HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-23-67MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 23, 1967
CALL TO
ORDER
II.
ROLL
CALL
Iii.
APPROVAL
OF
MIiQUTES
IV.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
The meeting was called to order at 7:37 P.M., by Chairman
Marsters.
Present: Commissioners: B~'and, Baccn, 5~rsters, Hefner, Sharp,
Cs~er. Mr. Halus arrived at 8:30 P.M.
Absent: Commissioners: ~one
Others Present: James Rourko, City Attorney
James Supinger, Planning Director
Jo Ann Rhrner, ?lanning Secretary
I~ was moved by Xr~ Hofner, seconded by Mr. Sbarn, that the
~inu~es of tho January 9, 1967 mee%in~ be aooroved as mailed.
Motion carried.
1. /U.~iD:-:£N? TO ORDI.,A~.C.". NO. 157
To consldor the amendment of regulations governing the minimum
buiid~ng site area, the minimum lot width and the required
off-street parking for service stations.
Mr. Supinger presented the staff report recommending the proposed
ordinance be sent to %he City Council for adoption with the
additional suggestion ~hat, once adopted, the staff be directed
to make tbs sa~e changes in the Service Station Minimum Site
Development Guide.
The proposal showed.the following changes:
1. Increase of minimum building site area from 9,000 sq. ft.
to 1O,O00 sq. ft.
2. Increase of minimur~ lot width from 60 ft. to 100 ft.
Decrease in parking requirements from one space per
1,CO0 sq. ft. of site area to six (6) spaces per service
station.
Chairman Marsters opened the public hearing at 7:39 P.M.
There being no comments or objections, Chairman Marsters
declared the hearing closed at 7:~;0 P.M.
.r. Hefner asked Mr. Supinger if this was in keeping with the
Orange County Service Station requirements.
Mr. Supinger said this is a new way of setting up the parking
requirements a~d ~ha% most of the zoning ordinances have a
formula for the requirements for parking spaces and we find
that i% is rather bulky so we suggested the six (6) spaces
across the board, He explained that this would be solely for
automobiles and for the staff.
Chairman Marsters asked Mr. Supinger if this allowed for cars
t~mt are for sale or display and Mr. Supinger answered N__o.
:gr. Oster asked if this met with the approval of the Western
Oil and Gas Association and Mr. Supinger said ~e__s.
Planning Commission Minutes 1/23/67 Page 2
It was ~.oved by Xr.__Ostcr, seconded b" Mr. Share t,.,_% Resolution
.~.~o. ,~73, ,:m,~n,a~ent to Crd:ranco No. 157~ Mini__F. um Bui~cln~. Site,
~.~inima~ ~% '.'~'~i~,_~,. F,e~u!red ~% ~rco~rtv Linc and M~nimum Of~-Street
Parkln~ '.{c':u~rc~:~en%s for Service Stations, bo .recommended to City
Courci! /'or ad~'.ot".~r, and that once..'..do~t3~ th9. s~3'f be directed
to ~ake the same ckan~e3 3n the Service S~ation Minimum Site
Peve!oome~ Duidt'.
The above motion wa~ voued by Roll C~iI: Ayes: Brand, Bacoa,
~rsters, He£ner, Sharp, Oster. Absent: Halus. Noes: None.
co,.s~u,., an a~ond:~en~ '~o Srdin&nce No. 157 providing
for th~ regulation of the parkin~ of certain vehicles on
private property.
Mr. Supinger p:;ezented zke staff report and the new proposed
o.~inar, ce re: Vehicles in Residential District.
Mr. He£ner directed a st :tcment to :,~r. ouo~n~er saying assume
that r._~o_~iiehome means anything that you would get in and sleep."
;{r. Supi~ger called to the Commissioner's attention that trailers
other than mobzzenom., such as small week-end trailers are not a
mobiieho~.~e.
Mr. Suplnger, d'.scribing ~ho difference in a %ravel trailer and
mobilehome stated that a travel ~raller can be hauled behind an
automobile, where mobzlohoncs have to be pulled by a cab.
Chairman Marsters opined that this left it wide open for buses,
Chairman .~'arsters ope.ned the hearing to the public at 7:45 P.M.
~_. He_qry .B.a_d.~er, i4]..7..2_l...~.ro_ok].ip.e_.~;~a_y, asked '"What is a passenger
vehicle then?;'
Mr. Rourke f~l% it would be wis~ to change the crdirmnce to be sure
we are referring to auto~:ubiles.
Mr. Badwer stated that if that could be included in the ordinance,
he would be happy to see it go to the City Council.
There being r;o further comments or objections the hearing was
declared closed at 7:48 P.M.
