HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 09-13-76MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
September 13, 1976
The regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission was
held on the 13th day of September, 1976, at the hour of 7:30 p.m.
of said day, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Centennial Way
at Main, Tustin, California.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hill at 7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Robbins.
INVOCATION was given by Commissioner McHarris.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Commissioners:
Hill, Glenn, Lathrop,
McHarris, Robbins
Absent:
Commissioners: None
Others Present:
R. Kenneth Fleagle, Assistant City Administrator,
Community Development Director
Daniel Van Dorpe, Assistant Director, Planning
and Building
Scott Nichols, Assistant City Attorney
Mary Ann Chamberlain, Planning Commission Recording
Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved bY Lathrop, seconded by Glenn that the minutes of August 23,
1976 be approved.
MOTION CARRIED: 4-0
Commissioner McHarris abstained because of his absence at the last
meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Continued
Variance 76-5 - Gene King, to authorize the construction of a
six unit ~P~rtmen{ building on a sub-standard R-3 lot with a
50 foot frontage instead of the required 70' frontage.
Location: 130 Pacific Street.
Dr. Fleagle presented a synopsis of the staff report and presented
a petition which had been signed by 77 residents of the area.
The petition read:
"We the undersigned property owners and nearby residents have no
objection to the above mentioned property being used for a one
story, luxury type apartment building, with off-street parking
for two cars per unit, on the end of the building, at street
level."
Dr. Flea~le informed the Commission that there are several alterna-
tives available as related to this variance application:
1. Approve the variance application as submitted.
PC Minutes
9-13-76, Page 2
Approve the variance subject to staff approval of design plans
that limit the property to six (6) dwelling units, not to ex-
ceed a total of 9 bedrooms with two parking spaces per unit.
Continue the variance application for 30 days to enable the ap-
plicant to re-submit acceptable design plans to the Planning
Commission.
4. Deny the application without prejudice.
Commissioner McHarris informed the Commission that he had reviewed
the tapes and' discussed this matter with local residents and feels
that the overall plot plan is not adequate for the site and would
be a disservice to the surrounding neighborhood to approve this plan.
After some discussion among the Commissioners, it was moved by
Hill to deny the application without prejudice.
Motion died for lack of second.
In response to Commissioner Glenn's question pertaining to possible
legal ramifications in denying this variance, Mr. Nichols informed
that court cases have gone both ways and this matter could be re-
viewed at Council level.
Moved by Lathrop, seconded by Glenn to approve the variance subject
to staff approval of design plans that limit the property to six (6)
dwelling units, not to exceed a total of 9 bedrooms with two parking
spaces per unit.
MOTION DID NOT CARRY:
Ayes:
Noes:
Lathrop, Glenn
Hill, McHarris, Robbins
Moved by McIIarris, seconded by Hil~ to deny the application without
prejudice.
MOTION CARRIED: 3-2
Ayes:
Noes:
McHarris, Hill, Robbins
Glenn, Lathrop
Initial Hearings
Variance 76-7 - Park Tustin Condominium Owners Association~ Inc.
to permit the installation of patio covers on existing structures
in conformance with existing architecture, with all structures
being applicable, except for structures on the south perimeter
next to the area called Enderle Gardens.
Location: Easterly side of Yorba Street approximately 600 ft. south
of 17th Street known as Tract 7750.
Mr. Van Dorpe presented the staff report and related that variances
had been granted to two other condominium developments for the same
reason.
The public hearing was opened at 8:10 p.m.
Mr. Theodore Winns, representative for the Park Tustin Condominium
Owners Association explained to the Commission that the patios are
all very small, not close to the property lines and are 2" x 2"
open lattice.
Commissioner Robbins questioned if the patio covers would be con-
necting from one condominium to another and if this would do any-
thing to the fire coverage.
Mr. Winns commented that running from east to west on the plot plan,
the patios would not connect with each other and would have no
bearing on any fire insurance.
The public hearing was closed at 8:20 p.m.
PC Minutes
9-13-76, Page 3
After some discussion, it was moved by Robbinsr seconded by McHarris
to approve Variance 76-7 by th~ adoption of Resolution No. 1540.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
After further discussion related to setbacks, it was moved by Robbins,
seconded by McHarris to add 2 (d) to Resolution No. 1540 to read:
"Patio structures shall not project closer than 5 feet to the
perimeter property lines."
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
2. Environmental Impa~t Report. 76-3 ~ General Plan Amendment 76-2
Dr. Fleagle presented the staff report for the Environmental Impact
Report and related that this EIR had been circulated to the appro-
priate agencies and the hearing would now be held to address the
environmental impact for the six general plan (land use) amendments.
The hearing was opened at 8:30 p.m.
Sheila Patterson informed the Commission that she is concerned with
Mr. Vaughn's home at 14632 Holt Avenue and the loss of the historical
value disappearing from the Tustin scene. (Amendment 76-2C).
Mr. Vaughn, 14632 Holt Avenue, owner, stated that the home was built
before the turn of the Century and later an addition was added to
the original home.
Barry Zimmerman, Covington Brothers, explained that the conceptual
plan was a concept only and was not intended for evaluation. Covington
Brothers now feels that their initial concept is inadequate because
of the findings in the Environmental Impact Report. (This section
refers to Amendment 76-2A).
Mr. Ken Nelson, 17401 Irvine Blvd., applicant for Amendment 76-2B,
stated that his plans were conceptual only and they would mitigate
the freeway noise with the same treatment that had been provided on
Tract 8490 to the north.
The public hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m.
Commissioner McHarris related that he felt that the air quality
study contained Within the impact report was not completely related
to the site.
After further discussion, it was moved by Robbins, seconded by. Lathrop
to recommend certification of Environmental Impact Report 76-3 by the
adoption of Resolution No. 1543.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
3. An Amendment (76-2) to the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area
General Plan for the following properties:
A. Southeasterly corner of Main and Williams
B. North of 17th Street easterly of Newport Freeway
C. East side of Holt, north of Irvine
D. 17th Street, west of Laurinda Way
E. Newport Avenue, south of Andrews
F. North side of Second between Pacific and "A" Streets.
76-2A Southeasterly corner of Main and Williams
Mr. Van Dorpe presented the staff report and stated that the re-
quested action would permit construction of a 79 unit apartment
project with a density of 27 units per acre. Staff recommended
that the property be reclassified to the Planned Community District
with mixed commercial and residential uses permitted with approval
of precise development plans.
PC Minutes
9-13-76, Page 4
The public hearing was opened at 9:00 p.m.
Mr. Barry Zimm~rman, Covington Brothers, explained that the concept
as shown was only a gui~e to prepare 'the Environmental Impact Report.
Mr. Zimmerman suggested that they come back with a plan that would
mitigate the problems that were addressed in the EIR, noise, adult
units, density and commercial uses. Mr. Zimmerman stated that the
property had been zoned C-1 thirteen (13) years ago and never devel-
oped as commercial. Mr. Zimmerman further stated that the property
was only three (3) acres and he felt it was too small for both Com-
mercial and Residential.
The public hearing was closed at 9:20 p.m.
In response to Commissioner McHarris' questions pertaining to den-
sities of surrounding properties, Dr. Fleagle informed that the mo-
bile home park has less than ten (10~ dwelling units per acre,
Williamshire has less than ten (10) dwelling units per acre and the
nearby apartments have approximately 17 dwelling units per acre.
After some discussion centering around the sound and air problems
for the site, it was moved_~y Lathro~, seconded by Glenn to deny a
recommendation for a general plan amendment.
After further discussion, the motion was withdrawn by the maker and
the second.
Moved by McHarris, seconded by Glenn to continue this general plan
amendment to the next regular meeting in order for Covington Brothers
to make further studies regarding mixed uses.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
A recess was called at 9:33 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 9:45 p.m.
76-2B Northwest corner of Carrol Way and Medford Avenue
Dr. Flea~le presented the staff report recommending that the General
Plan be amended to reclassify this six (6) acre parcel to the Planned
Community Residential with the density limited to ten (10) dwelling
units per net acre excluding public and private streets.
~Mr. Ken Nelson, applicant,, presented a slide presentation of how they
intend to develop the property.
The public hearing was opened at 9:50 p.m.
Mr. Ken Nelson, applicant, stated that they have given a lot of
thought to the sound attenuation for the freeway noise and the plan
is to be similar to that which Pacesetter Homes constructed with a
large mound and a block wall built on top of the mound. Mr. Nelson
stated that he felt this plan is compatible with the surrounding
area and would present a good living environment.
Mr. David Miller, a resident from Yorba Street stated that he felt
there are too many multi-family developments and does not think that
there should be any more in Tustin as the classes are now overcrowded
in the Tustin schools. Mr. Miller stated that he had been informed
that we were the second in the County for density of multi-family
dwellings. Perhaps the City should consider this area for a park
since there is so little open space left in the City.
Chairman Hill commented that everyone would like to see more parks but
the economic situation would determine how much the town would grow.
In response to a question pertaining to traffic circulation, Mr.
Nelson stated that the traffic would flow across Medford, down Yorba
to 17th Street, or down Carrol Way to 17th Street.
PC Minutes
9-13-76, Page 5
After some discussion relating to densities and open space, it was
moved by Hil.1, seconded by McHarris to direct staff to prepare a
resolution incorporating the findings of the Commission to approve
General Plan Amendment 76-2B reclassifying the six (6) acre parcel
at the northwest corner of Carrol Way and Medford to Planned Com-
munity Residential with the density limited to ten (10) dwelling
units per net acre excluding public and private streets.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
76-2C
Easterly side of Holt between Irvine and the flood control
channel.
Mr. Van Dorpe presented the staff report and stated that this area is
in the County with letters filed with the City for future annexation.
Reclassification to a multi-family would not be detrimental to the
area, but would enhance property values and encourage development
with a proposed density not to exceed one dwelling unit per 2,000
sq. ft. of land area, with two parking spaces per unit.
The public hearing was opened at 10:30 p.m.
Pat Koval, applicant, explained to the Commission that the old Vaughn
home was expanded over 50% of its original size and could not be moved
or saved because of the present condition with the front porch falling
away from the home. Miss Koval also stated that there is a large old
tree on the property which hopefully can be saved. She would not want
to put more than twelve (12) units on the property.
Sheila Patterson stated that she hates to see historical landmarks
destroyed and thinks old homes should be preserved. She also informed
the Commission that the property owners to the south of this property
were not informed of the hearings.
Carol Hammond stated that she was impressed with Mr. Young's comments
pertaining to parks but thinks the City should look at the buffer
zones within the City.
The public hearing was closed at 10:50 p.m.
It was moved by McIIarris, seconded by Robbins to continue this hearing
to the next regular meeting and directed staff to notify the property
owners to the south of this property of the intended general plan
amendment and annexation.
MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 Commissioner Glenn abstained from voting.
76-2D
Northerly side of 17th Street and westerly of Laurinda Way
Mr. Van Dorpe presented a synopsis of the staff report and related
that this proposal is to change the general plan designation from
Professional to Single-family for the front 300 feet of the property
which is presently zoned R-1.
The public hearing was opened at 11:00.
Seeing and hearing no one, the hearing was closed.
Moved by Robbins, seconded by McHarris to direct staff to prepare a
resolution amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan for the
front 300 feet of the property northerly of 17th Street and west of
Laurinda Way to Single-family Residential.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
76-2E
East side of Newport southerly of Andrews
Dr. Fleaqle presented a synopsis of the staff report and related that
this proposal is to change the general plan designation from multiple
family to commercial.
PC Minutes
9-13-76, Page 6
The public hearing was opened at 11:01.
Seeing and hearing no one the hearing was closed.
Moved by Lathrop, seconded ~y Glenn to direct staff to prepare a
resolution amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan for
the property easterly of Newport Avenue, southerly of Andrews from
Multiple-family to Commercial designation.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
76-2F
North side of 2nd Street from "A" to Pacific Streets.
Dr. Fleagle presented a synopsis of the staff report and related
that this proposal is to reclassify the land use from Single-family
Residential to Multi-family Residential.
The public hearing was opened at 11:05 p.m.
Mr. William Hockenberry, 465 West 2nd Street, one of the applicants
of this proposal, explained that this change would provide a natural
buffer for the commercial properties on the north and the Single-
family Residential properties on the south. Mr. Hockenberry further
stated that he is a resident of the area, an architect by profession,
knows what can and should be done with the area and would treat it
with discretion.
Ritchie Bonkowski, 160 S. "A" Street, presented the Commission with a
petition signed by property owners on Pacific, "A" and Second Streets.
The petition stated that the above 30 property owners do not want the
above mentioned property to be rezoned but to be maintained as a quiet,
low density, peaceful area as it has been since the turn of the century.
Mr. Bonkowski stated that the increased noise from additional people
living in the area would adversely affect the character of the whole
neighborhood.
Commissioner McItarris questioned what they would like to see developed
there. Mr. Bonkowski answered that the trailer park is quiet as it
now exists and apartments would not be.
Homer Itannaford, owner of the trailer park, related to the Commission
that the trailer pa.rk was there before the City was incorporated and
felt that this amendment was a good idea because the area had to be
redeveloped sooner or later and wanted to hear the reactions of the
neighbors.
Larry Marsters, 502 West Second Street, related that he had bought
his property long ago and felt it was an area of speculation. Mr.
Marsters feels it is a logical rezoning and has sold it subject to
being re~oned and presented the real estate agent that purchased it.
Mr. Rick Angoni, Real Estate Developers, Inc., informed the Commission
that since t~is block is all mixed uses, he felt that this classifica-
tion change would enhance the property values but he had not taken into
consideration the emotional factors that would result from the neigh-
bors. He stated that this project would be low profile and enhance the
surrounding properties. He would be willing to work with the neighbors
and community and their feelings would be well taken in the planning of
this development.
