HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 12-09-68MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 9, 1968
· CALL TO
OkDER
ii.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
III.
ROI,L CALL
IV.
APPROVAL
OF
14I ~UJTE S
Ve
PUBLIC
HERRINGS
The meeting was called to order at 7:37 by Chairman Halus.
Led by Conmissioner Webster.
Present:
Coma~issioners:
Sharp, Oster, Ludwig, Halus, Webster, Larnard,
Mahoney
Absent: Cor. u~is s ion. rs: None.
Others Present:
Harry E. ~.11, City Administrator
Kenneth Bryant, Assistant City Attorney
James L. Supinger, Planning Director
Jo Ann Turner, Planning Secretary
It was moved by Mr. Oster.:~econded..by Mrs. Ludwig~ tbat the minutes of
_th_e November 25~ 1968 meeting be aooroved as submitted. Carried 7-0.
1. V-68-222 - GULF OII, CORPORATIOM - Continued fr~n 11/25/68
For a variance to permit the replacement of an existing nonconforming
pole sign (10' X 15' each side, total area 300 sq. ft.) with a pole
sign in the sa~..a location which is proposed to be circular, 81 sq. ft.
per side and 162 sq. ft. total area.
..
Location: Site fronts 180' on the northwest side of Newport Avenue
and approximately 180' on the south side of McFadden Street at the
intersection of McFadden Street and Newport Avenue.
Mr. SuDinger stated that this hearing was closed at the November 12, 1968
meeting and continued to await further study of the Sign Ordinance.
After a very brief discussion, Corznissioner Oster stated that due to the
prior meetings and continuance of this matter the applicant was antici-
pating some kind of a decision.
Mr. Supinber reco.~,?.~.ended denial for ~he following rea. sons:
That because of circ~xstances applicable to the subject property
the strict application of the Ordinance the subject property is
not deprived of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and under similar circ~ustances.
That the adjustment requested would constitute a grant of special
privileges inconsistent with thc l~mitations upon other properties
in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is located.
3. The hardship involvc~d is self-created in that the applicant, Gulf
Oil, has chosen to change ~ts corporate sign identification.
4. Approval of thc request would increase the usable lifetime of a
nonconfor~?ing sign.
As additional grounds, thc~ minutes and evidence introduced at the
hearing arc included by reference and made a part of the motion.
-1-
PC }:iht, rcs - Decen:ber 9, 1968
It wos t~ovod bv Fir. Oster. scco:~.'lod by 14r. ¥.a?,ot:ev~ that Ar~z~!icat'iou I,'o.
V-68-222 be ~.nprovc..d for the follo,.:inz; r¢.,ason..~:
That the adjustment hereby authorized will not constitute a
grant of special privilege inconsistent with thc limitations
upon other properties in the vicinity aud district in which
the subject property is situated.
That because of special circtn-.mtanccs applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or sur-
roundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance will
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at this
hearing and prior hearings arc included by reference and made a
part of the motion.
Motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Ludwig, Mahoney. Noes: Sharp,
Halus, Webster, Larnard. I.:OTION FAILED 4-3.
2. 'V-68-223 - G~F Oil, CORPO!b\TION - Continued from 11/25/68
For a variance to permit the replacement of an existing nonconforming
pole sign (10' X 15' each side, total area 300 sq. ft.) by a circular
pole sign 81 sq. ft. each side and 162 sq. ft. total area.
Location: Site fronts 120' on the north side of First Street and
approximately 150' on the east side of Tustin Avenue at the inter-
section of First Street and Tustin Avenue.
Mr. Supin$or stated that this hearing was closed at the Nove.:::ber 12, 1968
meeting and continued to await further study of the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Supinge[ reco:'.m~ended denial for subject request for the same reasons
as stated in Hearing No.1 (V-68-222).
Mr. Oster stated that he felt it was premature on the applicant's part to
have removed the price panels at the time but was in favor of granting
the request.