Mr. Oster opined that when you start fooling around with passenger
vehicles then uotorcyclos and things of this nature become involved.
Mr. Hefner said this item has been on the agenda since August of
1966 and has probably been going on for a year and no one has really
been able to come up with definitive wording of what it should be.
It winds up here again with so~ezhlng strictly undefinitive. He
went on to say tbmt the research had been good but the out-come
has been real poor. }~r. ~ief~or said ~'i can't see having a new law
when we don't need o~e just %o huve iL in the books. We really
haven't had any real problems and I, for one, feel this whole thing
should be eliminated and should be tabled.
It was moved bv Mr. Hefner, ~?.c.cnded by Mr. Bacon that tho recom-
mendation for ~,~= qro:~o:~edorc_..=n~'~ .... Vehicles in Residential
t~D~-~..a for an indefinite time.
Districts~ be "''
Chairman Marsters stated that he had noticed on several occasions
that boats and trailers are parked in these residence yards and he
hoped that the commission would take some type of action for buses.
Planning Commission Minu~es 1/23/67 Page
BUSINESS
VI.
BUSIN."~- S
VII.
COR~RESPON-
D4~CE
Mr. Brand v:~iced his o~[nicn on the subject saying that the
latest re-write (ordlnanna) was non-deflaitlve and felt tha~
it had been safficiently discussed and the opinion of the
commission had beer; sent ~o City Council and they seem to be
reluctant to act on i~.
~.r..' Badror pro~csted, stating that he had me% with Mr. Cliff
}~iller a~on."~. Susinger. and felt that %hey b~d come up with
good dei'initivc wcrJing and %er~s and now it seems to be com-
pletely changed and h~ wanted to ~now why.
;<r. Supin~er answered ~<r. Badger;s question by explaining after
discussing 'this with the City Attorney there seemed to be a few
proble~s with %he recommended provisions and this is why it is
changed.
The above motion was voted 'by i{oll Call: Ayes:
,.e. ne., cacon Brand. Noes: Sharp, .'..lore%ers. Absent:
Motion carried 4 - 2.
}{alus.
BONE
NONE
To :mrmtt the establishment of a permanent adverzising
sign and retail pet supply store in connection with an
existtn(~ commercial kennel in %he Al General Agricultura~
D!str~ct.
Mr. Supinger prm~ented the staff report stating %hat there is no
objection to the ap~£icatlon approval but would su6gest that the
bottom of the :,ign be a ~nlmum of ten (10) feet above grade to
lessea the possibility ~hat it will be hit by any large vehicles
visiting the $i~e.
Chairman Marsters inquired to %he location of thi.~ and Mr. Supinger
answered him by saying i5 was at the Eas~ side cf Lyon Street just
..~rtn of ,4c~.acder: and 2orth of the railroad tracks.
it wa.= moved bV ','~. O:;tcr, ~e~.~7.;'~(!ed bv ~;r, Brand th~:~ a !e%~er bo
~icce%ed Lr, tko 'brnm~e 3cuqb'z, P~.nin~ ~or~Ln~:ion th~b the 'i'us%in
wnul. d sU~O~,h~t the '~
o..~tO . oF the si~n be a minimum of ten
feeb ~b,':re Frn~e to ]e~',M.e5 ~:he ?oss~.bil.~y t~ ~ will b9 bit bl
BnV i~r~;e vehicles vislt.inE the site. Motion carried.
2 COL":f]'Y TE;5~i:,'fIVZ ?FqtCT '""~ 'n
· .'w.~ }';0. o ,6i
Pr,,teal. for a 6 ~o~ ~ R-i subdivision. Sou~h side of
L'TT Drive West of Nisson Road.
Er. Suplnger presented the staff report stating that the Director
o:' Public :forks? a~ong with the ~ ~ann~ng Department has no
object, ions on ~'.e ....,,, n~,a,,~.ve :.;ap.
Brand in:mired a:~ to what tho property is zoned and Mr.
Supinger re:,!ied i:,-i.
;.;r. Supin~cr :'~ta~,:. %hat the only reason the rozonln6 (next agenda
item) has come ,~. again is because %he Planning Staff had recommended
approva~ of the zoned area and when it got to the County there was
some disapproval from homo owners.
Planning Commission Minutes - 1/23/67 Page 4
Mr. Hefner asked Mr. Supinger what information he had received
free the County and M£. SuFinger said that the latest information
he has received is that the prooerty has been sold to a gentleman
for R-i zcning. He aloe stated thst the area to be subdivided
did not include the oroperty on the corner.
