HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 10-23-73 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
October 23, 1973
The regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission
was held on the 23d day of October, 1973, at the hour of 7:40
p.m. of said day in the Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street,
Tustin, California.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Hare.
The Invocation was given by Commissioner McHarris.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Absent:
Others
present:
Dombrow, Hare, McHarris.
Edgar, Larnard.
Bruce Lenorovitz, Assistant Planning Director
Jessica Carroll, Planning Commission Recording
Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner McHarris moved for approval of the minutes of the
October 8, 1973, meeting, seconded by Commissioner Hare.
Carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Continued
1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DRAFT) - THE IRVINE COMPANY
Location: Bounded by the Santa Ana Freeway to the north-
east, the future alignment of Myford Road to the southeast,
the U. S. Marine Corps Air Station (H) to the southwest,
and the future alignment of Jamboree Road to the northwest.
Mr. Lenorovitz gave the background to date, stating that as the
questions posed concerning the EIR are answered, this data will
be made available to staff by the Irvine Company and/or their
consultants, Owen Menard & Associates. Staff will then submit
same to the Planning Commission for their perusal and/or action.
No answers to questions posed by the Planning Commission or
staff have been received as yet, since it was recommended that
the EIR be continued as an open public hearing to November 12,
1973. It was further recommended that additional testimony be
taken from any members of the audience desiring to do so.
Acting Chairman Dombrow requested that all answers to EIR ques-
tions posed and submitted to Planning Department also be made
available to the organization, "Citizens for Quality Living",
and other interested citizens.
The public portion of the meeting was opened at 7:47 p.m.
David B. Neish, the Irvine Company, Newport Beach, requested a
continuation for the reason that at the last meeting, questions
were asked by staff, Commissioners and citizens, which their
consultants have not had time to study. Although they would be
happy to hear any further questions that have not been asked
previously, they are not in a position to report on any answers
this evening. However, all questions to date, including those
posed by the Citizens for Quality Living, will be incorporated
in their reply.
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 2
To Commissioner Hare's question as to actual date of replies,
Mr. Neish stated that it depends on the questions received
tonight. Those already asked are in the process of being
answered. A two-week continuation should place them in
excellent position and enable them to present their findings
to the Planning Commission and public.
Commissioner Hare stated the importance of receiving the Irvine
Company's reply no later than Wednesday, November 6, 1973, to
the EIR questions raised to date.
Ronald H. Smothers, Owen Menard & Associates, stated that a
number of questions asked to date require additional insight
study but they will provide as much information as possible
by the required date. They are categorizing questions into
related areas in an attempt to have entire responses at the
November 12th meeting.
To Commissioner Hare's question regarding the possibility of
this issue being continued again on November 12, Mr. Smothers
replied there was that possibility.
James Kinder, 1941 Hampshire Road, Tustin, President of Citi-
zens for Quality Living, stated that if questions and discus-
sions of workshop sessions were going to be continuously con-
sidered for some time to come, he would suggest removing this
item from the agenda until such time as definitive answers
have been prepared from workshop sessions to consist of inter-
ested citizens' groups, Irvine Company, City of Tustin, and
any other interested parties.
Richard Reiser, 14852 Alder Lane (Peppertree), Tustin, raised
questions concerning the preparation of the original EIR,
stating that while this document took a great deal of prepara-
tion time, significant questions that have arisen concerning
some of its text were prepared almost overnight by interested
citizens. Mr. Reiser questions certain motives and the seri-
ousness of the study, stating that he is upset by the delay
taking place, thereby endangering other critical areas.
In answer to Commissioner Hare's question, Mr. Reiser stated
he had been living in Peppertree for two weeks.
Commissioner Hare questioned if Mr. Reiser was aware and
informed as to what was proposed for the particular land use
in question prior to the purchase of his property. Mr. Reiser
replied that he was not informed of the nature of the property
in question. Every presentation given showed that it was to
become residential and he is now considering taking some type
of action concerning misleading advertising.
Darr~l Bloom, 1951 Hampshire Road, Tustin, presented a land
use map showing the south portion of Tustin of proposed Jam-
boree, Myford and Moulton Parkway. He stated that the pro-
posed industrial complex takes up a major portion of the City
and questioned the need of such an industrial area to support
a city the size of Tustin. He stated that approximately
40,000 vehicles will be generated daily from the proposed com-
plex, while the Jamboree Road an and off ramps cannot possibly
be completed until 1982.
The public portion of the meeting was closed at 8:15 p.m.
