Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1969 09 15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL September 15, 1969 CALL TO Meeting called to order at 7:30 P,M. by Mayor Coco. ORDER PLEDGE OF Led by Mayor CocoD ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION Given by Mayor Coco, IV. ROLL Present: Councilmen: Coco, Mack, C. Miller, Marst~rs, CALL L. Miller Absent: Councilmen: None Others Present: City Administrator Harry Gill City Attorney James Rourke Planning Director James Supinger Acting Secretary Doreen Henson V. APPROVAL OF Moved by L. Miller~ seconded by Mack that minutes of MINUTES September 2~ 1969 be approved as written. Carried. VI. PUBLIC 1. APPEAL - VARIANCE 69-251 - Continued from 9/2/69 HEARINGS ~,_ APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING APPLIOATION OF THE METZ COMPANY ON BEHALF OF TANDY CORP, FOR A VARIANCE (V 69-251) TO PERMIT: a. A pole sign within required setback area with a height of 35 ft., an area of 88 sq. ft. each side, total area of 176 sq. fro both sides with a revolving mechanism, b. Total sign area for subject business of 224 sq. ft. Site fronts 90 fro on the southeast side of Newport Avec, approximately 120 fro southwest of the centerline of Old irvine. Boulevard, Mr. Supinger stated the Planning Commission conditionally approved total sign area of 148 sq. ft. and one sta'tionary free standing sign within the required setback having a maximum height of 21.5 fro and maximum total area of 100 sq. ft. The condition is the installation of sidewalk along the Newport frontage. Mayor Coco stated this was a continued hearing from the last Council meeting and the public portion of the hearing --- was still open, Mro Clay Reavis, Attorney, representing the Tandy Corp., 12570 Brookburst, Garden Grove, stated they had studied the area very closely and their main disagreement with the Planning Commissio~ was the height of the pole sign and the rotating factor. They are offering to reduce the speed of rotanion from 8 RPM's to 4 RPM's and requesting a height of 30 fro Dueto the area being a very small triangle, they felt it necessary to go 30feet in order for the sign to be seen from all six directions. Ilearing closed a~ 7:45 P.M. Council Minutes 9/15/69 Pg. 2 In answer to questioning by the Council, Mro Supinger. stated this site would be considered a complex and because Newport and Old Irvine are both select system streets, 2 pole signs would be allowed within the complex. Mayor Coco called for a short recess since no business could be conducted durin~ the sounding of a Fire Department warning device. Meeting reconvened at 7:50 P.M. Councilman L. Miller commented on the publication put out by the Radio Shack, stating that advertising of this nature was usually distributed to do away with the impulse buyer. ~ J. Cernie, representing the Radio Shack, stated that whem they c,ome into a new area they have to rely on the impulse buyer in o~der to obtain a mailing list. CounCilman C. Miller stated he felt they did need a pole sign, but not a rotating sign. He asked how many lineal feet of sidewalk was involved in the condition of approval. Mr. Gill advised the entire Newport frontage was involved, approx/mately 120 lineal feet. Councilman Marsters felt there was a definite need for a pole sign at the location, but felt it should be held down to 21~ feet and was adamant against a revolving s~gn. Moved by C. Miller~ seconded by L. Miller that the Planning Commission action be upheld in this matter and the appeal be denied. Councilman Marsters stated he felt the Planning Commission was overly generous in the area allowed; however, he would be voting in favor of upholding their action. Councilman L. Miller concurded. Motion carried unanimously. 2. ZC 69-195 OF WILFRED TAYLOR & ROBERT HALL Application of Wilfred Taylor and Robert Hall (ZC 69-195) for rezoning of a 1.52 acre parcel from the R-1 (Single Family Residential) District to the R-3 (1500) (Multiple Family Residential - 1500 sqo ft. of lot area per dwelling unit) District° Site fronts 220 feet on the south side of Third Street, 300 feet on the west side of Pacific and 220 feet on the north side of Main Street. Mr. Supinger advised that the Planning Commission recommended denial of this application. Councilman Marsters stated he would be abstaining from any discussion or voting on this matter. Hearing opened az 8:28 P.M. W. B. Taylor, 7281 Ladera Senda, Cowan Heights,stated he had owned this property for 26 years. Ite has spent a good deal of time in Tus~in, keeping the property neat and green and Council Minutes 9/15/69 Pg. 3 has paid $6300 in taxes in