Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-12-73MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF TIIE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: March 12, 1973 TIME: 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 275 South "C" PRESENT: Dombrow, Hare, McHarris, Sharp ABSENT: Larnard Street INDEX ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MEETING OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Item Land Use Element New Items PZ-73-1 - UP-73-6 - MINUTES OF REGULAR FEBRUARY 26, 1973 of the General Plan Initiated Initiated Planning Commission Planning Commission Guidelines and Procedures for Environmental Impact Statements ................................ OLD BUSINESS Adoption of Resolution No. 1324 - Ayres Final Map ..... NEW BUSINESS Revision of Plans for UP-72-401 -'Doty (TenEyck) ...... Tentative Parcel Map 73-61 - Irvine Ind. Complex ...... Development Standards ................................. CORRESPONDENCE Orange County Zone Change 72-49 ....................... Notice of Seminar from Institute for Local Self Government .......................... Letter from State Mutual Savings regarding Land Use Element ............................... STAFF CONCERNS - none COMMISSION CONCERNS - none AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none ADJOURNMENT ............................................... PAGE 1 1-2 3 3,4,5 5 5 5-6 6 6-7 7 7 7 7 M1NU'I'I']S OF A RI']GUIJAII MEETING OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 12, 1973 The regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission was held on the 12th day of March, 1973, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., of said day in the Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street, Tustin, California. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairman Sharp. The Invocation was given by Commissioner I{are.. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Others Present: Dombrow, Hare, McHarris, and Sharp. Larnard. James G. Rourke, City Attorney; R. Kenneth Fleagle, Ass't. City Administrator ~ Comm. Dev. Dir.; Bruce Lenorovitz, Ass't. Planning Director; Nancy Lawton, Planning Com- mission Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 26_~ 1973 Commissioner Hare moved for approval of the Minutes of the Febkuary 26, 1973; seconded by Commissioner Dombrow. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Item Land Use Element of the General Plan: Initiated by the Planning Commission Tustin Sphere of Influence Mr. Fleagle advised that this item was continued from the meeting of February 26, 1973 to allow staff the opportunity to prepare the neces- sary text and resolution-for the Commission's review and adoption. He proceeded to give'a synopsis of this text, which included: the purpose of the plan, classification of uses, assumptions, goals and objectives, proposals, area of land use allocations for the year 2000, population projections, and general concerns and considerations. Mr. Fl_eagle also read letters from John Siegel and State Mutual Savings as to their feeling on the Land Use Element. Chairman Sharp questioned Staff as to if the firms that were interested in speaking with them, got a chance to do so, and was advised by Mr. Fleagle that State Mutual had been in contact with Staff. As respects the Thriftimart property, Mr. Fleagle stated that there is a division in the headquarters itself as to the highest and best use of their property, but at the moment, they don't have any plans. Chairman Sharp opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:53 p.m. Milton Curtis, 13362 Cromwell, Tustin, stated that he noticed that th Land Use Map did not cover the property east of the Venta Spur Tracks, and was wondering if this would be shown on the final package. He also questioned as to why the areas, such as Peacock Hill, etc., was not i~ our Sphere of Influence and not shown on the map; also that it is not shown in the Orange General Plan, or Irvine's. Mr. Fleagle responded that this area is so remote at this point, that there ~as be~n no effort on Tustin or Orange to incorporate this in their Sphere of Influence. It is considered to be a rural area by character. Chairman Sharp_ asked .~,Ir. Curtis if he was representing this area, and w,'::.; -a-~l-v~se¢l tilat he wan not. PC'M'' " 3/12,' 1 .%U ~.es 73 Pagc two Don Osen, 1091 Castlegate La3.~, owner of property north of LaColina ..... L .... ' ...... .. ~i.=rc bc an inclusion On the map for multi-family residences at this location. · Mr. Fleaqle stated that the County had re-zoned this area north and south of LaColina due to the irregularity of the lots, with Tustin Planning Commission protesting this action advising that it was in vio- lation of the General Plan. He commented that reality could be accepted, and go along with the County zoning. Dave Thomas, 6902 Bridgewater, Huntington Beach, representing Thrifti- mart, stated that Thriftimart purchased this Commercial property for a proposed supermarket and shopping center some years ago, however, haven't seen fit to develop the property as such. A change in zoning ~ preclude using this as a commercial development. Thriftimart is not for or ~ainst this plan, as such plans are a necessity for cities to grow with control. He doesn't know how it would work out as Pro- fessional zoning, but possibly the land would be more valuable for com- mercial development. He would hope that this area might not be "frozen" as Professional usage, and asked if it would