It was moved bM Mr. Oster_.that Ap.,olication No. V-68-223 be granted for
the reasons as stated in his prior motion of Application Mo. V-65-222.
MOTION DIED FOR I~%CK OF SECO.%~D.
It was moved by Mrs. I,udwi.%~ seconded bv Mr. Webst.e.r~ .thf._t Application No.
V-68-223 be denied for the fo!lo:.:'~n5 reasons:
That because of circ~:xstances applicable to the subject property
the strict application of the Ordinance the subject property is
not deprived of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and under s~ilar circ~stances.
That the adjustment requested would constitute a grant of special
privileges inconsistent with the li~nitations upon other prop'orties
in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is locate~
3. The hardship involve~ is "self-created" in that the applicant, Gulf
Oil, has chosen to chaugo its corporate sign identification.
4. Approval of the request would increase the usable lifotin:.: of a
nonconforming s ~gn.
5. As additional group:ds, the minutes and evidence ~ntroduced at thc
hearing are inc]ud~d by reference and made a part of tho
Motion votx'd by roll cnll. Ayes: Sharp, I.u:!wig, Web::ter, I.nrn?.rd, l. iahon:.y,
Halus. l~:o~s;: Oster. i.~ot',.'o:~ carried 6-1.
-2-
PC :.i~nut,,~s - i?.,~ccr..~b~'r 9, 1968
3. V-68-21.9 - TR]'A.'.'~CLE I..'C~E:SEi.iE~ C£'i.,'.PA~;Y - SIGI,;S
To permit the modificatio~ of an existing nonco~for~'..~ing pole sign
identifying the ~cwport Plaza Shopping Center. Modification in-
volves an increase of sign area by 216 sq. ft. and would exceed
the permitted height of 20 ft. 6 in by 9 ft. 6 in.
Location: Site fronts approximately 300 ft. on the south side of
McFadden Avenue and approximately 500 ft. on the northwest side of
Newport Avenue.
Mr. Sup~nger presented a brief staff report stating that this application
was denied by the Planning Con~ission at its meeting October 28, 1968· The
applicant arrived shortly after action was taken and the decision was appealed
to the City Council November 18, 1968, at which time applicant requested that
the matter be reheard by the Planning Co..-n~ission to allow him to state his
case before the Planning Co:remission.
Mr. Supinger recor.n~ended denial for the following reasons:
That the adjustment applied for will constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and district in which the property
is situated.
That special circumstances applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, do
not, because of the strict application of the zoning ordinance,
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by othe? properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.
Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:43 P.M.
Mr. George Ar~y~ps, 415 West Fourth Street, Suite D, o,~er of the Ne~port
Plaza, showed slides of the various signs lining Newport Avenue and the
lack of identification that is exposed for the tenants of this particular
complex. He stated that this complex is located in a highly competitive
area and felt that unless more identification is permitted, the'existing
businesses will not be able to fulfill their full potential·
Chairman Halus declared the public portion of the hearing at 8:02 P.M.
The C~:ission briefly discussed the sign regulations, the aesthetic
value of the property and the lack of identification that is involved·
Mr. Oster expressed concern over the next step the applicant might take -
if they would be happy with the granting of this variance or would they
come in later and ask for other identification and additional signage in-
crease along ~cFadden Street.
Mr. Argyros stated for the record that there would be no additional request
for sign increase.
It was moved bv l.[r. Oster~ seconded by Mrs. Ludwi5 that Resolution ~fo. 1026
be adopted~ recc'~'::'?.nded conditional a,~proval of Amolication .Yo. V-68-219 for
the following__reasons:
1. That the adjustment hereby authorized will not constitute a
grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which
the subject property is situated~
2. That because of special circt:mstances applicable to the subject
property, ~ncluc]~ng size, shape, topography, location or sur-
roundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance will
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other propprties
in the vicinity and un<~.er identical zone cla~s~fication.
3. As additional o~,--:.,:-~ ° ..... ~-, the m. lnt, t'es .... and evidence introduced at the
hear~n?, are inc].uc~.ed by reference and made a part of the motion.
