The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 07-02-84TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSI AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETIN~ June 25, 1984 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGXANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF HINUTES PUBLIC CONCERNS REPORTS NO. 1 7-2-84 7:30 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER AINSLIE, PUCKETT, WEIL, WHITE, SHARP All present For Meeting Held June 11, 1984 Approved with one correction regarding name of Tusttn Meadows Homeowners Association President (limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO ll4E COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD CONSENT CALENDAR None ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION. 1. Resolution No. 2162 - General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d 1262 Bryan Avenue - Goldrich, Kest and Associates Approved, 6-0. Planning Commission Action Agenda June 25, 1984 Page 2 CO#TINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 Applicant: Location: Request: Matt Nisson 14462 Red Hill Avenue Authorization to change the designation of the Land Use element from Professional Office to either all Commercial or a combination of Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential Approved to recomend to the Ctty Counct], a Commercial land use designation, 4-0, riel] abstaining. 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3a - HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN A revised Housing Element of the General Plan consisting of statistics and programs specifically designed for the improvement of housing and provision of adequate sites for housing. This element is designed to accommodate the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. An environmental assessment of the Housing Element proposal is included and referenced within the document. Approved to recmmend adoption of the Revtsed Houslng Element to the City Counct], 5-0. 3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3b - OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN A combined and revised Open Space and Conservation Element that addresses the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources for the City of Tusttn. Programs and plans are proposed that will conservate, maintain and assure the continued availability of land for the production of food and fiber, for the enjoyment of scenic beauty, for recreation, and for the use of natural resources. An environmental assessment of the Open Space and Conservation Element is included and referenced within the document. Continued to next regular meeting. 4. GENE_PAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3c - RECREATZON ELEMENT Shows a comprehensive system of areas and public sites for recreation. Programs are proposed that address the community-wide needs and requirements for recreational areas. An environmental assessment of the Recreation Element is included and referenced wtthin the document. Continued to next regular meettng. PUBLZC HEARZNGS None. ADMINXSTRATXVE MA'FI'ERS A. Old Business 1. Land Use Study Concerning Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Presentation by Parents Who Care. Workshop scheduled for July 23, 1984 at 6:30 p.m. B. New Business 1. Parcel Map 83-1026 Southwest Corner "B" Street and Sixth Street Approved, 5-0. STAFF CO#CER#S 1. Report on Council Actions - June 18, 1984 Received and filed COle~ISSION CONCERNS ADJOURNHENT: At 9:31 p.m. to next regular meeting on July g, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. 1. L~, oauece ? ~ TUSTIN pLk~I~O COI~IISSION-. AGE~DA FOR REGULAR MEETING June 25, 1984 ?:00 p.m. 7:30 P.M., CIT¥ CoUNCiL c~AMBER AI~SLIE, puCKETT, WELL, W~ITE, S~ARP For Meeting Held dune [t, (limited to 3 minutes per perSOn for items not on the'agenda) IF YOU WISR TO SPEAK TO ll~E COMMISSION A SUBJECT, pLEASE FIlL OOT T~E CARDS ER S TABLE. ALSO, pLEASE B~: '~ FOR T~E RECORD MATTERS LISTED U~DER CoNSEnT ALL .-- ~ONS~DERED ROUTINE A~D W~LL CALENDAR A~ ~ T~ERE WILL BE BE E~ACTED BY ONE MOTION. SION OF T~ESE ITEMS ~,.o TO TRE TIME ur _. ~uE COMMISSIOn, v~"~..-,,,,,cc~ EMBERS ur ~- MOTION u"~ M REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS STAFF OR pUBLiC TO BE DIscUSSED A~D/OR REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION- Kest and Associates ~262 Bryan Avenue - Goldrich, CO~'l#OEO 9UBLIC REARINGS: Location: Request: Rea .ill esignation Of the Land Use e~ement §e ?eAuthortzatlO to either co erci l ot Professio"~ 0~ ce Resi ~e~%i a~ · planner Presentation: Edward Knight, ASsOClal~e -- ELEMENT~ merit of housing and 2. ~ of statistics · _ nt of the the improve _~ · designed to sed Xouslng .Eleme designed fo_.r_ This eteme_n? ~s ommunitY. A revi ..... snec~ftcall,Y~_, for housing- ,_ .~.mentS of the c and ?r.ogr~._'~ ~dequate $11,U~_ .f all economo :'~='"' rovls~o.n.~'~o oustng neeo~ ~ Paccommooam ~"~ h ~oustng Element proposal is inclUde~ An environmental assessment of the and referenced within the document- presentation: Edward Knight, AsSOciate planner aaUUeLd e3eposs¥ '3q6tuX paeMp3 :uot3e3ueseJd · ~uawnoop eq~ utq~tM peoueJe~aJ pu~ papnLout st LeSOdoad ~ueweL3 5u~snoH eq~ ~o ~uewssesse L~UaWUOapUa u¥ · X~unmmoo aq~ jo s~uem6es 3~mouooa L[~ jo spaau ~u~snoq aq~ a3~po~o3~ o3, peuStsap st ~ue~aLa stql 'Sutsnoq do~ se3ts a3~nbape ~o uotst~o~d pu~ 6u~snoq jo ~uama~o~d~ aq~ ao~ pau6~sep XLLe3~pads s~e~6oad pu~ sot~s~s jo 5ut~s~suoo u~w L~aue~ aq~ jo ~uameL3 5u~snox pespa~ ¥ NVgd 9VB3N3~ ¥3BV NI±Sfl£ 3H£ JO £N3~393 ~NISflOX - e~-~B 'ON £N3WQN3~¥ NVgd 9VB3N3~ aeUUeLd e~eposs¥ '~q§~ux pde~p3 :uo~e~uesa~d Le~ueptsa~ ~L~m~-eLd~Ln~ pue LepJemmoo ~o uoL~eu~qmoo ~ Jo Lepaatumoo LLe aaq~[a o~ eoL~O LeUO~SSe~Oad ~uemaLa asfl pue~ eq~ jo uo~eu§~sap aq~ e6ueq~ oh uo~ez~aoq~n¥ enue^¥ LL~H pa~ uosstN :~sanba~ :uot3e3oq :%u~otLdd¥ 'ON £N3NQN3N¥ NVqd 9VB3N3~ 'T :SgNI~3H 3IqS~d se3eposs¥ pue ~seN 'q3~apLo9 - enueA¥ ue&d8 Z9ZT P~-~8 'ON ~uampuem¥ UeLd Leaeue~ - g9Tg 'ON uo~nLose~ 'T 'N0113¥ 31VBVd3S BO5 BVQN39V3 IN3SNO3 3H1 ~0~ Q3AO~3B BO/ONV O3SSflDSIQ 3B S~31I 313133d5 IS3~b3B 3IqB~d BO 33V£S 'NOISSIN~OD 3HI 30 SB3BW3~ 5S39N~ NOI£O~ 3H£ NO ~NI£O^ 3H± ~0 3~£ 3X£ 0£ BOIBd SW3£I 3S3H£ 30 NOISS~3SIO 31¥~Vd3S ON 3B 99I~ 3~3H£ 'NOI£O~ 3NO AB Q31OVN3 3B 99I~ QN¥ 3NZ£ROB Q3a3QISNO3 3~¥ ~¥0N39¥3 £N3SNO3 ~3QNR Q3£SI9 .SB31£VN 99¥ ~r~ON31¥O IN3SN03 OBOO3B 3H£ BO3 SS3BOQV QNV 3WVN 99R3 BROA 3AI~ 3SV39d 'OSqV '39BVl S,~3~¥3dS 3H1 NO Q3£V309 SQBVO 3HI 1~0 9913 3SV39d 'Io3Defls V NO NOISSIWWO3 3H1 Ol ~¥3dS Ol HSIM flOA 3I (epue6e eq~ ua 3au swe3t ao~ uosaed aed se3nu~m £ o~ pe~mtL) SNB3ONO~ 3IlSnd S3~#IN 30 qYAO~dd¥ l~B6I 'II aunD pLaX But3aeW JO:l dBVHS '31IH~ '913M '.L.L3XDfld '319SNI¥ 11¥0 llOB NOI£WOANI/3ONYZ~311¥ JO 3~O3ld B38WVH3 913N~00 iiI3 "W'd O£:L · m'd O0:L ~B6I '~2 eun~ 9NI±33W B¥lf193B ~OJ VON39V #OIS$I~IO'J 9#I##Vld #I.LSRI 'm'd OE:£ ~ t86I '6 ~Lnc uo 6u~aau ~Ln6a~ %xau oI :lN3NIlaflo~av SNa33NO0 NOXSSZk~103 ~uemdoLeAeG &~unmmo~ &o ao~eJ~G 'mme~ 'G PLeUOO :uo~e~uesea~ LeaO ~86[ '8~ eun~ - suo~3¥ L~3uno3 uo ~Jodea SN~33NOO ~aeJ3S q~x~s pu~ 3ee~3S .G.. aeu~o9 3seRq~nos 9ZOZ-£8 den sseu~snG ~uemdoLeAeo ~unmmo3 &o ao33ea~g 'tumeq '~ pL~uoo seS~aeAeG 3~LOqO3L¥ ~o eL~S 5u~uae3uo3 &Pn3S es~ pu~q sseu~sn8 PLO *¥ Sa3~L¥# 3A~ZVil£S~N~NO¥ *euoN aeuu~Ld e3~ooss¥ '3q6~uN PJ~P3 · ~uaun3op eq3 u~q3~ pu~ pepnL3u~ s~ ~uemeL3 uo~3~ea3ea eq3 ~o ~uemssess~ L~3uemuoa~^ue u¥ · s~eJ~ L~UO~ea3e~ Jo& s~uemea~nba~ pue speeu ep~-&~unmmo3 eq3 sseappe 3eq3 pesodoad ea~ sm~a6oa~ · uo~3~eJ3ea ao& se~s 3~Lqnd pu~ s~eJ~ &o me3s[s eA~sueqeJdmoo ~ s~oqs £N3N3q3 NOZ£¥3a33U - 3~-~9 *ON £N3NdN3NV N¥qd q¥~3N39 ~euu~Ld e3~3oss¥ %q6~u3 Pa~P3 :uo~3~3uesead · ~uemn3op eq3 u~q3~ pe3ueae&ea pu~ pepn£3u~ s~ 3uemeL3 uo~e^aesuo9 pu~ e3~ds uedo eq3 ~o 3uemssess~ Lm. UamUOa~ue u¥ · se3~nosea L~Jn3~u ~o esn eq3 Jo& pue 'uo~3~ea3ea Jo~ '[3neeq o~ue3s &o ~uem~o~ue eq3 ao~ 'aeq~ pu~ poo~ uo~33npoad eq3 ao& pu~£ ~o X~L~q~L~ penu~3uo3 eq3 eanss~ pu~ u~3u~m 'e3~aesuo3 LL~ ~eq3 pesodoad ea~ su~Ld pu~ sm~J6Oad 'u~sn± eq3 Jo& se3anosea L~an3eu ~o uo~z~L~n pu~ 3uemdoLe~ep 'uo~3e~Jesuo3 sesseJpp~ 3~q~ 3uaaeL3 uo~aesuo3 pu~ e3~ds uedo pest,aa pu~ peu~qmo3 ¥ NVgd 9V~3N39 V3BV NI~S~£ 3H£ ~0 £N3N393 NOI£VAB3SNOO QN¥ 39¥dS N3dO - q£-tB 'ON &N3NQN3N¥ NYqd 9¥B3N3~ '£ (*luoo) S~NI~¥3H ~IqBIId Q3~NIJ.NO0 g e~ed ~86T '9Z eun~ epue~ uo~ssttumo3 6u~uueLd ~tINUTES OF A AGULAR ~£TING OF 'file PLANING COI~IISSION OF -rll£ cI~ OF TIJSTIN, CALIFORNIA June Il, 1984 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sharp at 7:08 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. The Director of Public Works gave an oral presentation regarding traffic circulation. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Well and the Invocation was given by Commissioner Puckett. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Also present: James Sharp, Chairman Ronald White, Chairman Pro Tem Mark Ainslie" Charles Puckett Kathy Weil None Donald O. Lamm, Director of Community Development Ed Knight, Associate Planner Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner Suzanne Atkins, Deputy City Attorney Janet Hester, Recording Secretary MINUltS Moved by Well, seconded by White to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 29, 1984, as submitted. Motion carried, 5-0. PUBLIC CONCERNS None. CONSENT CALENDAR None. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 Applicant: Location: Request: Matt Nisson 14462 Red Hill Avenue Authorization to change the designation of the Land Use Element from Professional Office to Commercial and Multiple-Family Edward Knight presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the Report to the Planning'Commission dated June 11, 1984. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. The following persons spoke in opposition to General Plan Amendment No. 84-2: Mr. John Baxter, and an unidentified member of the audience expressed opposition to the proposed amendment because of concerns regarding traffic, density and potential to decrease property values in the area. Mr. Lamm gave a brief explanation of the purpose of a general plan and zoning regulations. The following person spoke in favor of General Plan Amendment No. 84-2:. Mr. John Prescott stated the Nisson family had made many contributions to the community in the last three generations. Mr. Nisson, applicant, requested he be allowed to amend his request and have the General Plan designation be changed to all Commercial instead of Commercial and Multiple-Family. Mr. Lamm explained such a request would require re-advertisement of the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes June [[, [984 Page 2 Rosemary Rookers, no address given, requested clarification of the need for the General Plan and Zoning to be consistent. Mr. Lamm explained. Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. At the recommendation of the Deputy City Attorney, due to a possible conflict of interest as a member of the Board of Directors of the Tusttn Meadows Homeowners Assocation, Commissioner Weil stepped down from the dias. It.was moved by White, seconded by Ainslie, allow staff to re-advertise the public hearing reflecting Mr. Nisson's requested change. Motion carried, 4-0, Well abstaining. PUBLIC HEJkRI#GS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3a - HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN A revised Housing Element of the General Plan consi$i:ing of statistics and programs specifically designed for the improvement of housing and provision of adequate sites for housing. This element is designed to accommodate the housing needs of all economic segments of the communi ry. An environmental assessment of the Housing Element proposal is included and referenced within the document. Edward Knight presented staff's report and recommendation to continue as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June 11, 1984. Chairman Sharp asked if ~he East Tustin Specific Plan was considered when revising the Element. Mr. Knight responded that it was and that The Irvine Company was reviewing the Element. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak, it was moved by Puckett, seconded by Weil, to continue .the hearing to the next regular meeting on June 25, 1984. Motion carried, 5-0. 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3b - OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN A combined and revised Open Space and Conservation Element that addresses the conservation, development and utilization of the natural resources for the City of Tustin. Programs and plans are proposed that will conservate, maintain and assure the continued availability of land for the production of food and fiber, for the enjoyment of scenic beauty, for recreation and for the use of natural resources. An environmental assessment of the Open Space and Conservation Element is included and referenced within the document. Edward Knight presented staff's report and recommendation to continue as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June 11, 1984. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak, it was moved by Puckett, seconded by White, to continue the hearing to the next regular meeting on June 25, [984. Motion carried, 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes June 11, 1984 Page 3 3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3c - RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN Shows a comprehensive system of areas and public sites for recreation. Programs are proposed that address the community-wide needs and requirements for recreational areas. An' environmental assessment of the Recreation Element is included and referenced within the document. Edward Knight presented staff's report and recommendation to continue as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June II, I984. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:i4 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak, it was moved by White, seconded by Weil to continue the public hearing to the next regular meeting on June 2b, 1984. Motion carried, 5-0. 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3d Applicant: Goldrich, Kest and Associates Location.: 1262 Bryan Avenue Request: That the General Plan be amended from a single-family classification to a multiple-family classification Mary Ann Chamberlain presented staff's report and recommendation of approval as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June 11, 1984. Commissioner Well asked if the hearing had been properly advertised and if any response had been received. Ms. Chamberlain replied the hearing had been advertised and no response had been received. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. The following person spoke in favor of General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d: Mr. Emanuel Aftergut, representative of the applicant, stated the request was the first step in seeking approval to develop a board and care facility for senior citizens. Mr. Aftergbt stated he had distributed flyers to neighboring property owners announcing a meeting to discuss the project. Mr. Aftergut stated only one property owner had attended but the flyer did give his telephone number in case of additional questions. An unidentified member of the audience, address given as 1331 Bryan Avenue spoke in favor of the amendment. The following person spoke in opposition to General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d: Mr. Dennis Michaelman, Charloma Drive, expressed opposition to the amendment stating he felt the best use for the property would be single-family, in keeping with the development of the rest of the area. Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing'at 8:35 p.m. In response to Commission questions regarding control over development of the parcel, Mr. Lamm replied that the property could not be limited to a particular use, such as the board and care facility, but a use permit would be required, giving the Commission some discretionary control. He stated a specific plan would not be appropriate for such a small site. It was moved by White, seconded by Puckett, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval for consideration at the next meeting. Motion carried, 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes June 1[, 1984 Page 4 5. ZONE CHANGE NO. 84-2 Applicant: Location: Request: Garrison Management, [nc. 1122-1192 Laguna Road Change of zone from the Retail Commercial Commercial General (CG-PUD) classification (C-[) to the Donald Lamm presented staff's report and recommendation of approval as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June [[, 1984. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. The following persons spoke in favor of Zone Change No. 84-2: Mr. Steve Garrison, applicant, presented himself to the Commission to answer any questions. Mr. Wayne Day, no address given, spoke in favor of Zone Change No. 84-2. Seeing no one .else wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 8:48 p.m. [t was moved by Puckett, seconded by Weil, to recommend to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 84-2 by the .adoption of Resolution No. 2160. Motion carried, 5-0. AB#I#IS"rRATIV£ FIATI'ERS A. Old Business 1. Liquor in Proximity to Public Schools Donald Lamm presented staff's report and recommendation to continue the item at the request of the organization Parents Who Care, in order to allow them more time to prepare a presentation. In response to Commissioner White, Mr. Lamm stated the Council wanted the Commission to solicit opinions and report to the Council. By unanimous informal consent the Commission agreed to receive and file staff's report. B. New Business 1. Final Tract Map No. 12018 - 14452, 14472, 14492 Holt Avenue . Richard L. Pierce Mary Ann Chamberlain presented staff's report and recommendation of approval as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated June 11, 1984. It was moved by Weil, seconded by White to adopt ~esolution No. 2161 recommending to the City Council approval of Final Tract Map No. 12018. ST~F CONCERNS 1. Department Status Report Donald Lamm presented staff's report. Chairman Sharp asked staff to report back to t'he Commission regarding traffic generated by mini-warehouse storage facilities. Commissioner Well asked that an updated zoning map be sent to each Commissioner. By unanimous informal consent, the Commission agreed to receive and file staff's report. Planning Commission Minutes June 11, 1984 Page 5 COtlMISSION CONCERNS The Commission requested copies of the new Parkland Dedication Ordinance. The Commission directed staff to prepare a letter 'to the Director of Public Works thanking him for his presentation regarding traffic circulation. Commissioner Well stated that those Commissioners wishing to be re-appointed should have letters drafted and sent to the City Council. Commissioner Puckett asked that the Secretary draft his letter of request for re-appointment. AD~OURtI~ENT: At 9:33 p.m. to the next regular meeting on June 25, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester Recording Secretary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9.7 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2162 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE- FAMILY RELATIVE TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1262 BRYAN AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tusttn does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A.' Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the state of California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General Plan. B. That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of the state of California, a public hearing was dully advertised and held on June 11, 1984 on the application of the property owner initiated by Goldrich, Kest and Associates to consider General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d to reclassify the property to Residential Multiple-Family use. C. That a Negative Declaration has been applied for to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. D. That the change in classification would he in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the surrounding property owners. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d amending the Land Use Element to reclassify the property at 1262 Bryan Avenue from Single-Family Residential to Multiple-Family Residential. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 25th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary Report to the Planning Commission CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NO. i June 25, 1984 SUBJECT: Continued Consideration of General Plan Amendment No. 84-2 APPLICANT: Matt Nisson LOCATION: 14462 Red Hill Avenue - Northeast Corner of Walnut Av~n~e and Red Hill Avenue ZONING: Suburban Residential (R-4) District REQUEST: Amending the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan from Professional Office to either all Commercial or a combination of Commercial and Multiple-Family Background A Land Use Element change from P~ofessional Office to Commercial and Multiple-Family was considered by the Planning Commission at public hearings held on May 29 and June 11, 1984. The staff reports for these hearings are enclosed. At the June 11, 1984 meeting the applicant requested that the Multiple-Family designation be removed from consideration, and requested that the entire site be given consideration as a Commercial designation. The amended request required a readvertisement prior to a public hearing by the Planning Commission. Discussion As stated earlier, the current land use designation for the property is Professional Office (PR) and the zoning for the property is Suburban Residential {R-4). According to State Planning Law, both the land use designation and zoning must be in conformance. The applicant is requesting a change from the current Professional Office designation to a Commercial designation. The PR land use allows only professional office uses, while the Commercial designation would allow both retail business uses and/or professional offices. Essentially, the Commercial designation allows the applicant greater flexibility for land use development. Community Development Department Continued Public Hearing No. 1 June 25, 1984 Page 2 If the property remains with a Professional designation, the zoning must be changed to Professional Office {PR}, while a Commercial designation would require a change to a Commercial zone and staff would recommend Commercial General (CG). A land use intensity chart comparing the two zones shows that the intensity in which the land could be developed for either zone is basically the same. Each has a thirty-five-foot {35') height restriction, and setbacks are basically the same, although the CG zone is slightly more restrictive in the side and rear setbacks. The removal of Multiple-Family residential zoning (R-4) would result in a lost opportunity for affordable housing. The 2.4 acre site that was.proposed as housing would have supported approximately thirty-five (35) dwelling units. The loss of units, though, will not conflict with policies or programs in the City's Housing Element. Recommendation Should the Commission wish to designate the subject property in its entirety for commercial uses, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 2156, attached to this transmittal. Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments: Report to the Planning Commission May 29, 1984 Report to the Planning Commission June 11, 1984 Land Use Intensity Chart Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 2156 Community Development Department 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2156 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERI"f KNOWN AS 14462 RED HILL AVENUE AND SHOWN AS EXHIBIT "A" ENCLOSED The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The A. Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: Section 65356.1 of the Government Cdde of the State of California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General Plan. That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of the State of California, a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on May 29, 1984, on the application of Matt Nisson, to reclassify 14462 Red Hill Avenue to Commercial as shown in Exhibit "A" enclosed. C. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the requested change, and the Planning Commission hereby recommends approval to the City Council. D. That the change in classification would be in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the surrounding property owners. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 84-2, amending the Land Use Element to reclassify 14462 Red Hill Avenue to Commercial as shown in Exhibit "A". PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 29th day of May, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester Recording Secretary "I'IIH CFlU LU LU Report to the .. Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 L May 29, 1984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-2 APPLICANT: Matt Ntsson LOCATIO#: 14462 Red Hill Avenue, northeast corner of Walnut Avenue and Red Hill Avenue GENERAL PLA~: ZONING: REQUEST: Professional Office Land Uses Suburban Residential (R-4) District Amending the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan from Professional Office to Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential Background '. The subject property is a 4.2 acre site located on the corner of Walnut Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. It presently has one single-family home which is surrounded by fruit trees. The subject parcel has virtually no right-of-way improvements, curbs, gutters or sidewalks. This property has a land use designation of Professional (PR) and a zoningI designation of Suburban Residential District (R-4). According to State Planning Law, the authorized General Plan Land use designation and the City's zoning ordinance must be in conformance. The applicant is requesting that the land use be amended for the subject property and that applicable zoning be adopted for the land use designation. Discussion The State of California dictates that a city can amend its General Plan a total of four times each year, and when it deems the change to be in the public interest. This statement has been interpreted to mean that the amendments should benefit the community rather than a property owner who is proposing the change. The subject site has a land use designation of Professional (PR) meaning that only a use of professional offices can be built on the site. It has had this designation since the present land use element was adopted in April of 1973, The current zoning on the site is Suburban Residential District (R-4), which allows for a variety of residential land uses, from farming of agricultural CommuniW Development DeparTment' General Plan Amendment No. 84-2 Hay 29, ~984 Page ~ This district allows a density of up Obviously, the property's zoning is crops to multiple-family apartment units. to one dwelling unit per 3,000 square feet. not consistent with the General Plan. ThiS' error apparently occured several years ago and remained undiscovered until recently. The applicant is proposing a change to a commercial designation along the Red Hill Avenue frontage and a multiple-family designation along the Walnut Avenue frontage. The commercial area encompasses approximately 1.4 acres after all dedications, and the multtple-fa~ly is approximately 2.4 acres after dedications. Surrounding land uses in the area include: a single-family, one-story subdivision to the east and north of the site; Tustin Meadows subdivision to the south; a neighborhood shopping center to the southeast; and apartments to the west. In determining the applicability of the proposed land use designations, criteria such as community benefit, existing land uses, and the range of conceivable land uses for the site were considerations. A change from professional office designation to commercial along the Red Hill Avenue frontage would allow a greater range of possible land uses. Commercial allows for all commercial retail activities and offices, while Professional allows only office developments. While the retail potential has not been determined, the Commercial designation would still provide more flexibility than a Professional designation. A change to Multiple-family residential for the remaining property, reflecting it's current zoning, would provide the community a potential housing opportunity. However, staff recommends that several criteria be used when a development project or zone change is proposed. Any proposed density for the site should not exceed the density of the current R-4 district, one unit per 3,000 square feet, or 14.5 units per acre. Serious consideration must be given to building setbacks for two-story structures near the single-family subdivision. The entire subdivision is one-story, and staff feels any proposed project should take this into consideration. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 2156, recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 84-2 be adopted. Edward Knight Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments: Land Use Intensity Comparison General Plan Amendment Map Area Map Resolution No. 2156 Community Devetopmem Deparlment Land Use [ntenslty Comparison Land Use Designation Proposed Zoning Development Standards Mlntnum Sq. Ft. Height Setbacks 1. front 2. side 3. rear PR Commercial PR CG 7,200 35' 3,000 35' 20' 10' 5' 10' 5' one-story 15' (if 10' two-story adjacent to R-l) The above comparison shows that the Commercial General (CG) zone (which is the applicable zone for a Commercial land use designation) is either as restrictive, or more, as the Professional zone (PR) that would be adopted for Professional land use designation. communip/ Deveiopmen~ Departmen: I R2 2000 R3 1500 R3 4000 I R 3 1500 R 3 2000 "~R4 R4 PO 6000 R1 MHP P&l ,. §~ R3 · = 1750 {4 R4 · 1111-1 Ci~I~i '] "? · 'I'IIH (3=i1:1 U,I U,i U.I Report to the PuBLic HEAR ,G H0.2 , Planning Commission June 25, 1984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-3a - Housing Element of the Tustin Area General Plan Background According to State Government Code Section 65588d(1), each city and county in the state of California must revise its Housing Element each five years, beginning July 1, 1984. Each element must be prepared under the newly developed 10.7 Article provisions which outline areas that must be addressed. As a part of the process, the draft element must undergo a public participation review. The statutes do not outline the method for this review and, in Tustin's case, a Citizens Advisory Committee was formed of local citizens, property owners and housing industry representatives. This review was completed and became a part of the draft element. Additionally, the state of California must review and comment on each draft Housing Element. The legislative body of the city or county must consider these comments prior to adoption of the element. The City has received a verbal response from the State Housing and Community Development Department and the contents of those comments have been reviewed by staff. Discussion For the sake of brevity, and not to attempt to rewrite the Housing Element in this staff report, only certain areas will receive more than cursory comments. Chapters II and III contain statistical data covering current conditions, trends and constraints to the development, improvement and maintenance of housing. Nearly all of this data must be included as a part of the element as dictated by the State. The main thrust of this data is to provide a base to develop programs and implementation measures and as a way to educate policy makers and the general public as to the make-up of the community. The fourth chapter contains the City's housing goals, objectives, sites available and implementation programs and represents the most significant portion of the element. This is the one in which both the Citizens Committee and the state of California concentrated their comments. Community Development Department General Plan Amendment No. 84-3a June 25, 1984 Page 2 The recommended changes by the Citizens Committee are enclosed and represent additions and deletions that are minor corrections and major alterations. Most changes are clarifications to the draft, but the group did delete one program and add two new programs. Included in the draft is a bonding program, encouraging the City to use State or County tax free revenue bonds utilized for affordable ownership or rental housing. Each of the changes has been either underlined to indicate an addition or crossed through to indicate that the section was removed. The Committee met four times before completing its review, with the Committee authorizing Chairman Franz Schulte to transmit the amended draft to the Planning Commission and City Council for public hearings. Surprisingly, the State's comments were light and basically administrative in nature. They had no new programs to propose and were generally complimentary of the Element. Below is the list of comments from the State and staff's response to them. 1. A change in the RHAM Regional Share Figures: Page 27 of the document indicates that the City challenged the RHAM figures and received a re-allocation for low- and very-low-income households. The City must show its method in the appendix documenting why the re-allocation was given. Staff will enclose all letters prepared by the department to SCAG that resulted in.the re-allocation. 2. The State wanted an expansion on the type of improvements for which the City uses its HCDA Block Grant funds: They are used for rehabilitation of housing units and public improvement projects affecting target areas. 3. The State wanted an estimated number of upper income units that will be constructed in the next five years. These units do not require special housing programs and are basically governed by private market constraints: Estimating projected growth in the East Tustin area, staff predicts that upwards of 1,000 of these units will be constructed in the next five years. 4. The State wants an additional objectives section added called "Conservation Objectives". This outlines the means the City employs to conserve existing affordable housing units: In the case of the City of Tustin, we have a specific mobile home park zone (MHP) that helps protect existing parks from conversion to another use. Additionally, we require a use permit prior to conversion of apartments to condominiums, and we allow new apartments by right in the R-3 zone, while condominiums would require a use permit before construction can begin. 5. In the existing implementation programs, the State wants the City to identify the responsible agency administering the various programs. Staff will go through each program and identify the responsible public agency. Community Development Department General Plan Amendment'No. 84-3a June 25, 1984 Page 3 It is important to realize that the State takes the housing issue seriously and the Housing Element represents more than just words on paper. The State expects that the City will make more than a good faith effort to implement programs and monitor them and to further evaluate the Element yearly to ensure that goals are achieved. The State also expects that the quantified objectives identified on Page 62 will be achieved within five years and if the number of units indicated are not built, the City will have to account for that. Through research and citizen input staff feels that the draft element is workable and realistic in its intended goals. In order to streamline the oyerall size of the General Plan, the appendix of the Housing Element will be under separate cover, The appendix will contain the technical data tables, minutes of the Advisory Committee, resolutions and environmental assessment. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution recommending adoption of the Housing Element to the City Council. Associate Planner No. 2163 EMK:jh Attachments: Letter from Franz Schulte Minutes of Advisory Committee Advisory Committee Changes to Draft Element Resolution No. 2163 Community Development Department PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 Planning Commission June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-3a Housing Element of the Tustin Area General Plan Discussion According to State Government Code Section 65588d(1), each city and co~ty in the State of California must revise its Housing Element each five ~ars, · beginning July 1, 1984. As a part of this revision, the State must review~each element &nd comment on its adequacy. The legislative body of the City.or County must consider these comments prior to adoption of the element. ~ The Housing Element was submitted to the State on April 1, 1984 for their review, which should have encompassed 45 days. The State has ruled, though, that all Elements developed under the new 10.7 Article' are considered new elements, requiring a 90-day review instead of the 45-day review for revised elements. The review period ends July 1, but the State assured staff that preliminary comments would arrive before June 1, 1984. The comments have not arrived and staff is requesting continuance to the June 25, 1984 meeting. Even though the Planning Commission .is not required to consider the comments from the State, staff would like to give the Commission the opportunity to review these. Enclosed in this staff report are the recommended changes to the draft element by the Housing Element Citizens Advisory Committee. Each of these changes has either been underlined or crossed through to indicate that the section was removed. The Committee met four times, reviewed and amended several sections of the draft element. A letter from Franz Schulte, chairman of the Committee, transmits the recommended changes and recommends that appropriate public hearings be held on the draft Housing Element. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing to the June 25, 1984 regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission. Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments Community Development Department May 9, ~984 Honorable Chairman & Members Honorable Mayor & Members of the Planning Commission of the City Council City of Tustin City of Tustin Tustin, California 92680 Tustin, California 92680 Subject: Revised Houstn~ Element of Tustin General Plan Pursuant to California State taw and the Guidelines for the development of a Housing Element of the General Plan, a Housing Element Advisory Committee was appointed by the Mayor to achieve public participation in the development of the Housing Element. The Commlttee elected Franz Schulte as Chairman and Coralee Gapastione as Secretary' to conduct and record the deliberations of the Committee. Meetings were held and a draft element was reviewed by the committee. Amendments and additions were made to the draft that reflected the individual and collective-concerns of the members. Transmitted herewith is a copy of the revised Housing Element. The Committee, by unanimous action of those present and voting at a meeting held on May 9, 1984, recommends~ the necessary publ!c hearings and the adoption of the Tustin Housing Element as submitted. Respectfully yours, ~mmittee CITY OF TUSTN HOUSING ELEN£NT ADVISORY ~OI~ITTEE Minutes March 28, 1984 The first meeting of the Housing Element Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:10 p.m. on Wednesday, March 28, 1984 in the City Hall Conference Room, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL: Present: Mary Ann Chamberlain Jeff McElderry Ken Fleagle Ed Knight Don Lamm Kathy Well Mayor Ronald B. Hoesterey, welcomed the Committee and thanked them for their participation. Moved by McElderry, seconded by Chamberlain, to nominate Franz Schulte as Chairman of the Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Well, seconded by Chamberlain, to nominate Cora Lee Gapastione as Secretary of the Committee. Motion carried unanimously. The Committee discussed the reasons for reviewing a City Housing Element, and its basic content. Committee Chairman Franz Schulte discussed the future dates and anticipated number of meetings necessary to complete a review of the element. Staff and Kathy Well felt possibly four or five meetings of one hour each would be necessary. The Committee agreed that Wednesdays and Mondays were the only days available to those present for future meetings. The next meeting date selected by the Committee was Monday, April 16, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room. Prior to that meeting, agendas will be mailed, along with copies of the Housing Element to those not in attendance. Chairman Franz Schulte requested a roster of Committe member names, addresses and telephone numbers be forwarded to all Committee members. Kathy Well reviewed her participation in the preparation of the 1979 Element. Chairman Franz Schulte adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Housing Element Committee Coordinator CITY OF TUSTIN HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES April 16, 1984 The second meeting of the Housing Element Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:25 p.m. on Monday, April 16, 1984 in the City Hall Conference Room, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL: Present: Mary Ann Chamberlain Jeff McElderry Ken Fleagle Coralee Gapastione Franz Schul~l~ Kathy Weil The minutes of March 28th were approved. Ken Fleagle reviewed the letter sent to the State which outlines the contents of the Housing Element's adequacy and informed the committee that the Housing Element is to be adopted by the City by July 1, 1984. Chairman Schultze opened the meeting to receive committee comments on the Housing Element. A round table discussion commenced and it was agreed that the discussion would continue at the next meeting. Moved by Weil, seconded by Chamberlin, to-have staff revi'ew and amend Page 60 paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 to reflect discussion. The next meeting date selected by the committee was Wednesday, May 2, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room. Prior to that meeting, agendas will be mailed. Chairman Franz Schulte adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Coralee Gapastione Committee Secretary CITY OF TUSTIN HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES May 2, 1984 The third meeting of the Housing Element Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:25 p.m. on Wednesday, May 2, 1984 in the City Hall Conference Room, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL Present: Edward Knight John Erskine Ken Fleagle Coralee Gapastione Franz Schulte Kathy Weil Hollis Griffin It was moved by Weil, seconded by Griffin,to approve the minutes of the April 16th meeting. Chairman Schulte asked Ken Fleagle to review the submitted revisions to the Housing Element. Ken Fleagle presented the following revisions to paragraphs 4 and 5 of page 60: Original: Revision: 4. A variety of housing styles with proximity to places of employment; public services and facilities; and alter- native transportation means between places of residence and employment. 4. Reducing dependency upon the automobile for transportation by locating housing facilities convenient to service and employment'centers thereby enabling walking or bicycling to places of employment. Original: 5. Revision: 5. Economic integration of housing accommodations within the sphere of influence to preclude ghettos of the poor and minorities or enclaves for the wealthy. The availability of a variety of housing accommodations and housing values to enable economic integration of neighborhoods and communities. Moved by Weil, seconded by Griffin to receive and approve amendments for paragraphs 4 and 5, page 60,as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Ken Fleagle presented a revised paragraph 3 as follows: Original: 3. A reasonable balance between ownership and rental housing accommodations with single family ownership representing a majority of the housing stock. City of Tustin Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes 5-2-84 Page 2 Revision: 3. An increased ratio of owner occupied single family housing units to multi-family rental units to achieve a majority of owner occupied dwellings in the interest of community identity and stability. The committee reviewed the proposed revision to paragraph 3 and proposed the following: The City promote and encourage the availability of owner- occupied units for the purpose of correcting the inbalance between rental and owner-occupied housing. It was moved by Erskine, seconded by Griffin,to approve the committee's recommendation for paragraph 3. The motion passed unaniously. Revisions were to page 61, Section B, Objectives, were presented by Ken Fleagle. The revisions were: Original: The responsibility of the City is to promote housing opportunities and to remove barriers to the construction of housing accommodations. Revision: The responsibility of the City is to encourage the construction of affordable housing and to assist in its creation by facilitating the review and approval of development permits. The Chair entertained a motion to approve revised page 61 as presented by Ken Fleagle. