Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 02-26-73MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: February 26, 1973 TIME: 7:30 p.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street PRESENT: Dombrow, Hare, Larnard, McHarris, Sharp ABSENT: None ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 1973 .......................... 1 INDEX PAGE PUBLIC HEARING Land Use Element of the OLD BUSINESS Adoption of Resolution No. NEW BUSINESS Final Map of Tract No. CORRESPONDENCE Orange County Population General Plan .................. 1,2,3 8088 1321 (Hamer & Carpenter) ... 3 (Ayres) ................... 3 Summary Report - Growth Policy and Development Strategy .. Letter from California Roadside Council ............... STAFF CONCERNS .............................................. COMMISSION CONCERNS - none AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none ADJOURNMENT ................................................ 3-4 4 4 4 MINUTES OF A REGUI~IR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 26, 1973 Th_TM regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Commission was held on the 26th day of February, 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 Commissioner Larnard. The Invocation was given by Commissioner McHarrls. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Others Present: Dombrow, Hare, Larnard, McHarris, and Sharp. None James G. Rourke, City Attorney, R. Kenneth Fleagle, Ass't. City Administrator-Comm. Dev. Director, Nancy Lawton, ~lanning Commission Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 12, 1973 Commissioner Larnard moved for approval of the Minutes of the February, 12, 1973 meeting; seconded by Commissioner Hare. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 PUBLIC HEARING Land Use Element of the General Plan: Planning Ccmmission Initiated. Tustin Sphere of Influence Mr. Flea~le advised the Commission that Section 65101 of the Government ~ode requires a City to adopt a Land Use Element of the General Plan, which may encompass such areas outside of the corporate limits as the Commission determines relevant. The Local Agency Formation Commission in December, 1972, formally adopted a "Sphere of Influence" for the City of Tustin, which is the area encompassed by this element. By terms of State Legislation, the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan must be in substantial conformity by June 30, 1973. M~._F~eag~e stated that the map presented is to establish direction only; and is a bl--ueprint of guidelines for the City, City Council, and Planning Commission., The County has granted many zone changes, variances, and use permits in contradiction to what was established by the Land Use Element. The City of Tustin looks at the location of LaColina and Newport as R-l, whereas the County says it includ~multi-family development. As a result, there is room for ambiguity. The intent of this Land Use Map is to be more specific in showing the intents and classifications of land uses and to incorporate the changes that have been made by the City and County. Mr. Fle___a~le outlined several areas of variation from the existing pla which are presently developed, or soon to be developed: Seventeenth Street between Yorba and Prospect: classifi- cation of Professional, Commercial, and Multi-family. e Irvine Boulevard: Professional. 3. Red }{ill Avenue: Commercial developments. 4. Newport Avenue: Commercial developments. PC Minutes 2/26/73 Page two He also indicated the follewing areas which should be given specific attention for potential change~ an use: 1. 6th Street, east of "B" and south of 6th: to Planned Industrial. Newport Avenue, south of Kenyon: Residential. from Industrial to First Street: development of Commercial. Area bounded by Main, E1 Camino Real, Laguna Road, and Newport Avenue: potential of change from Commercial to an integrated development of diverse land uses to include Commercial, Professional, and Multi-family Residential. Chairman Sharp opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:45 p.m. Lowell Martind~le, O'Melveny & Myers, 611 W. 6th Street, Los Angeles, representing State Mutual Savings & Loan, stated that they have property located on both sides of Fashion Lane, and are concerned that this area may not have much demand for the Professional classification. He re- quested more time so that he may confer with the City staff as respects their concerns. John Prescott, advised that he was speaking for himself, for his prop- erty located on the northeast corner of E1 Camino ~ 6th, and also for the Tustin Mortuary. He felt that the zoning presently on E1 Camino and 6th is the best for this area; and that where the Tustin Mortuary is, the zoning should remain C~2. He requested Mr. Fleagle to explain the Land Use maps more thoroughly. Commissioner Larnard moved, at 7:55 p.m., for a recess to enable Mr. ~ to present the material to the audience, which was poste~ on the board; seconded by Commissioner McHarris. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 During this time, members of the audience questioned Mr. Flea~le as re- spects various locations, and they were given a thorough presentation. Chairman SharP reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Tom Lenhart, Foothill Homeowners Association, questioned Mr. Fleagle's statement regarding the General Plan. He stated that the General Plan has precedence over zoning. As respects the map, it shows North Tustin as R-l, which he states is not so; the bulk of it is E-4. He cannot understand why Tustin does not have E-4 classification, as it is stand- ard zoning. The Association would like to work with Tustin's Council and Commission to have a better relationship. In response to a question from Commissioner Hare, Mr. Lenhart advised that ~-4 zoning is small estates, with 100' minimum frontage. Mr. Fleagle advised Mr. Lenhart that the process is to bring the General Plan into reality; then the Zoning Ordinance reflects the General Plan. As respects the zoning, the maps shown were not Zoning Maps, rather Land Use Maps. Also, there is E-4 zoning within the City. Louis Proctor, owner of the property on Main Street which was annexed to the City, commented that the C-2-P zoning on this property is best in his opinion. Chairman Sharp closed the public portion of the hearing at 8:35 p.m. ~or--discussion among the Commissioners. -2- PC Minutes 2/26/73 Page three Commissioner Larnard moved to continue this item as an open hearing at their March 12, 1973 meeting to allow the Staff to incorporate the find- in~ i~ ~ -~vls~d ~LL~ and Resoiu~ion; seconded by Co~ti~slo~ McHarris. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 OLD BUSINESS 1. Adoption of Resolution No. 1321.- A. ~. Hamer and L. Carpenter (E er/ Mr. Fleagle presented subject Resolution which states, in part, that =ne applicant has indicated building plans with two-story structures, perim- eter landscaping, parking to the rear of the structure at a ratio of one parking space per each 250 square feet of floor area, and limited curb cuts to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mr. Fleagle stated that as a further condition of development, the follo~ · ng requirements are required: Dedication of 20 feet of additional street right-of-way in accordance with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. e Construction of full street improvements on the entire frontage of the development, including curb and gutter, sidewalk, street pavement, the installation of sewers to serve the development and the installation of street trees. Annexation of the property to the Tustin Street Lighting District and the installation of street lights complete with underground conduit. Commissioner Larnard moved for approval to City Council of Resolution No. 1321; seconded by Commissioner McHarris. Commissioner Dombrow stated his feelings as respects this item, which were the same as at the February 12th meeting - that he was opposed to any development at this location, due to' the traffic problem at 17th and Yorba. MOTION CARRIED: 4-1 (Mr. Dombrow casting a "no" vote) NEW BUSINESS 1o Final Map of Tract No. 8088 - Ayres Development Location: Easterly of Tustin Meadows and southerly of Walnut Ave. Mr. Fleagle summarized the City Engineer's staff report, which stated that this Final Map appears to be in substantial compliance with the approved Tentative Tract Map 7813. He advised that this tract borders on the Orange County Flood Control Channel and the railroad right-of-way, and that the conditions outlined in the Tentative Tract Map should be so stated in the resolution for this Final Map as respects the buffering. Commissioner Larnard moved for approval of Final Map of Tract No. 808~ directing Staff to prepare the necessary Resolution encompassing the conditions outlined in Tentative Tract Map 7813; seconded by Co~missi~..~r Hare. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 CORRESPONDENCE 1. Orange County Summary Report - Population Growth Policy and Devel- opment Strategy Mr. Flea~__l__e advised the Commission that this report was for their perusal and commont~. -3- PC Minutes 2/26/73 Page four Chairman Sharp questioned Mr. Fleagle as to how our City could fa~e with other cities and the County as respects a growth plan, and directed Staff to have the County notify us of any hearings on this item, so that we can be kept informed. 2. Letter from California Roadside Council Mr.~agle read a letter from the California Roadside Council addressed to Chairman Sharp, as respects Mr. Sharp's comments on billboards. Chairman Sharp directed Mr. Fleagle to respond to this Council advising them that the comments mentioned were out of context. STAFF CONCERNS 1. Community Development Department's Schedule of Events Mr. Fleagle weht over the schedule with the Commission so that they would have an idea of what was ahead for them in the coming months. COMMISSION CONCERNS - none AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - none ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Larnard moved for adjournment at 9:27 p.m. to the next regular meeting of March 12, 1973; seconded by Commissioner Hare. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNIN~ COMMISSION RECORDING SECRETARY -4-