Cond~ tio;~ oC
1. lh.~,rc. ;:,"!! b? ~:o otq:.'.r req:,,,st for a~!dition'~] identfficat~cn
for t]~,', su?.,~j2c.'.: Fro[-z. rty.
PC ¥.inut~s - Dec~'r;bcr 9, 196S
The above motion was voted by roll cai1. Ayes: l-~ahoncy, Larn~.rd, Web.~ter,
Ludwig, Oster. Noes: Sharp, Halus. Motion carried 5-2.
4. V-68-226 - C. I,. TEVES ON DE!b\I,F O? SU.qUil]$]'..\
For a reduction in the required n~.;ber of parking spaces for an
office building.
Location: Site f~onts 120 ft. on thc north side of Fourth Street
and 129 ft. on thc east side of Yorba Street.
.Mr. St, pinger presented a brief staff report reco~u:~cnding denial.
Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 8:20 PoMo
Mr. C. I,. Teves, 505 West Fourth Street, stated that the applicant desires
to develop thc lot by constructing the Professional Office Building as
shown in the plot plan submitted with the application. He stated that there
is only one drive approach in the plan located to the rear of the lot on
Yorba Street eliminating the need for any new driveways on Fourth Street.
He felt that this pla'n will facilitate the flow of traffic on both lots
and reduce traffic problems to a minim.%n~. He dir~:cted the attention to the
proposed building and that it contains 9000 sq. ft. of which approxiz.~.ately
1600 sq. ft. is public hallway or nonrentable space which, together with
the street parking available on Yorba Streetma".-, the request for a variance
from the required 30 spaces to 26 spaces reasonable and in the best interest
of all concerned.
Mr. Edward Driscoll, 17372 Roseleaf Ave and Mr. Worthington, 17342 Vinewood,
Tnstin spoke in favor of subject application stating that fr~ what they have
observed, the 26 parking spaces requested would be more than sufficient.
Chairman Ha!us declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 8:45 P.Mo
The Commissioners discussed items relative to the type of tenants that would
be using the offices, thc amount of space and time for certain users, the
economic effect it would incur, the surrounding tenants and the possibilit
of granting such a request could set a precedent. It was agreed by thc Com-
mission that this would not be a good risk.
It was moved by ~.[r. Oster, seconded by .~[r. Sharp that Applicatio_n V-___68__~22__6
be denied for the following reasons:
That the adjustment applied for will constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and district in which the property is
situated.
e
That special circumstances applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography location or surroundings, do
not, because of the strict application of the zoning ordinance,
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at
the hearing are included by reference and made a part of the
motion.
Mr. Oster addcd that the Co..~'~'~ission has recognized the opinion expressed
by the Buildin.~, Engineering and Fire Depart~nts.
A petition was submitted at the r.:.acting with approximately 20 na.~:cs of
tenants or employc~s of tenants of the office building at 505 West Fourth
Street stating that they have not experienced any parking prob!er;s. This
petition is on file in the Planning Dcpart.~ent.
The above motion was vot-ed by roll call. Ayes: Sharp, O~-;['er, L~dwig,
Halus, Webster, I:arnard, ~.~ahon~-:y. Noes: Non,~. C~r~'fed 7-0.
-4-
PC "' ' ~ D .......... 9, 1965
5. Ui'-6g-274 24c!)O:;ALD'S RESTAU{I:\?..7,~
To permit a drive-iu restaurant (l.lcDonald's)
Location: Site fronts 150 ft. on the north side of First Street
approxi:..-..atcly 175 ft. east of thc ccnterline of Prospect Avcuue.
Mr. Supinger presented a brief staff report stating that the applicant
feels that tl,e proposed use will provide a much needed service for tile
families working and residing in the cc~?m:uuity. All food %.~'ill be served
within an°enclosed building. There will not bc any carhops, waitresses,
waiters, vending n'achines, etc., involved in the operation. The architecture
will be in keeping with the spirit and history of the 6~:u~unity.
