The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Minutes 04-13-61ZONE HEARING BEFORE THE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 1961 ,,,v~,,, H EA }{ z Nu Before the TUST[N i'LANNING COFiMI' .... oozON April 1), 176]. He,'~ring c~:!led to or'~er ~.t 7'30 P.H. by Chairm;~n Bacon. PtiI.:SENq.' Bacon, Siegel, Hume:.;ton, Cl:,.r'k, Gray, Mitchell ABSENT' Sher i dan CZTY ENGINEI,iH · }:resent '~lTv. ATTORNEY' Present · A,..con turned the meeting over' After we'ic, orr;ing those [)resent, Mr ~'~ to I','Ir. Wi'~.~_., P].anning Consultant, who exnlained, th,'.; purpose or. the hearing and method of presentation. Corresi;ondence was re. ad by the City Clerk. Said c~)rresi,cndence now or. file with the Planning Comr, i:::~ion for further study. Zon.ing Or, iinance and Reguiatlons expl~ined by Mr. Wise· The following comments were made a.t comp!etlon of said explanations'- George :~roo~ne!]., L~L~0 Pacific Street spoke for "P" Zoning rProfessional) to be used ~s a buffer zone rather than H-3. He feels there are too many apartments proposed for the e, ity whlch ruins tax base and lowers school revenue. Howard Robertshaw, 1829 Loma }loja, owner of i)ronerty., within the c~ty, spoke sup!.,ortYng positior of Charles Greenwood as per letter of Mr. Greenwood. Q. I,. }ta. rdy, owner, of ,nro,.c~tY:"~ at 440 W. First Stre~,~* auest~on-. _ ed phraseology of ~' ~ectlon 3.4', a.~; to prol)erty corning into the ci. ty as "U" b'istri, ct and Use Permit required for any improve- merits on property. Answer by Hr. Wise - "U" District for new districts annexed to the city as an interim district. All pro~:.erty will come in with no use permitted without a Use Permit, unti'l the. Planning Commission can properly zone after study and hearings. Russel Quackenbush, 1796~ Wellington, asked' What are the distinctive values of B Zones as attached to H-1 in preference to E-4 or similar zoning. Mr. Wise answered that in B Zones, different lot sizes could be sat up to an acre or more. This is more adai,tabie. A lot of the north area shou]a be R-I m~nimum combined w~th B-1 snd that further up towar'd the hill area this zoni. ng c~)uld provide for larger qots and ~ive the -~,~,~,,]e the :;rotect~on off acre or 1/2 ~tcre zoning, if combine(t with B-] or B-4. Eugene Jacobson, property owner:ha Tust~,n, stat. ed seri.~:us consid,=.r;~t :~c.r', should be giver, to ~..:[of, ting the county zoning, using the same. wording instead of B Zoning. Some po!nts in H-i cou].~i cause ~ ].essoning cf restr, i~tions. haymc)nd Watson, Irv lne Co., asked ~f there is any Haster Flan of Greater Tustin Area, wi~ch ~ol~Ic'i allow the areas to Oe annexed to have some understanding of the l~lans of the Council. Al:.;c asked if th..re was any consideration of an excJusive Industrial Zone, rather than a more ~ncl. usi. ve zone. I73 Er. W~se answered thab the Co~]ncil and Planning Commission had considered doing a general plan but felt at that time it was best not to get involved with area outside the City i.imits. In answer to the second quest~on, he stated that both M Zones proposed are exclusive and do not allow other uses other than planne..i manufacturing. ? M is re. ore exclusive than the straight M District as it does spell out more in detail the type of uses a'.lowed. One weakness is that M Zone will allow certs~n retail uses. There being no further questions on the Ordinance, discussion was opened on Zoning Mai.;. Map was taken section by section. SECTION I South ,.~f oa.