be possible in the future to get a rezone for other than Professional. Mr. Fleagle responded, stating that in order to accomplish what Mr. Thomas is suggesting, put it in the Planned Community District, which allows more flexibility, but would require a public hearing. Commissioner Dombrow asked Mr. Thomas why Thriftimart has not developed ~n~ing to this time, and was advised that the time was not right to build a shopping center at this location. John Prescott, felt there was ambiguity between the Land Use Element text, and the map, in that the map showed the property he owns as C-2, but the text changes it to Planned Community. He feels his property should remain at C-2-P. Mr. Prescott stated he would oppose this Planned Community zoning. Scott G~lla~h~{, president of Saddleback Chapel, felt that if the zoning was changed, it would present problems should they wish to make any additions or changes. Matt Nisson, 14462 Red Hill Avenue, was confused with the map, and after some discussion, was in agreement with the proposed map. Public portion of the hearing was closed at 8:37 p.m. for discussion among the Commissioners. Responding to questioning by Commissioner Dombrow, M_r.. Flea~le explained the Planned Community District, and the Planned Development District. Commissioner Hare moved for approval of the Land Use Element by adoption of Resolution No. 1325 with two changes: Mr. Prescott's property on Main Street to remain the same, and Mr. Osen's property on Newport to conform to the County classifications: and amend the map to show these changes. This motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner McHarris moved to recommend to the City Council the approval of the Land Use Element of the General Plan as indicated on the amended map; seconded by Commissioner Dombrow. MOTION CARRIED: 3-1 (Commissioner Hare voting no) Commissioner Dombrow moved to adopt Resolution No. 1325; seconded by Commissioner MclIarris. MOTION CARRIED; 3-1 -2- PC Minutes 3/12/73 Page three New Items 1. PZ-73-1 - Planning Commission initiated - prezone change from Orange County R-4 District to City of Tustin PC-R3(1900) District, subject to annexation to the City. Location: Site, consisting' of approximately 4.4 acres of land, has a frontage of approximately 230 feet on the north- easterly side of Mitchell Avenue, and is located appro'-:- mately 1092 feet southeasterly from the centerline of Red Hill Avenue. Mr. Fleagle summarized the staff report advising that the Commission had heard this item on November 13, 1972, and recommended approval to the City Council. Upon Council hearing, it was determined that the proposed density for this unit was not in the best interest of the City, and the prezoning was denied. Part of the consideration for denial was the limited area that would be subject to annexation to the City. Subse- quently, however, the property owner of the adjoining complex has given a letter of consent for annexation to the City, thereby enabling the to process a logical annexation. Proposed now is an additional 31 units, compared to 36 units desired previously. Therefore, with the R-3 District, there would be a total of 95 units on subject parcel, which i~.a reduction from the original proposal. M_r~ F~eagle showed a rendering prepared by the ArChitect. Chairman Sharp opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:28 p.m. Gared Smith, Architect, 2043 Westcliff, Newport Beach, °stated that there is sufficient parking for the new units, with one covered and 31 open spaces. If they should ever need more parking, they can con- vert some of the green area. Chairman Sharp questioned if the tennis cour'ts will be lighted, and Mr. Smith advised they would be, with the lights shin'ing towards their own units. There would also be a curfew on the courts. Public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:35 p.m., for discussion among the Commissioners. ! Both Commissioner McHarris and Hare stated they had driven through this project, and felt it was a well-planned development° Commissioner Dombrow moved for approval of PZ-73-1, by adoption of Resolution No. 1323; seconded by Commissioner Hare. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 2. UP-73-6 - Planning Commission Initiated - by direction of the City Council, to authorize the establishment of the Public Works Maintenance facilities in the R-1 District for a period of 18 months, pending improvement of permanent location. Location: Site is located on the east side of Prospect Avenue, northerly of Irvine Boulevard, south of Beneta Way, known as 14702 Prospect. Mr. F!eagle advised that in the development of the new Civic Center site, ~ ~ill be necessary to move the Public Works facility from ~ts present location. The ultimate location of the new facility will be north of the Flood Control Channel, between ~ewport and Red Hill, adjacent to Fire Station,,~.~ This ~cmporarv~ .. permit is being submitted to allow the City to use this prope£ty while ,~esign plans are being made for the ultimate .~tc and to permit ~£cce.