.Mr. Supinger reco:=:mendcd conditional approval of subject application for
the following reasons:
1..The Com~nission finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation
of the use applied for will not, under the circt~nstances of the par-
ticular case be detrin:ental to thc health, safety, morals, comfort
and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neigh-
borhood of the proposed use and it will not be injurious or detri-
mental to the property and ~mprovements in the neighborhood or tile
general ~:elfare of the City.
Reco~.maended condition of .apo. royal is:
Construction of full street improvements on First Street including.
installation of street trees per the Master Street Tree Plan.
Chairman Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:00 P.M.
There being no cor..u~,ents or objection from., the audience, Chair]nan Halus
declared thc public portion of the hearing closed at 9:01 P.M.
After a very brief discussion and in view of the prezoning application
of this property being granted, It was moved bv l.;r. Oster, seconded
}irs. Ludwi.%~ that Resql__ution l,:o. 1027 be adop_.te__d~ condition~.ll¥ aDprov-
ing Application 2.~o. UP-68-274 for the follm:ing reasons:
%~e Co:.-~aission finds that the establis!~ent, maintenance and
operation of the use applied for will not, under the circ%m~-
stances of the particular case be detrimental to the health,
safety, morals, com,.fort and general v;elfare of the persons re-
siding or working in the neighl~orhood of the proposed use and it
will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and im-
provements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of tile
City.
Condition of____~aoDroval !__s:
Construction of full street itzprovements on First Street including
installation of street trees per the Master Street Tree Plan.
The above motion x...'as voted by roll call. Ayes: Sharp, Oster, Ludwig, ]Ialus,
Webster, Larnard, l.:ahoney. Noes: None. Fotion carri,::d 7-0.
6. V-68-225 - H-kRI,:\N CROSS - S1G:fS - To pemnit:
a. Signs having a total area of 356 sq. ft. (Sign Ordinance
permits 300 sq. ft.)
b. Pole s,_'gn located in the front setback area and exceeding 150
sq. ft. each side and total are,i of 300 sq. ft.
Site fronts 150 ft. on the north sf~!c of First Street approxfm_'~.tely
175 ft. east of the centerline of Prospect Street.
Mr. Su~j._.+,..r,,~',~ stated t::at' dr:c., to a staff error th~n it~,.:n ~:as iucorrectlv~
advertJsc, d anal ~:oul.d have to be re-a:lvertised, wMch has been done a?:d has
bc. en reschc.~l~,].~, fo'..- th.? D.2cc:'.:~:.t~r 23~'d r:?et'ing.
-5-
PC ~;inute:~ - Dece~.~Lbcr 9, 1968
V-68-225 be conti~m,':d to thc? Deccm!:cr 23rd r.:~,et:~._ Carr4ed
7. UP-68-275 - JUS S'fi>~K ]..'.'.:C.
To permit live entertair~:~ent including r.:usicians and singers in
conjunction with a restaurant and bar. Location: 13/~44 Newport Ave.
~Ir.__IE~_3_pj. nger presented a brief staff report reco.~raending approval.
Chairmnn Halus opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:05 P.M.
There being no co:.r,:ents or objection from the audience, Chain?.an Halus
declared thc public portion of the hearing closed at 9:06 P.14o
After a very brief discussion It was moved by }~r. Larnard, seco.?.dcd bZ
}Ir. Mahonev that R~-so!ueion No. 1028 be ad____oD_t'..ed, ap,orovln~% Ao.~!ication
No. UP-68-275 _fpr.the fol~ reasons:
The Co~.~::~ission finds that the establiskment, maintenance and
operation of the use applied for will not, under the circu;.-.-
stances of tile particular case be detrfmental to th,: health,
safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons
residing or working in thc neighborhood of the proposed use
and it will not be injurious or detrimental to the prop~rt:y
and improvements in the neighborhood or tile general welfare
of the City.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at
the hearing are included by r~ference and made a part of the
motion.