~ta Ana Freeway. Mr. ~ricker, property at ~.rtheast corner of Tustin and McFadden, checke;i on zoning for this corner. SECT'iON II Mair~. Street to Santa Aha Fr<:eway and South B Street to interchange at proposed New~ ort Freeway. Mr. Fred Storey, ~40 W. Main Street, said he was not pleased with ti-.j along ?,~a~n Street and t~t some study should be made. R-3 may be acceptable along Freeways. George Broomell, ~05 Pacific, read a petition from 21 residents on Pacific between Main and Sixth Streets, o!posing zone changes. Said the same people would object to any H-3 more than 200' from the Santa Aha Freeway. (Petition filed with Secretary). Mrs. B. Boosey, read a petition from Main Street residents objecting to R-3 zoning. (Petition filed with Secretary). Mrs. Feather.:tone, a55 Pacific asked if there was any reason why residents could ~ot vote on zoning changes. Mr. Wise exp]ainod reasons for He:,.~rings in l~u of voting. Mr. J. Sauers, 5]-3 South Pacific, asked ~f the reason for H-3 Zoning was because of land-locked property, couldn't "A" Street be extended or Cul-De-Sac made. Mr. Featherstone, ~55 Fa. cific Street, said he regarded Pacific Street as a residential community and was against any H-3 ~ ' ,~onlng. Mr. Jack Mason, 45~ S~xth Street, asked to go on record as oF. posed to H-3 on Sixth Street. Mrs. Linker, Sixth Street, stated she opposed on S~xth Street. Mr. Wickham, owner of property on West Main Street, stated th:~t 330 feet de~p lots deserve something more than R-1 Zoning. SECTION III From South B Street east to City Limits and South of Main Street. Dr. Stanton, Laguna Road, opposite the High School, stated he is against ti-3 for triangular shaped property 65' deep on the East end, 146' deep on the West and 165 feet on Laguna Hoad. Property ~s adjacent to the Santa Aha Freeway and Laguna Road and too noisy for residential use and the shape do~.~s notice, nd itself to sensible design of apartments and the adjacent property i.s now in a C use. S:~;CTICN IV North of Ma~,n Str~:,et to Fi. rst Strce.~t and B Street to Tustin Avenue; Mr. 'Don Heffner, 525 Third Street, opposed to zoning for this area. ~ies]dents would be surrounded by multiple zoning from R-3 to C-1 an~. ranging from a 3 block radius to ]/2 block. This ts pr'esent]y a single dwelling area. He would rather see block zoning to R-3 comf~lete].y than leave an ~s!and of residents surrounded by multiple dwellings and commercial zoning. SECT~ ~'.~ V Main Street to First Street and B Street to New- . "~ '~ owner of Northwest port Avenue ~r. onyder, corner of Freble Drive, objected to the charade from C-2 to ~-3. Property i.'.; surrounded by C-! and C-2. F.e has been refused multiple dwelling use on this ~roperty becau:;e of sewage. SECTION VI All property in the ci. ty North of F~rst Street. ,~eorge Broomell, a40 ;~acific, asks that C-o ~oning be kept on Dunston property, North o.f 17th Street, as it Y s tee close to the l'~roposed New~.~ort Freeway For ~ousihg. G. Enderle, ask~..ng for C-2, adjacent to Newport Freeway. 'dhen Yorba Stre~t is rel¢;:at, ed to the East it wi. Il leave a 200' str~t~. Would like to maint;~n this m. rop¢.rty as C-2. V. Boyd, 1758]. Yorba, recommends C-2 on 17th Street and [~-3 on ut~ between Yorba and Newport Fr:~eway. T. W. Newmann, 17561. Eddy Drive., stated he is anxious to see North area remain a.t least H-1 or better. Commercial or multiple zoning will tend to degrade the R-i area. Bill Nickels, 17571 Leaf wood Lane, wants the area to remain residential, H-1 or better to Seve~!teenth Stre,.,t shoul.~2 be kept a'good looking street. Mr. {4uackenbush asked why b-1 is not designated in the zoning now. Mr. Wise answered that the city wanted to see development of lot size in area and be sure of s~zes set out. Probably would recommend B-1 or better. Mr. Zuackenbush - The Freeway should be the commercial boundary. East of the Freeway would have to be large developments to survive and small businsss would add nothing to the area. There being no further comments, the Hearing wa.c; continued to May 16tha' *.. ?'3u,'~ P.M. ~'~... the Tu:;t~_n Youth Center. ' Cha I rman ,..... .... ~_ ..%:'.~.:..-- ~,~,RUTH C. POE . SEC}~i~TAt{Y