the last 10 years. This land is not R-1 quality. Over the past 5 years at least 8 competent contractors have .found that no market exists for new single family houses at this location for anywhere near the price that would be required. He said he could not qualify as an expert .in planning, but was experienced in picking up beer cans and had become convinced that he needed professional help in developing this property. He had engaged Bob for this professional help. Bob Hall, 17452 Irvine Boulevard, Tustin, stated that back in JanuaryMro Taylor had come to him and asked his advice on the property. As he indicated he has owned the property for a long time. It has got to be replaced with an economical use and as he nears retirement age, it becomes more important. It is pretty hard to get any production from an orange grove and it has become a maintenance problem. He has tried to sell it and has been unable.to do so as single family property. They have studied the move-on homes possibility but there are not 10 move-on homes available. He recommended R-3 (t500) last April, but has re-studied the project and developed a new plan. He found that thereis a shortage of single story, low profile, low density, garden apartments. There are very few of these around. He has divided the parking into 3 areas to make them more convenient to the individual units, scattered the buildings in such a manner to have lots of green area, shake roofs, parking for 12/3 cars per unit. It would be an inward facing development~ There are probably a lot of · people in that area who don't want to maintain their own home and don't want to move out of the neighborhood. This is providing a nice area but allowing them to get out from under the maintenance of their house. There would be lots of open space and no children. They are amending their request from R-3 (1500) to R-3(2800) (SingleStory) and rather than have the Council deny the application, requested they be sent back to the Planning Conmission. ~r. Arthur Witten, 245 Pacific, stated he has lived here for 37 years and wants to keep it in single family dwellings. He asked why they have to come down here every 6 months or so to keep this frommultiple family dwellings. Councilman C. Miller replied by stating that when people come to the Planning Commission and Council, by law the City has to hear them. Mrs. Carolyn Campbell, 690 W. 3rd 7Street, stated that 7 years ago she had come before the City Council and had spoken on this same subject. She has lived here for 42 years and is proud of her property and keeps it up well. She wants to stay there and keep it single family. She asked what obligation Mr. Taylor and Mr. Hall have to go ahead and develop this as they present it. She said Mr. Taylor had never had any signs on the individual lots trying to. sell them for single family.. She asked if the Council had received a petition signed by residents in the area. ~ayor Coco advised that Council was in possessionof the petition containing 54 names wl~ich included some husbands and wives who had signed separately. Mr. Supinger pointed out that ~h0uld the applicant be granted his request, it would not obligate him nor would it obligate the City to accept the revised'plan. Council Minutes 9/15/69 Pg. 4 Mayor Coco commented that there is nothing in the R-3 provision in the Ordinance that would specify that this would be an adults only community - it does not have the Planned Community provisions. He asked if this would go before the Development Preview Committee. Mr, Supinner stated that it would go before the Development t>rev~ew Committee and there was some question in his mind as to whether it would be acceptable in this form. It would have to be PD to signify single story° Bob Blaylock, 675 W. 3rd Street, stated there are 3 move-on houses in the area and all are a credit to the community. Most of the people living in the neighborhood are approaching retirement age and they don't want the property cluttered up with apartments° He said it appeared that the proposal before the Council at this time would place a lot of blank walls facing their homes. He would noz be in favor of staring at a blank wall for half a day. He does not feel that any of the homes in this area are in a rundo~a status. If they put apartments in, the street would have to be widened whic~ would be additional cost to the property owners already there, Bob Hall stated he wished to point out that not all of the property owners in the area feel the way those who signed the petition feel~ About a year ago approximately 70% of the property owners to the north requested R-3 (1250)o He felt that when apartments are mentioned some people think of the young, wild bunch. The proposed type of density requires expensive apartments - about $200,00 per month. The element these people are so concerned about, he felt, would prefer the swinger type buildings that other developments have provided. This type Of development would be quieter and more compatible to the area than if there were 10 families there. Richard Kruppe, 12312 Newport, spoke in.favor of this proposal. He felt these people in the area should be proud of their older homes but when there is a group of homes surrounded by R-3, R-2, etc., if it can't go R-3 what can a person do that is economically feasible with ~he property. Mayor Coco stated ~he question is justified, but there just is not an answer available at this time. These R-1 parcels have been the subject of at least 12 months extensive study. Being discussed this evening~swhat can be done me help an applicant who is paying taxes, who is trying to sel.i or develop the land and has been unable to do so. The other side of the Council's dilemma is if any of the small applications are granted in the area, the small development will remain with the City for 30-40 years and preclude any large scale development in thei vicinity. The only decision the Council can make is what is over-all best for the City° At this point it is not known; the Council does not have the data. All that can be said at this time is that the Council is very aware of the need to answer this question. The time is being taken to do a thorough analysis of it. A~.~ Oh~le~oU~ 460 W~se ~d 8~e~, s~a~ed i~ is ~o~ too long ago since he came before the Council and requested a change in the lot nex~ to his. ilis requesm was denied and he put a single family dwelling on the lot which he is very happy with. He does hem thinlc single family dwellings are going out of style. He felt Chat if the Councilmen lived ~t~ · i'~Council Minutes 9/15/69 Pg. 5 ne ' ~f~apartments, they would understand why he and his neighbors were objecting to them. Edward Hurd, 12871 Barrett Lane, stated he owns the property just north of the Taylor property. At one time it was referred to as ~he Attebery tract. He felt that Mr. Hall and Mr. Taylor were doing everything they could to be quite lenient by changing their request to R-3 (2800). He said he would not want to build any new single family houses in that area because he did not feel the property would be single family residential in some years to come. Whether soma want it or not, it is going to change. Mrs. Campbell said she felt it was a mistake to listen to ~. Hurd and Mr. Kruppe because they are separate instances. Hearing closed at 9:10 P.M. ~ouncilman C. Miller stated he had driven through that area tonight to take a look at the 'neighborhood and see how it is. He noticed that what Mr. Taylor says is true, that he is doing an excellent job in keeping up his property. The single family residences around there are all very nice and neat. He aoesn't want anyone to feel that the old part of Tustin is synonymous with rundo~ra. It's probably the nicest part of the City with its old trees and well kept homes. The things that are concerning the people living in that area are of prime importance to the Council.. He said he could understand how they feel about a proposal that would put a wall around the entire property, He lives very close to some apartments and knows just what the people are concerned witk. The prime criterion for any development to take place in this area is - what is going to be done will haveto upgrade the area. The interest of the people living in this area must take first precedence with anything that the Council does° Councilman Mack stated under the City's Ordinance in regards to development standards, controls or requirements in developing multiple uses are much s~ricter than R-1 or E-4 standards. 'The City is going to gr~¢ more and the attitude of the Planning Commission as well as the City Council is that its got to be good and the next one has got to be better to keep Tustin a nice place in which to work and live. ~ayor CoCo felt the recent proposal of R-3 (2800) needed Planning Commission perusal. Mr. Hall's requesE that this be sent back to the Planning Commission is the best possible action for the applicants as well as the residents. ~oved by Mack~ seconded by L~. ~ille~ that this matter be referred back to the Planning Cormnission for study, to be taken up at the earliest possible time. Councilman C. Miller did not feel this the best action to take. He does not think the Planning Commission is in a position ~o act on this