Conditions of aoproval are:
Remove throw bolts from all doors and install approved type
panic har&.~are.
Internal exit lighting shall be installed above front and
rear door.
Fire. extinguishers shall be serviced and installed as outlined
in Title 19, subsection 3, of the California Administrative
Code.
Occupant load sign shall be posted allowing 15 sq. ft. per person
for drinking and dining and seven (7) sq. ft. par person for areas
of dancing.
All drapes, curtains, drops and other decorations including
Christr::as trees shall be of fire resistance materials o._~ treated
with a flame -re tardant solution as approved by the State }'ire
}larsh,'.~l's Office.
e
All openings into corridor going to rear exit shall be protected
by approved I 3/4" solid ben,led wood core typo doors or one of
equivaJent value.
%"ne above r. otion was voted by roll call. Ayes:
Halus, Webster, ~X?ahoney, Larnard. Noes: None.
Sharp, Oster, Ludwig,
Carried 7-0.
UP-68-276 - SOCAL P!i03EC'PS:. INC.
To permit a 290 b~d convalescent hospital on a portion of a parcel
totalling 5.08 acres.
I,ocation: Total parcel is triangular and bounded by Nc~,.:port, Bryan and
~.ain. Proposed deve!op.':ent frouts 500 ft. on Bry:.n, 645 ft. on
and leaves p~-opc:'ty with a depth of 180 ft. fronting on ~;e;.'port for
future co..~.~.-rcial develoF:~;:'nt.
-6-
PC l.!i:mtes - Dcce~L~r 9, 1965
Mr. St?j_n,_f~_r_ presented the staff report stat';.nj that although the
original request was for a 290 bcd hospital, the app].~cant has since
revised his plans and now requests approval of a 185 bcd hospital.
Since no parking requirm::ents are established for this use in the Zoning
Ordinance, a standard must be established in the Usc Permit. It was
rec(r~:xended that the following off-street parking requirements apply:
one (1) space for'each six (6) patient beds, plus
one (1) space for each staff menbcr or doctor, plus
one (i) space for each three (3) additional e'mployecs.
The Fire Department stated that if subject application is approved they
will require the foil. erring:
Two sets of plans:
a. One set for Tustin Fire Department files.
b. One set to be sent to the State Fire Marshal's
Office in I,os Angeles for a plan check.
2. Building to comply with Title 19 and thc Tust~n Fire Code.
Water lines, fire hydrants and access roads to be approved
by the Fire Chief.
}lr. John H. Siege_~l submitted a letter stating that he was not opposed
to subject application and felt that the proposed use appears to be the
best possible solution to a difficult piece of property.
Mr. Supinger rec~nended conditional approval.
Chairman Halus opened thc public portion of the hearing at 9:10 P.Mo
There being no co:~m~ents or opposition fr~% the audience, Chairman Ha!us
declared the public portion of the hearing closed at 9:11 P.14.
Mr. Webster stated that in view of the detailed staff report, adjacent
property m.mers with no complaints and regulations all met concurred with
the rec~.'.mendat ion.
It was moved by_ Y..r. Webster, seconded bv ?.'.r. Oster:. that Resolution No.
1029 be adop:.'e.d~ conditionally approvin;% :%p.nlication No. UP.-68-276 for
the foilow~n3 reasons:
The Coa'~nission finds that the establis!~nent, maintenance
and operation of the use applied for will not, under the
circumstances of the particular case be detrhr..ental to the
health, safety, morals, comfor, t and general welfare of the
persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the pro-
posed use and it will not be injurious or detrimental to
the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the
general welfare of the City.
As additional grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced
at the hearing are included by reference and made a part of the
motion.
Conditions of approval are:
1. That water lines, fire hydrants and access roads be subject to
the approval of the }'ire Chief.
Granting of any add.4tional street rzo,~t-of-way for Bryan, Main
or Newport to confo:'a with ult~r.,ate right-of-way as sho',.,-n on
the ¥,aster Plan of Arterial Highways.