~ding with the development of the Civic Center site. PC Minutes 3/] 2/73 Page four C~a~r~a~ Sharp questioned Mr. Fleagle as to what the cost would be ~or ~n alternative site, other than this property on Prospect; and if the funds to build the permanent facility were in the capital outlay pro- gram. M__r. Fle~qle answered that the funds will be in the budget for 1973-74, plus the selling of the present City Hall. As respects to any alter- natives to the proposed site, many avenues were explored, and this was the best one, with other alternatives costing five times as much as the one presented. Chairman Sharp asked if the use of this property is the same as the property the present facilities are on, and was advised that it is the same exact use, a house surrounded by an orange grove. Commissioner Hare felt that there should be a specific date given for the temporary facilities, rather than 18 months, so as not to interfere with the development of the park on this site. Chairman Sharp opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:47 p.m. Barbara Benson, member of Parks & Recreation Commission and Chairman of the Tustin Unified School District, cited the following concerns: the Parks & Recreation Commission was opposed to this; the principal of the Columbus Tustin School had made a count of 55 students passing this area in one day; only an informal discussion had been held to date as respects the combined city-school permanent facilities of the Public Works at the Sycamore site; and, the time period should not be more than 18 months. Walter Wands, 17692 Westbury, felt that the proposed pian was ridicu- lous, especially putting a maintenance facility in a residential neigh- borhoo~, which is very quiet, with a minimum traffic flow. He felt it would cause congestion, be noisy, smelly, and is not compatible at all. He stated that if he wanted to live near a maintenance facility, he would have moved near one. Until the permanent facilities are built, he feels the yard should remain where it is. If the Council desires this temporary facility, he suggests they move it to a more compatible location. Rod McCloud, 17781 Lucero Way, stated he had moved to Tustin only a couple of months ago, to avoid this type of situation. He felt that this 18 month temporary period is a reasonable estimate, and that if there was any delay, it could become a semi-permanent yard. There should be a better way than this one proposed. .Public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:55 p.m., for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner McHarris was in agreement With the statements made above, ~n~--~elt there was no merit to this location, except for the cost. He feels it would present a traffic problem, and might cause a delay in the development of the park, and can see no positive aspect to this. Commissioner Hare expressed the same concerns, especially relating to the number of students passing by, and felt there could be a better al- ternative. Chairman Sharp asked what the time schedule was for the building of the new C~y Hall, with Mr. Fleagle responding that the present facilities of the Public Works yard have to be vacated by June 1st. As far as delaying the development of the park, Mr. Fleg.g~e stated that at the present time no plans have been drawn ~or the park, no award of con- tract has been made, and that the property is not owned yet, free and clear. Mr. Rourke elaborated uDon the time frame necessary to acquire title to a~l the parcels proposed for park development. Chairman Sharp stated that he does not feel the present facilities are noisy, and that the temporary facilities would not present any conflict with pedestrian traffic. PC Minute.?, J/]2/73 Page five Commissioner Dombrow moved for approval of UP-73-6, by adoption Of Reso±~n~o}l Ho. ±3zz, with one change in the Resolution in paragraph 2, wherein it should read: to allow the public works facility to be located..on the residential property located at 14702 Prospect Avenue for a period of 18 months from occupancy, not to exceed January 1, 1975; seconded by Chairman Sharp. ., The consensus of the Commissioners was that this is not the ideal situ-' ation or location, due to it being in a residential area, and felt ti' t a better alternative should be looked into. Commissioner Dombrow withdrew his motion. He suggested the possibility of sharing Santa~na's facilities temporarily, or the Municipal facil- ities. Commissioner Hare moved for continuance of this item for exploration of more alternatives; seconded by Commissioner McHarris. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 3. Guidelines and Procedures for Environmental Impact Sfiatements advised the Commission that as a provision of AB889, the uired to adopt guidelines for the implementation of the C~ifornia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, prior to April 5, 1973. The guidelines presented were modeled after those prepared by the Resources Agency of the State of California. He proceeded to give a synopsis of these guidelines. Commissioner Dombrow felt this was an excel~nt document, as did the other Commissioners. Chairma~ Shar_ __p opened the public portion of the hearing at 10:40 p.m. and seeing or hearing no one for or against the issue, closed the pul portion of the hearing at 10:41 p.m. Commissioner McHarris moved for adoption of the procedures as outlined 5y Staff, with Resolution to be drawn up by the city Attorney, recom- mending approval to the City Council; seconded by Commissioner Dombro~. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 Mr. Fleagle outlined a draft resolution of procedures for implementati~z, ~hich will be submitted to the City Attorney. OLD BUSINESS 1. Adoption of Resolution No. 1324 - A~res Final Map of Tract No. 8~8~ Mr._Fleagle advised that at the last Planning Commission meeting of February 26, 1973, subject Final Tract Map was approved with the recom- mendation that Staff prepare a resolution for adoption. Commissioner Hare moved for adoption of Resolution No. 1324; seconded by Commissioner McHarris. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 NEW BUSINESS 1. Revision of Plans for UP-72-4Q1 - Doty (TenEyck) Location: 17th and Yorba -5- PC Minutes 3/12/'73 Page six · ~ ~x~n~ wc~c ~ub,,LitLcd to Ll~c City Council, subsequent to approval there were some boundarY ·changes to be made. Therefore, revised plans have been presented to the Planning Commis- sion. He showed the difference in the previous and present plans, with the current plans conforming to the recommendations of ~e Devel- opment Preview Commission. Also, it'was made clear that the 10' rear setback was to be unobstructed from ground to sky, permitting no in- trusions into the yard area by any architectural projections. Commissioner Dombrow moved that these revised plans are in conformance with UP-72-401, and that the 10' unobstructed rear setback excluded architectural projections; seconded by Commissioner McHarris. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 2. Tentative Parcel Map 73-61 - Irvine Industrial Complex Location: Red Hill, Warner and Bell Mr. Fleagle summarized the City Engineer's report, advising that com- plete development in this area has been held up for several years due to the lack of ultimate drainage facilities on Red Hill Avenue between Barranca Road and Bell Avenue. The City has submitted this facility to the Flood Control District as a proposed project, however, the pro- posal has been suspended for lack of funds. The Irvine Industrial Complex advises that as a part of this development, they would be willing to provide a temporary ditch on Red Hill Avenue between War- ner and the Barranca Channel to permit ultimate installation of the drainage facilities with the City of Tustin. This would be a satis- factory solution to the problem if the Flood Control District could be convinced that the installation of ultimate drainage facilities at this temporary ditch were the District's responsibility. If the Dis- trict does not agree to this, then it would be the responsibility of the Irvine Industrial Complex. The purpose of this map is to divide this parcel into five parcels for future sale and immediate development of Parcel·No. 5. The City Engiheer has stated eight conditions if this map is approved. Mike Babbit, Manager of Engineering for the Irvine Industrial Complex, stated that they are anxious to get this project underway, and that parcels one through four are not going to be for sale at this time, but will be used for the Irvine Industrial Complex inventory. They are committing themselves to the master storm drain anyway, and will be constructing the ultimate facility at ked'Hill and Barranca. Appli- cant does concur with the eight conditions of the City Engineer. Commissioner Hare moved to direct Staff'to prepare a Resolution approv- l~ng the parcel map with the recommendation that ultimate drainage for Bell and Warner Avenues be put in concurrently as a condition of the parcel map, with Red Hill being left until such time as April, 1975, or two years, to solve the drainage problem there; seconded by Commis- sioner Dombrow. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 3. Development Standards Mr. Fleasle advised the Commission that the City Council, Development Preview Commission, and themselves have requested Staff to prepare pre- cise development standards for coHsideration and approval. Mayor Miller suggested using the Placentia standards as a guideline· In July of 1~71, t]~ D~v~iopmc~U P~eviuw CoL.'u~ission su~g~L~d L~L d~vci~ment guidelines should provide a degree of flexibility to adapt to various situations. Therefore, Resolution No. 71-42 was adopted by the City -6- PC Minutes 3/] ?/73 P,lgo seven Council in Auqust of 1971. SubsecTuent experience has indicator] thai: ~±c>~'iu±u gu~uc~z~.,-; ~re u ~,~s£s et i~uqu±~ies, not unilormity of applic~- tions, and occasional dzsputes. Commissioner McHarris moved for adoption of the Development Standards, as contained in Resolution No~ 1326; .seconded by Commissioner Dombrow. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 CORRESPONDENCE Orange County Zone Change 72-49, and related correspondence regard- ing Irvine Boulevare Annexation #78. M~. Fleagl~ stated that there are no objections to this zone change proposal, however, Staff would like to be informed by the County of these pending zone changes when they abut the City. In this partic- ular instance, this property was in the process of an Annexation to our City, along with other properties in this area. Commissioner Hare moved to direct Staff to prepare a letter to the County expressing their concern on pending actions which would have bearing on our City; seconded by Commissioner Dombrow. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 2. Notice of Seminar from Institute for Local Self Government Mr. ~lgaqle requested any of the Commissioners who were interested in attending this Seminar to get in touch with Staff. 3. Letter from State Mutual Savings regarding Land Use Element This item was brought up earlier in the discussion with the Land Use Element. STAFF CONCERNS - none COS~ISSION CONCERNS - none AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Dombrow moved for adjournment.at 11:58 p.m. to the nex. t regular meeting of March 26, 1973; seconded by Commissioner Hare. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0 CHAIRMAN O~ THE.PLANNING/gOMMISSION RECORDING SECRETARY