Mr. Richard Clark, Utc Drive, sta~ed that he lived across the
street from the property in questic'% and the property was petitioned
to the County to ne rezoned. Au that ~.ime the property was up for
sale but not sold and now it is sold to a xan that wan~s to develop
it to R-~ zone. ?he ~ese peacing for Ril) ~s pending now upon a
technicality and was tabled %0 be re-heard as 5eon as the plan was
adopted.
it .~, r eyed ~v (r. Sh::r:; ~nd oe::ondo~ by !(r. Hefner that s loiter
be dir:~cucd to thc Cranre County ?!annia~Q Cc~mission relative to
Lhe go!air ['en%a_~ii~~ irsct ~o...~.36!~_thpt the ~st%n ~!annin~om-
mission has nc ob.iec%io~s tc the six (6i lot oarcel subdivision on
the oronerty. ~:otion carried
',.,u,.,,:.,.. CASE ., ~-S ...... .',SM~ iRS-11
Zone Change from R-i "SI.~;3LE ~..,I~Y R~--~IDA~CE" District
to R2D "?~0 FAMILY RLSiDENCI~" District.
Mr. Supinger presented %he staff report recommending approval of
the application as it would be a good buffer between the R-! and
C-i areas.
Mr. Dick Clark -- tho nearby home owners did not know of the orig-
inal hearing on this subject - had they known, they would have voiced
their opposition at that time. Origknaily it was zoned ~o R4. in
1962 a request was made for C-2 zo.':e and t, as di~mpproved. The R-1
section was ~aintained along Uti Drive. ~]inety-three (93) people
signed a ~etition in this neighborhood against this zone change and
i have a copy to furnish you gentlemen th~.s evening.
it is our hone that we can wark with the City and County to develop
a more suitable p[an for abe area, including apartments and R-I,
south cf the Saa~,a A~:a freeway. It is one of these R-I zones that
we are %rying to protect but at tie time the R4 was rezcned as a
holding zone, the El residents wore nob in the area to do what they
could so consequently %his ]and was the victim of people that were
land grabbers with ~acney that bought the land. Considering the fact
that thc R-! zone has been proposed,in the subdivision map, it is
cur request that this be allowed to preside as a R-i zone.
Mr. £aul Daniels - !nOel Wood!awn - We, like nest of the other
neigabors, have ilvod in this tract for over five (5) years. The
buffer should not face the existing tract, it just stands to reason
to an outsider and we do feel like one.
Mr. F~i. Rip, by - I~032 Wcodlawn - There are several items of interest -
the six (6) homes are to be built on 1.6 acres and i believe tzat is
smaller than om.~r ho..mes. CaliforrAa is not made up of outsiders, be-
cause anyone that lives here over five (5) years is considered a
.native Californian and i w:'.ll llve here for the rest of ~y days.
Most of %he property is fair? y pretty, although we have one set of
apartze::ts on Mitchell that has r. ot been compieved, i want a pretty
neighborhood but I thin~ ~t should stay R-i so the people that liv~
there can have some pretty hca. cs.
:.ir. Paul Daniei~ - He covered the apartment complex and to me, it
seems quite beycnd my comprehension that we need another R2 district.
I feel we need homes with the same quality of ours.
P~annxn~ Commission ,.:ann%es - i/23/67 : '.:.re ':
Chairman Marstcr~-: .'.l:.,~ed to see the ,~.-'~.~ and Mr. "~ ,-
e: wan%od to
xnow ~.:'nat thc ac%ual lot size was. !~::'. Suoinj. er said it was
7,209 ruer.
i.~r. Oster asked what the ~o:~.~ari:~cn waa for RL- in ~,he ,City and
Co'ar,~y and .4r. Supinger sa~d it was the :~a:'.e density as tn thc
Gitv. [{2~ usur~llv comes out :5-?~ t~ the acre, ~.- & 1',o the acre,
he wont ahead to e~piain [.hat tlc Jom.~y only brougk~ uo ~he cas:
agoin because they sai4 'Zhey ..;cu]d~ b~t he had no indication 9h i%.
* ' ~ ,n~., area would
Mr. Hoi'ner .~!.a%e:i ~r.~,L this "_s ~ .'.'ea~ ckamo!e that '~' ~,-
..~,, ..... ~ .... a.~o,., r,~,~ end .:~a~ed
he has a Lc7 3[' ~ .v,,cuy w).T,h ~,he re:,k:ler,ts
-' ....... ,,,.~ ].Lye Across the
_e,.,~ .... s::.:-.ethLn~' ray be Fur ap ~ ..... .~ ts objecc'kor.'fi~kc.