matter. He felt the best thing for the Council to do would be to uphold the decision of the Planning CommisSion made previously. In answer to questioning by Councilman L. Miller, Mr. Gill stated that Phase II of the Tustin Area Study had been completed and they would now move into Phase III. He could give no estinated date for completion of Phase III. Above motion carried 3-1. Ayes: Coco, Mack, L. Miller. Noes: C, Miller. Abstained: Marstc~s. Council Minutes 9/15/69 Pg. 6 Mr. SupinNer advised that the earliest possible time this matter could be heard by the Planning Commission would be October 13, 1969~ Mayor Coco called for a short recess. Meeting reconvened at 9:50 VII. OLD 1. FIRE LANES IN TUSTIN MEADOWS BUSINESS Mr. Gill requested that this matter be deferred for 2 weeks. Moved by Marsters~ seconded by Mack that the matter of the fire lanes in TustinMeadows be deferred .until 10/6/69. Motion carried° 2. AWARDING OF CONTRACT FOR FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL F-10 AT RED HILL AVENUE, WING WALL AND CHANNEL MODIFICATION Mayor Coco stated the report indicated that the low bid for this project was 60% over the City Engineer's estimated cost. Moved.by C. Miller~ seconded by Mack that all bids be re~eeted and the staff be asked to come back to the Council with some other recommendation. Carried. VIII. NEW 1. REQUEST TO BARRICADE ONE END OF CUL~DE-SAC ON KIMBERLY BUSINESS CIRCLE SEPTEMBER 20, 1969 FOR BLOCK PARTY Moved by Marsters~ seconded by L. Miller that permission be granted to barricade one end of cul-de-sac on Kimberly C,ircle September 20, 1969 for block party, subject u. the following conditions as set forth by the Fire Department: 1. Let the Fire Department know what time the street will be blocked. 2.One side of the street is to be kept open,for emergency traffic. 3. No cars shall be parked on either side of the street. Motion carried. 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Moved by L. Miller, seconded by Mack that demands in the amount of ~64~566.78 be approved and paid. Carried. IX. OTHER 1. RESOLUTION N0. 1021' BUSINESS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN. CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PURCHASE CERTAIN ITEMS. (one 1/2 ton Pick Up truck) ~oved by Macl~, seconded b~ C. M~ller that ResolUtion No. 1021 be ~. by title only. Carried unanimously. MOved by Ma~Ic, second~d by L. Mlllo~ d~at l~e~ol~:Lo~ NO, k0'21. authorizing: u,~c Dc!~nranenu of Central Services o[ the State of California z, r .Tchasc certain itcn~. be passec and ~j~2L./aj/L. Carrio d unan h',~o:.~; i,.~ 9/15/69 Pg. 7 2. Mayor Coco commented on the General Revenue Summary. It was the opinion-of the Council that the Computer Service was very worthwhile. 3. .Councilmen C. Miller asked for the status of the clean-up campaign. Mr. Gill advised that a report would be presented to the Council at the next regular meeting. 4. Councilman L. Miller asked if anything was going to be done about the 4th and Prospect "swamp." Mr. Blankenship advised he had heard nothing new from the County; they had promised to maintain the property, but evidently nothing had been done az this point. 5. Mr. Richard Kruppe, 12312 Newport, Tugtin, asked if there was any definite date set for the results of the area study. Mr~ Gill said that Phase II of the study had been completed and they would now move into Phase III ~ He could give no estimated date for completion of Phase !ii. The Following Correspondence and Reports Received: 1. Los Angeles Times article from Norm Halus, Planning Commission Chairman, regarding Garden Grove's beautification campaign. 2~ Commendations for Police Department - Mr. & Mrs, J.L. Gardner, Mr. & Mrs. D.M. Persinger, Mr. & Mrs° R.M. Kent Mr. & Mrs. ViseUr (vacation checks); Congressman William J.B. Dorn (assistance in locating missing subject), 3. Commendation for Fire Department - Mr. & Mrs. Louis A. Riehl. 4, Transportation Association of Southern California (TASC) Resolution of the Executive Board. 5, Orange County Water District Report. 6, Resolution No. 3200, City of Orange, opposing State enactments imposing mandatory costs of enforcement on local governmental agencies. 7. Resolution No, 69-132, City of Santa Ana, re Corps of Engineers' work Ion the S.A. River & Sant'iago Creek. 8, Letter from John H. Siegel re Development Preview Committee. 9. Police Dept, activity summary for the month of August. 10. Building Dept~ report for the month of August. 11. Bulletin re Fall Recreation Program, ADJOURN- Moved by Mack~ seconded by C. Miller that meeting be adjourned MENT to a personnel session. Carried, " MAYOR ACTING SECRET~j{Y