Motion by Hare, seconded by McHarris to continue hearing to
next regularly scheduled meeting, November 12, 1973. Carried
unanimously. Ayes: Dombrow, Hare, McHarris. Noes: none.
Absent: Edgar, Larnard.
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 3
2. ZC 73-6
A joint application of the City of Tustin Planning
Commission and the Irvine Company for a zone change
from Planned Community (Residential) to Planned Com-
munity (Industrial-Commercial).
Location: Bounded by the Santa Ana Freeway to the
northeast, and the future alignment of Myford Road to
the southeast, and the U. S. Marine Corps Air Station
(H) to the southwest and the future alignment of
Jamboree Road to the northwest.
A background synopsis was presented by Mr. Lenorcvitz, who
suggested that, since this is appurtenant to the previously
presented EIR - Irvine Industrial Complex, that the public
hearing be continued to November 12, 1973.
Public portion of the hearing was opened at 8:20 p.m.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:21 p.m.
Motion by McHarris, seconded by Hare, that public hearing for
ZC 73-6 be continued to November 12, 1973. Carried unanimously.
Ayes: Dombrow, Hare, McHarris. Noes: none. Absent: Edgar,
Larnard.
Initial
AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PZ 72-138 - NICHOLAS BARLETTA
Location: North side of Irvine Boulevard, west of
Newport Avenue and east of Holt Avenue.
Mr. Lenorovitz submitted a background report for a revised
development plan that would authorize the development of a pro-
fessional office condominium complex with support commercial
activities; stating that Tract Map 8475 is a related action to
this project, which is an agendized item for consideration
under New Business. Therefore, applicant has requested that
Tentative Tract No. 8475 be considered immediately following
this public hearing.
The amendment to the land use as previously authorized and re-
consideration of its development was brought about at the sug-
gestion and encouragement of the City. Opposition was previously
expressed by the public relating to the multi-story apartments
and their heights. The development as now proposed would con-
sist of office buildings no higher than 35 feet, and would be
lower in height and therefore is determined more appropriate.
The public portion of the hearing was opened at 8:40 p.m.
Bob Kramer, 105 South Prospect, representing Mr. Nicholas
Barletta, stated that over one year has been spent on this
project and that while the previous project development of
multi-story apartments was excellent, construction costs have
now risen so high as to make it economically unfeasible. The
present proposed project encompasses a larger parcel of prop-
erty, which would lend itself to office facilities and support
commercial. Plans call for parking to the rear and common
alley easements. Curbs and streets will be installed and
flood channel is being included, with CC&Rs and building
standards being submitted to the City for approval.
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 4
Jerry Fowler, 18211 Leon Way, Tustin, questioned Mr. Kramer
as to proposed use of Parcels 9 and 10 which would face Holt
Avenue. Mr. Kramer stated they are planned for use as office
buildings. There will be a proposal later for the corner of
Irvine and Holt to be annexed to the City for use as a com-
mercial lot. It is presently zoned R-4 in the County. Mr.
Fowler then questioned the compatibility of 2-story office
buildings next to single story multiple family residential.
Mr. Kramer replied that houses front on side street and 6'
walls will be placed around them. Additionally, buildings
could be planned to front on dedicated street.
Helen Kreider, 14621 Clarissa Lane, Tustin, questioned the
type of protection to be provided along her property line inso-
far as noise is concerned. Mr. Kramer responded that there will
be a 6' wall, plus parking, which represents more than 70'
between her property and any building.
Mahlon Heil, 14752 Holt Street, Tustin, believes the City of
Tustin owes an explanation as to why previous apartment project
failed so badly. It is his opinion that contractors should be
required to be bonded before breaking ground on any property.
Before this project is started, some assurance should be made
that it will be completed, which is an obligation of the Plan-
ning Department to residents living in County area located next
to proposed project. At the present time, three houses have
been removed which has created a very messy condition which
should be cleaned up. Additionally, he has talked to the City
Administrator concerning this matter, together with the matter
of sealing of some leaking sewer drains and, although promised
that this would be taken care of, no action has been forth-
coming.
Mr. Kramer stated the houses were removed a week and a half ago
and their contractor promised to have the lots cleaned within
a week. He was not aware sewer lines were open. He will check
to see that this is taken care of, if possible by Friday of
this week. They are presently covering the flood control chan-
nel and there is some noise and dirt from this operation. When
it is finished, Mr. Heil's property will be level to theirs.
Sheila Patterson, 14522 Holt Avenue, Tustin, asked what "trans-
port commercial" actually encompassed. Mr. Kramer stated he
envisioned such businesses as real estate offices, barber shops,
clothing shops, etc.
Commissioner Dombrow stated that he is not happy to see any
type of office building going in on Holt Avenue. If commercial
or professional buildings are allowed there, a precedent will
then be set.
Mr. Lenorovitz stated that professional office buildings along
Holt would be more advantageous than multi-family uses which
had been previously proposed for this location, since most pro-
fessional office buildings close early, and do not operate on
the weekends, as opposed to multi-family residential buildings.
The public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:00 p.m.
Commissioner McHarris asked the timetable for this proposed
development. Mr. Kramer replied that they will file for sub-
division as soon as approvals are obtained from the Planning
Commission. They are presently preparing on-site improvements,
and starting date will probably be in November. The on-site
improvements should be completed by the first of the year,
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 5
with groundbreaking for the first building scheduled for
approximately the same time. Lots will be offered for sale
to other developers and builders. However, they prefer to
build themselves which may not be feasible from an economic
standpoint. Present projections call for at least half of
the buildings to be built by applicant.
After general discussion concerning the possibility of restric-
tions pertaining to Lots 9 and 10, and Mr. Kramer's willingness
to accept CC&Rs allowing only professional buildings on these
lots, Mr. Lenorovitz stated that application could be continued
as a public hearing with staff being directed to prepare a
resolution incorporating any changes desired by the Planning
Commission.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris, that the public hearing
of Amendment of Development - PZ 72-138, be continued, with
staff directed to prepare a Resolution incorporating restric-
tions of Lots 9 and 10 being limited to professional use only.
Mr. Bill Reed, 160 Centennial Way, Tustin, stated he had served
on the Development Preview Commission when this project, pro-
posed as apartments, came before them several times. Although
no personal interest or gain to himself is involved, he ques-
tions the advisability of an additional two-week continuance.
As a citizen and member of the community speaking, it is his
opinion that one good project has already been lost and addi-
tional delay is now being proposed for the present development.
Motion to continue public hearing carried unanimously. Ayes:
Dombrow, Hare, McHarris. Noes: none. Absent: Edgar, Larnard.
NEW BUSINESS (Taken out of sequence)
1. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8475 - NICHOLAS BARLETTA
Location: North side of Irvine Boulevard,
west of Newport Avenue and east of Holt Avenue.
Mr. Lenorovitz presented background data and recommendations
of the City Engineer for the proposed Amendment to Prezone
72-138.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris, that Tentative Tract No.
8475 be approved, subject to the conditions as set forth by
the City Engineer. Carried unanimously. Ayes: Dombrow,
Hare, McHarris. Noes: none. Absent: Edgar, Larnard.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
2. PREZONE 73-2 - EARL E. CLAYTON
To prezone the subject property from the County R-4
(Suburban Residential) District, to the City of Tustin
PD (Planned Development) District.
Location: Southwesterly corner of San Juan and Browning.
Mr. Lenorovitz stated that he had just been handed a request
for the project to be withdrawn at this time inasmuch as
developer requires additional time to study design feasibility
and economics.
Moved by McHarris, seconded by Hare that request for withdrawal
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 6
for Prezone 73-2 be approved.
Acting Chairman Dombrow pointed out that the public hearing
concerning this Prezone had not yet been held.
Commissioner McHarris moved to withdraw motion. Seconded by
Commissioner Hare.
The public portion of the hearing was opened at 9:20 p.m.
Bill Reed, representing Earl E. Clayton, stated applicant
requested withdrawal for the purposes previously mentioned.
Jacqueline Kontilis, 1871 Jamboree Road, stated that if project
is taken before the County Planning Commission, they will be
allowed to build to a higher density then presently proposed.
Commissioner Dombrow pointed out to Ms. Kontilis that no prop-
erty can be annexed to the City without the consent of the
property owner.
Mr. Reed pointed out that County could approve building to a
density of 29 units on proposed property. If annexed to the
City, density would be limited to 24. One of the reasons for
withdrawal is that some opposition has been received from
occupants on Jan Marie Place and his client desires to con-
tact complainants.
Public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:25 p.m.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris that request for withdrawal
of Prezone 73-2 be approved. Carried unanimously. Ayes:
Dombrow, Hare, McHarris. Noes~ non----~. Absent: Edgar, Larnard.
PUBLIC CONCERNS
None.
OLD BUSINESS
FORMAL FINDING BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, RE:
USES IN THE PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT (PR).
Mr. Lenorovitz stated that the Planning Commission, on October
8, 1973, had directed staff to prepare a resolution making a
formal finding that a limited facility of a savings and loan
association is a compatible use with permitted uses in the
professional district.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris that Resolution No. 1372
be adopted as drafted.
Mr. Clifford Benson, President, Santa Ana Savings and Loan
Association, requested that the square footage as called out
in the Resolution be changed to reflect 1676 square feet,
which actually represents the square footage of the existing
dwelling. Also, he requested a change of wording from
"Homeowner" to "Home Loan".
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris, that motion adoptin~
Resolution No. 1372 as drafted be withdrawn.
Moved by McHarris, seconded by Hare, that Resolution No. 1372,
incorporating change of wording from "Homeowner" to "Home
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 7
Loan", and 1500 to 1676 square feet with the additional
wording of "represented by the existing dwelling" being
added. Motion carried unanimously.
REALTY OFFICE AS AN AUTHORIZED USE IN THE
PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT.
Mr. Lenorovitz presented a brief background concerning a
request for compatible use as presented by Mr. Sol Zwirn,
stating that a continuance would not be critical to the
pending issue at this time.
Commissioner Dombrow stated that he does not feel a retail
realty office qualifies under the original intent of the pro-
fessional district.
Commissioner McHarris concurred, and stated that it would be
best for a full Commission to discuss it.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris that Realty Office as an
Authorized Use in the Professional District be continued to
November 12, 1973. Motion carried unanimously.
3. DENIAL OF VARIANCE 73-5 - RESOLUTION NO. 1373
Mr. Lenorovitz reported that in accordance with Commission direc-
tion, staff had prepared a resolution incorporating the findings
of the Planning Commission.
Moved by McHarris, seconded by Hare, that Resolution No. 1373
be adopted as drafted. Carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
1. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8475 - NICHOLAS BARLETTA
(This matter was taken up earlier in the meeting.
2.
See Page 5.)
PARCEL MAP 73-67 - SANTA FE LAND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY
Location: North side of Irvine Boulevard, west of
Newport Avenue and east of Holt Avenue.
Mr. Lenorovitz presented a synopsis of the background, stating
that the Parcel Map is being filed to reflect a minor change
on the lot line of Parcel 2 in compliance with the previous
action of the Planning Commission.
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris that Parcel Map 73-67, sub-
ject to the conditions set forth by the City Engineer, be
approved. Carried unanimously.
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
None.
CORRESPONDENCE
1. PUBLIC HEARING ANNOUNCEMENT FOR ORANGE COUNTY LAND
USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR DISTRICT NO. 4
Mr. Lenorovitz stated this information was included for Com-
mission information and to note that a public hearing would be
held on November 6, 1973. No action required.
PC Minutes
October 23, 1973
Page 8
2. INFORMATION ON PROPOSITION NO. 1 FROM THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES.
Mr. Lenorovitz pointed out this information was provided for
Commission perusal only with no action required.
3. COUNTY ZONE CHANGE 73-27
Zoning to be changed from PC Planned Community and
100 E-4 "Small Estates" District to the A-1 "General
Agriculture" District.
Location: Northeasterly corner of Marcy Drive and
Newport Avenue.
No
Presented for Planning Commission information only.
action required.
STAFF CONCERNS
None.
COMMISSION CONCERNS
Commissioner HcHarris re: The Irvine Company EIR. The
only positive impact is that development is of economic
benefit to the City. Would like to see staff comment
more in depth on that benefit in relation to industrial
that we do have and what has been developed in the past.
He does not know if it is an issue for the EIR as much
as for the City.
e
Mr. Lenorovitz stated that staff will review information
concerning the EIR for the possibility of developing
additional information that would relate to this question.
Commissioner Hare re: The Register newspaper item of
October 21. This article was a complete surprise to him
and he would like to know where the information regarding
revenues came from.
Mr. Lenorovitz will attempt to determine this information.
Commissioner Dombrow is concerned City officials are
releasing figures the Planning Commission knows nothing
about. It is his desire to have a workshop session
between the Irvine Company, citizens' committees, Plan-
ning Commission, and staff. Feels it is essential in
this particular instance.
Mr. Lenorovitz explained that one of the reasons it has
not been held to date is that numerous questions have
been raised. After the answers are forthcoming, then a
workshop session could possibly be held for their consid-
eration. The Community Development Department would be
the one to initiate such a workshop session.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Hare, seconded by McHarris that meeting be adjourned
to regular adjourned meeting'on October 29, 1973. Carried
unanimously. (9:55 p.m.)
'"' " :~ ~HAI~"'/ ......
? / ~CO~ING(SEC~TARY