Construction of all street f::prove:.::nts front:ing on this p2rcel'
on ,.~.tj..~, 1;r';'an~,.,~"' N.z.',:port inclucl~n3,~ curb, gutter, sidewalk and
st:reek pavJ~23.
-7-
Inst'a]lation of street trees in accord;-,ncc with tho
Street Tree Plan.
5. Modify ~rrigation linc~ in ~e'...~port as neces'sary to pe.r~.:it
street construction.
6. Installatim~ of street lights and annexation to the Tustin
Lighting District.
7. Utilities be installed underground.
The above motion was voted by roll call. Ayes: Oster, Sharp, Ludwig,
Halus, Webster, Larnard, }%2honcy. Noes: None. Carried 7-0.
Chairman Halt:s called a 5 minute recess at 9:15 P.M.
Meeting reconvened at 9:20 P.M.
9. UP-68-277 - SCCAL PRO~CTS lt'~C.
To permit a 100 bcd rest ho::~e in the 100-C-I-IO,O00 (Retail Con::~.2rcial)
District.
· Location: Property fronts 220 ft. on the northeast side of Bryan
Avenue approximately 230 ft. southeast of the centerline of Ke',..-port
Avenue.
Mr. Supin~_r presented the staff report stating that the proposed usc is
excellent for this location because of nearby shopping facilities and
medical offices.
The Fire Department stated the sam2 requirements for this request as
in the prev'~ous hearing (Ui~-68-276).
_Mr~ .S_u_pj~ge~ rcco:_?mended conditional approval.
Chairman Ea'lus opened the public portion of the hearing at 9:23·P.M.
Mr. Nick Barlctta spoke in favor of the request but wanted to know if
his license could be revoked for his place of business if there were
complaints relative to noise because of the close proxfmity of the pro-
posed structures.
Mr. Gill explainad that if thc conditions set forth are violated, it might
have to be reheard but d~d not ~alieve the license could be revoked if con-
ditions were carried out.
It was moved by i,:r. Webster: seconded by !...'r. Larn~rd that Resolu::ion
1030 be ado~ted, condlt~o,.:211v ao:~rovin% A:oplicatiou Mo. UP-68-277 for
the following rcf~ons:
The C~'~.mission finds that the establish:.::ent, mainten~.nce and
operation of the use applied fo~ will not, under the circu~n-
stances of the particular case be detri::antal to the health,
safety, morals, co:ufort and general welfare of thc parsons
residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed usa
and it will not be injurious or detr~.~.cntal to the prop2rty
and iniprover, ants in thc neighborhood or the geno, ral welfare of
the City.
As additi.on~l grounds, the minutes and evidence introduced at
the hearing are included by reference anJ made a part of the
motion.
Conditions of aooroval are:
1. Grantin~ o~ an ad:!'Jtion%l 7 feet of street rfght-of-way ~n
accorda~ae with the Master Plan of Arterial Ufghwz:yz~.
2. Constructio;~ of all sIreet ~m!>rove:::ents inc!uJit:f, curl,,
s~de::alh an:~ street paving,.
-8-
of,;)
BUS I bi~.]S S
VII.
~EW
USI~']SS
viii.
CO~.IRES-
PON~OENCE
3. I~stallation of street tre¢,s tx.~r Haster Street Tree Plan.
Installation of street lights.
5. That water lines, fire hydrants and access ,roads be subject to
the approval of the Fire Chief.
6. That off-street pa~'king be provided at the rate of one (1)
space/three (3) beds.
1. "APART._'.IE.,',¥1' PA.~IKI~,:G" SURVEY
%%is matter was continued from the Noven~er 12, 1968 t~eeting.
Mr. Sup~nger stated that no further attempt has been made for inter-
viewing apartment tenants due to the staff's workload.
The Co:..-nission agreed that a better sa;~pling be shown before making a
recomendation to the City Council on subject matter. One suggestion
was a survey by telephone or letters sent out.
Chairman Halus stated that due to the forthcoming holidays, it might
be best to defer action or further study until r.:ore time was allowed
for a survey, suggesting a date to be brought up before the Planning
Conn~ission - January 27th, 1969.
It was moved by l.[r. Oster~ seconded by i,~rs'. L~.~dw. ig that this mat'tcr be
deferred to the January 27~ 1.968~ Planning Co.~'mission meeting;.
Motion carried unanimously.
NO,N~]
1. COU~q."f TE:,Ti'ATi\~ TR_.\CT NO. 5448 - Parmelee Corp.
Location: Cowan Heights, east of Newport and south side of Skyline.
Reconz._nended action is that the County be informed that the City of Tustin
has no objection to the approval of subject map.
It was moved by Mr. Larnard, seconded by 14r. Mahoney that a letter be
directed to the County ~nform'inq, them that we have no ob,iection to
Tentative Tract i~o. 5448. l:..otion carried unanimously.
2. COL~'fY TENTATIVE TP~-\CT NO. 5462 - John Lyttle
Location: Fronts 330 feet on the northeast s~de of Newport Avenue
approximately 680 feet northeast of Seventeenth Street.
Recom;cended action is that the County be informed that the City of Tustin
has no objection to the approval of subject map.
It was moved by :.Ir. Mahonavz secon::d _b._x l.~r. Larnard~ that a letter be
directed to the Co'.,n[.,: .infor'.'~in~'~ the~ that ;.:~: .bav-.~ no objection to
Tentative Trac~: .'.:o. 5462. l-;otion carried unani:.-..ouslv.
3. COLrNTY TF2,TTATIVE l,L.kP NO. 6!;00 - Jacaran Developments
Location: Fronts 685 fect on the east side of Holt and 201 feet
on the south side of Vandcrlip.
Mr. Supin~r stated that th~s is a revision of a map reviewed last year which
adds two lots an:: reduces propose~ lot: frontag,- from a r::infmt~c~ of 61 feet to
a minima:un of 58 feet:. -
Recc~:':nendecl. cct~on is that the Co~;~'y be ~r, forr.~,d of our 80 foot r.~nL",:u.~: lot
front, ag,~ re?.ire:.':n.~ in E4.
IX.
OTHER
BUSINESS
Xe
AD JOURIC. H'iN£
· r . ,-r ]ct.t'er be dS. re. ctcd to thc, Cou::t.v
was wovc, d by ,.,r S[ ..... p t'hat a ...................
voicin,Z no o:~)o35, t'ion but 5nfor,'~Ln:: then, of our 80 foot r.~iu'/:'.~u:t lo~:
fren~a?,e rc~uirc:.:~.nL ~n ES.
Notion died for lack of second.
It was moved by l.;r. Oster, seconded by l.:r. l.arnard t}:nt x.:c do obj?st~
to subiec~: pror)oqa! because the lots are less than the 80 foo~
lot frontag,:2 rem:ircr.:.pn~ of the ~C~ty. Notion 9arried
(SCl>C)
Chairman llalus called attention to subject meeting being held Tnursday,
December 12, 1968 at the Anaheim Convention Center, Garden Grove Room
800 W, Katella, Anah~.i~::. He felt that. it would be an interesting r.:ecring
and encouraged the Con:n~ss~oners to attend. The subject will be "Growth
Forces Shaping Southern California", presented by Nr. Forest Dickason,
Director of Planning - County of Orange.
It was moved by Nr. Nahone~_sccondcd by Nfs. Ludwig,. thc. t .t_'£e... mac_t_it__~~
be adjourned. Carried 7-0.
There being no further business before the Planning Com~nission, Chairman
Halus declared the meeting adjourned at 10:55
SEcP~ETARY OF THi': Pl,..~i,,,1,,,G':V" "' CO.'.2.D. SSIO,.'.~
CHAIRi,~'xN OF THE
-10-