-0. 10:17 p.m. ADJOURNMENT In Memory of Kenny Wilson The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held Tuesday, September 11, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at 300 Centennial Way. Minutes -Planning Commission 8-28-07 -Page 21