,.[r 3{efr:or '..;ent ahead to s,~y n.: ..~ .~gn~ th2 uhoio area n~uded con-
,.~.(~.,~% ~-~caase hc cc'_).d vk:~uaZ~ze s~;,~ shops arou~
ar, J he "~" ~' - ' '
.... u~.[.~ scnc%n::,g :Lould be worked cut here %ha% is ~r, ore
digestible ~cr ;he people. This is part of the indep%h study now.
w ..... r,~ve(:, b', :,h'. Eefr'e~' .~cccndcd by !.:r, ~a~_Z~tbat_'/....C.,-66-44 be
held us u.zti~ ar ir.de~!.h s'.udv bv ti~e City and Go'ar.tv bas been
made. .._. ~ ..... c.~.rr i e:i ....... ~
4. COUX?Y CAS?] '": ~m.x
..,-,~ - Leo Su~!iff
To perzEt constr~ction of a iO-,'-ni% apartment building
a iO0-C2-LO,OCO District.
,'.,"". Supir'~..]or ?.re~e.,t~o' the staff re~'ort recommend-'.ni~ denial o?
UV-5646 /'or ~he foil.cwi'.~ reasons:
it is 3ur opine, on Lha% sl~ei~ al' action iileF, a-,-ly subverts
the 5i~ite 'law which reouires that zcnir, g actions be
approved by tho legislative body (Board of Su.oervisor~).
.... ar ....... .., pe.,..z..oa u',;e in thc 100-C2-.10,000
Dir~t:'Yc :.
,h~..~ is a aong~r %haL, at ooze fa;,ure (late, ~ne property
owner may at'~er, pt %c convert so,;e, or ail, of the apart-
~,en%s to ~:om~arcial uses for which ~hey are not designed
Mr. Brand q'aestioncd the size of this .or,~perty and whab zone would
Mr. Supinger Yeccm:zend.
Mr. Sup"nger stated that i% snm:ld be rezoned %o uul%ip',e family
and fe',.t certaic that there were enoui;h property to De rezoned
this. He ec:~.mented %ha+. a dezaiied study of the available amount
has not been ?;ado, but felt i% could be done ...'ith
;.~r. Cs%er - then you dcr.'t object %o the gor:s±,ruction in %he area
or rezo:.ing to pert, it ~be i0 un't-, apar%-~ent, ~t to %he me%hod of
Use Variance. ;4r. Suplr'.ger said that wa"J correct.
............, ~..-,~i:f. ~__~."._~*'~,'t.. ~., .... c,~ ~ *~,' or.~v" ~ ..... r..~,_ use so that %,ho.~ %~ould
Chairman Xarst.urs ca]l¢,'t a five mir, utc recess.
Planning Commission Minutes - 1/23/67
Page 6
VIII.
OTH~
BUSINESS
iX.
AD JOUPuN-
M~NT
/
Mr. Rourke - if %he count)' would pers:.t %his apartment house
development on tho C2 property I don't see how it is possible
for %i:e owner tc revert back. 2 variance is an additional privilege
%o the zonir.g. 'fne in%eh% is that the apartment should not be con-
verted to %he C-2. Once you get a yeti&see ior an agartment house
you are stuck unless you co~e in v, ith a future variance &nd then
ar%er i% is built, i don't think they could put in any shops.
Mr. S'~oineer said he thought the apartnents could be converted
to commercial uses because of tun underlying C2, if they ever wanted
Zr. Rourke said~_:~' the co~missior, feels that this mav~ haooen,., they
should make further inquiry to the coun%y and ask that if the
variance wa~ granted that the use be limited to residential uses.
Mr. Supinger felt that it would no~ be possible to rezone the whole
pLece of property.
..r. Bacon se2onded.
Mr. Halus - "I move the orevious question." x'
Vote by Roll Call: Ayes: Oster, Sharp, Hefner, Bacon, Brand,
Halus, Marsters. :.~oes: )~one. Absent: Iione.
Vote by f~oll Call or. main ,~otior.: Ayes: Brand Noes: Oster,
Sharp, l".efner~ Halus, :.larsters.
It. wa.s .~oved by k'r. Hefner~secendcd by Xr. C, zter that this bodE
has. no o__~q.)ect.%cr, to th~ aoart~ent cc!;~]ex as Drooosed to Ln/-~846.
Mr. Haius felt ghat these parts carried forth in the star'..' report
should be :n the 2ott%r to the Couh%y - ..~.r. Brand concurred.
The above motion was voted by Roll Call: ;.yes: Oster, SPmrp, Hefner,
Bacon, Xarsters. Noes: Halus, Brand. Absent:
it ',:as r. oved by .~r..~.o, se._~_ond___ed b- Mr. 5aeon thot the meeting
be adjourned.
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.g.
SECRETARY