Ms. Barbara Murray, 185 Pacific Street, stated that she felt these
gentlemen were entirely wrong and they were only out to make money
from the neighborhood. She feels Tustin should remain as is and she
does not want outsiders coming to build around them.
Margaret Byrd requested the Commission not to destroy old Tustin by
allowing this development.
Mr. Bill Hockenberry reinforced that he does have a deep seated inter-
est in Tustin, works and lives here and only wants to see the best
happen in Tustin.
PC Minutes
9- 13 -76, Page 7
After some discussion among the Commissioners, it was moved by
Robbins to deny this reclassification. Motion died fox lack of
second.
Moved by Glenn, seconded by McHarris to continue this item until
Octobe~ 11 to allow 'the developer to come with a definite proposal
that can be presented to the residents of the area and Commission.
MOTION CARRIED: 3-2
Ayes:
Noes:
Glenn, Lathrop, McHarris
Hill, Robbins
PUBLIC CONCERNS - None
OLD BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
1. Parcel Map 76-84 - Signal Landmark - Dix Metals
Location: Southeasterly corner of Bell and Mosher
Moved by Lathro~, seconded by Robbins to recommend approval of Parcel
Map 76-84 ~o the City ~ohncil by the adoption of Resolution No. 1541.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
2. Tentative Parcel Map 76-85 - John Griffith Co.
Location: Newport Avenue, First Street, Irvine Blvd., and Holt Ave.
Moved by Lathrop, seconded by Robbins that Tentative Parcel Map 76-85
~e recommended to the"-~ity Council for approval by the adoption of
Resolution No. 1542, and the addition that 2 b read: That Parcels
4 and 5 be combined as one parcel.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
3. Final Tract 9345 - Sand Dollar Development
Location: 17th Street west of Laurinda Way
Mr. Anthony De Lorenzo, 13862 Malena, complained to the Commission of
dirt in his home from the grading on Tract 9345 and requested that
the fence on his southerly property line be taken care of by the
developer.
Mr. Harry Gutierrez, 13851 Malena, complained that the developer is
creating a corridor between his property and the new tract (9345), and
who will provide the drainage for the rear of his property. Mr.
Gutierrez also explained that he has allergic children and the dust
from 9345 is causing problems.
After some discussion pertaining to the drainage, it was moved by
La~hro~, seconded by Glenn to recommend approval to the City Council
by the adoption of Resolution No. 1544.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
4. Parcel Map 76-82 - The Irvine Company
Location: Northeast corner of Franklin and Dow
Moved by }{ill, seconded by Lathrop to amend Resolution No. 1539
which recommended approval of Parcel Map 76-82 to the City Council,
to read: That Parcel 2 and 3 of subject map be subject to specific ap-
proval of the Planning Commission for any development thereon as re-
lated to access, landscaping, and lot coverage.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - None
PC Minutes
9-33-76, Page 8
CORRESPONDENCE
1. Setbacks for E-4 Parcels
Dr. Fleagle related to the Commission that Mr. Walter Wands of 17692
Westbury Lane has requested (along with 32 other property owners in
the area) for a change in the criteria for the E-4 District to allow
for a 5 ft. sideyard setback instead of the required 10% lot width.
After some discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to
have the homeowners initiate the action rather than the Planning
Commission.
2. Correspondence from Prospe.ct Park Homeowners Association
Received and filed.
3. IIousinq and Community Development Act - Third Year
Moved by Hill, seconded by Lathrop to advertise hearing for IIousing
and Community Development Act for the third year for October llth
meeting.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
4. Constitution Savings and Loan
Moved by Lathrop, seconded by MctIarris to direct staff to respond to
Constitution Federal Savings and Loan that the City will not partici-
pate in the construction of the storm drain and 2(j) will not be
deleted.
MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
STAFF CONCERNS
1. Price Sign for Insta-Tune, 12999 Newport Avenue
Moved by Lathrop, seconded by Hill to authorize staff to approve the
installation of the price sign attached to the free standing pole
sign for a total of 15 sq. ft.
MOTION FAILED:
Ayes:
Noes:
Glenn, Lathrop
IIill, McHarris, Robbins
Moved by McHarris, seconded by Robbins to authorize staff to approve
the installation of the price sign not to exceed 10 sq. ft. in area
in a location to be determined by staff.
MOTION CARRIED: 3-2
Ayes:
Noes:
Hill, McHarris, Robbins
Glenn, Lathrop
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Adjourn to Workshop Session for the California Redevelopment Act.
Commissioner McHarris requested staff to check into the status of
the curb striping on the northwesterly corner of Sycamore and Red
IIill.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned
6:45 p.m., September 27,
at 1:55 a.~to a workshop session at
CHAIRMAN OF TIlE PLANNING C~MblISS~ON
/
'PLAS~NING C~MISSION RECORDING SECRETARY