Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-27-89MINUTES TUSTIN PLANNING COi~ISSION REGULAR NEETING HARCH 27, 1989 CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL: Present: Well, Baker, Le deune, Pontlous, Shaheen PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. CONSENT CALENDAR: (ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.) Minutes of the March 13, 1989 Planning Commission Meeting and March 27, 1989 ~using Element Workshop Commissioner Le Jeune moved, Well seconded to approve the consent calendar. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS 2. Report on Actions Taken at the March 20, 1989 City Council Meeting Presentation: Christine Shlngleton, Director of Community Development Commissioner Wetl wanted to know if the public realized that the City Council meetings could be seen on cable television, and if the cable company provided any publicity. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Baker questioned the recent City Council discussion regarding City of Irvtne wanting to move the Browing Corridor. Planning Commission Minutes March 27, 1989 Page two The Director replied that there is a helicopter over-flight task force in the City of Irvtne that is coordinating concerns about the helicopter flight path through the northern housing areas in the City of Irvine. The associations are potentially interested in moving the diagonal flight path to the north. Tustin is concerned that there is more intense development north of Irvine Blvd. along Jamboree within the Browning Corridor, and also about any potential outcome that might be recommended by the Marine Corps in response to Irvine concerns. The Marine Corps will not take specific action without consulting with the City, and any changes would be pursuant to the Browning Corridor Agreement. AD.]OURI~ENT At 7:07 p.m. Commissioner Well moved, Le Jeune seconded to adjourn to the Housing Element Workshop. The Workshop will adjourn to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 10, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Motion carried 5-0. Penni Foley Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION HOUSING ELEMENT WORKSHOP RARCH 27, 1989 Addendum to March 27, 1989 Planning Commission Minutes CALL TO ORDER: 7:10 p.m., following regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting. 1. STAFF PRESENTATION 2. PUBLIC ZNPUT Mr. Steve LaFever, of the Irvine Company, 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, said that the Irvine Company will conclude their review of the Housing Element within the next few days. There are no formal comments at this time. He is hopeful that there will be no comments required and that they will work to provide any comments in an expeditious manner. 3. CO~INISSION DISCUSSIOM Commissioner Baker inquired as to whether there had been notices sent to the public. Staff replied that notices had been published in the Tustin News and concerned parties that addressed the City were sent personal letters of invitation. Only the Dale McIntosh Center, an advocacy group for the handicapped, responded with comments to the Element. However, it was received too late for incorporation into the Element at this stage, but some of their suggestions may still be able to be utilized. Commissioner Baker asked if homeowners and other groups were invited to this workshop. Staff repsponded by stating that if it were a comprehensive change, then community input should be much greater. This is only an update which is not proposing any changes affecting the community. The Director commented that all of the legal obligations for notification have been met. Commissioner Shaheen commented that his review of the Element was incomplete and that he had no questions as yet. However, he did request a clarification of what was included in the document that the Commissioners received. He also wanted to know how often the Element was amended. Staff replied that the Commission received a draft of the 1989 Housing Element Amendment, including Appendix A. The Appendix provides all tables and back-up data for the document. The Element is revised every five (5) years. The Director commented that the staff cannot begin to update the element until SCAG provides regional housing allocation numbers. As the staff has had less than 90 days to complete the amendment, there was not enough time to hire a consultant. They were fortunate, though, to have a talented staff on-hand. Staff asked if the Commission had any policy changes, confusing language they wished clarified, grammatical changes, etc. that they wished the Staff to make. Commissioner Wetl thanked the staff for their excellent job, and that she felt it was more speci{tc and meaningful than the 1984 amendment. She questioned the reference to "Programs" under Goals of Housing Policies on Page 81. She wanted to know what the Program numbers referred to and where they were referenced in the Element. P]annlng Commission Houstng E]ement ~lorkshop March 27, 1989 Page two The Director replied that they referred to the funding and assistance Programs noted elsewhere in the text. She noticed that the Program numbers needed to be reviewed for correspondence with the Goals and asked Commissioner Well if she felt it would be beneficial to note the page numbers referred to by each Program number. Commissioner Well responded that it would be helpful. Commissioner Shaheen asked if there were actually 49 programs for rehabilitation, and who provided the money for the assistance programs and if the Commission coordinates the programs with the City. Staff replied that there were a number of programs to facilitate the housing goals, low-cost assistance, and housing for the handicapped. Various organizations includ- ing the City, State, Federal, private individuals and developers agree ahead of time to set-aside units for low-income parties. The Director replied that the City participates by actually meeting objectives. Also, if there is a funding program like HUD Block Grant Program, the City will participate in it and apply for housing rehabilitation programs. Staff commented that on page 97 regarding Item 1. Mixed-use zoning: The Implemen- tation Agency noted is Community Development. This means that the City facilitates mixed-use zoning through the Zoning Code. Commissioner Shaheen asked if the Irvine Company is providing low-cost housing in the East Tustin area. The Director replied that there is no mandate requiring low- to moderate-income housing in East Tusttn. There is a voluntary commitment on part of the Irvine Company to provide low and moderate-income units. However, the goals as identified basically meet objectives of 1984 Element. Commissioner Wetl noted that she was glad that the Element acknowledges the need for moderate- to high-income housing; factory-built housing as an alternative; possibility of adjusting standards to bring down costs of new housing. She would rather see reduction in landscaping standards rather than in the number of parking spaces (except in the case of senior housing). She was also glad that the document acknowledges that the objectives of RHNA are part of the document, but that Tustin cannot guarantee successful achievement. Commissioner Well noted that she was personally not too happy about the inclusion of the Homeless as an entity in the Housing Element. She thinks it is commendable that organizations like Sheepfold provide shelters for citizens in need of help, but is philosopically against providing homes for indigents who want to live here but do not necessarily want to work here. She realizes that it is a moral subject, but wonders if the City is obligated to provide housing for everyone wanting to live in California. The Commissioner noted that she was just making a point, and that she saw no changes to the issue. Planntng Commission Housing Element Workshop March 27, 1989 Page three The Director replied that legal obligations require the City to address the issue of the homeless in the Housing Element. She does not feel that the magnitude of the homeless issue can be handled at the local level; it should be regional. Commissioner Shaheen asked how many homeless people there were in Tusttn. The Director replied that there is no way of knowing. The estimates are all provided at a county-wide level. Commissioner Well noted that the "ideal vacancy concept" is also a philosophical matter. She feels that it is a noble idea, but questions how it would be attainable. The reason the vacancy rate is so low is because Tustin has the lowest rents in the area. She feels that the City could raise rents and obtain ideal vacancy rate, but does not feel that this is the City's objective. It destroys the very idea that it is after. Commissioner Well offered some suggestions to be included in the allowable uses in the commercial zoning: a) apartments over stores to encourage an urban village atmosphere--may renovate older buildings and provide good housing; b) building senior housing over municipal parking lots--since the city already owns the land, the cost of building the housing is reduced (very innovative idea on the part of the City of Orange); c) Regarding Pg. 81, Goal number 5--Powers of Redevelopment Agency will be used when required to acquire underdeveloped properties. Suggests changing wording from "underdeveloped" to "blighted" so as to lessen the sensitivity to the wording, as well as alleviating the possibility of stepping on private property rights. She felt that unless the land was within a redevelopment area or under the ruling of eminent domain, that the City does not have the right to tell people that their property is underdeveloped. The Director suggested that the Staff reword the paragraph to be less specific. Commissioner Well noted that on Page 85, paragraph 2 the City was being very specific in Appendix A regarding East Tustin. She wondered if the East Tustin project was still largely vacant. The Director replied that there are 2,000 acres in the Plan area aproximately, a large portion of which is still vacant. Page 95, Vacant Land Survey, should be labeled as an Exhibit and be attached to this section. Commissioner Wetl noted that it was inconsistent with the figures in the rest of the document, and would like to avoid outsiders viewing the document and being misinformed. Planning Commission Housing Element Workshop March 27, 1989 Page four Staff replied that of the 2,000 acres, 1,005 are still vacant, including allocation for roads. Another way to approach the wording may be to change "largely vacant area" to "partially vacant area." The Director noted that there are largely vacant areas for which infrastructure improvements and connections are already under construction. Commissioner Well requested that the wording of Page 99 regarding Deed Restrictions be improved. She also wanted to know the time restrictions. The Director replied that the Staff can provide actual wording of the policy that the Planning Commission recommended to City Council on Deed Restrictions as applicable to. housing set-aside funds and density bonuses. There is a 30-year time limitation. Commissioner Le Jeune asked if land cost write-downs and 20~ set-aside is only in redevelopment areas. He noted that the Staff did a great job. The Director replied that the City would have the ability to do land write-down on any projects, although resources are not available. For example, the City may not have a vacant land site within the South Central project area, but may have one that is bordering the project area. The City may apply funds to property outside the project area if there is a finding that housing will serve those in the project area. Commissioner Pontlous noted that, given all the constraints, the Staff did a magnificent job. She noted that there did seem to be some confusion regarding the vacancy rate. When the Element was looked at in a Regional aspect, then the vacancy rate was more reasonable than when it is broken down into a city subject. She does not think there is anything that can be done about it. The Director replied that the Staff could add a sentence to the description of Housing Prices stating that the City is required to provide a 5~ ideal vacancy rate. Commissioner Baker asked if the vacancy ratios will change with the East Tustin development. He noted that he did not feel that the City needed to apologize for the low vacancy rates. The Director noted that the vacancy rates in Tustin have been historically low. She did not think that there would be a significant increase based on demand. The City is at 4~. Since other cities may be at 1) or 2[, she did not feel that 4~ was an unreasonable rate. Commissioner Shaheen asked what the letter was that was included in the package. The Director replied that the there was a request made of the Public Works Department to require a 2-hour parking limit. The item is not related to the Workshop and will be handled by the Public Works Department. P]anntng Commission Houstng E]ement Workshop March 27, 1989 Page ftve The Director noted that the Commission needed to formally request modifications as noted and to set a public workshop for April 10. Commissioner Baker requested a Public Workshop to be held April 10, following the regular meeting of the Planning Commission. The Director commented that at the next meeting, the Commission would receive the document with changes only, the lines and carrots would still be included until the Council approves the document. The HCG will receive a clean copy. The Director noted that because Staff is to do only four General Plan amendments per year, they would like to consolidate a minor land-use element amendment as part of the general plan amendment. This is to identify land-use intensities that are currently not in the element, as required. It will be designed to meet the intent of the law until a comprehensive revision is done. It will probably only be 4-5 sentences added to the land-use element. The Staff will provide this within the next 30 days, for consolidation by the meeting of June 10. Commissioner Wetl moved, Ponttous seconded to instruct staff to make minor ~6difications to the Document and provide changes at the Workshop on April 10. Motion carried 5-0. RECOMMENDATION - Staff will: 1) coordinate Program numbers and the Goals where referenced and provide page numbers of Programs corresponding to Goals; 2) re-word Goal 5, pg. 81 to be less specific and incorporate all needs beside low-income needs; 3) label pg. 95 - Vacant Land Survey - as an Exhibit; 4) provide actual wording of policy on Deed Restrictions to pg. 99; 5) add a sentence to the section of Vacancy Rates stating that the City is required to provide a 5% ideal vacancy rate. ADdOURleqE#T Workshop adjourned at 8:07 p.m. to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 10, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. HA I RP1AN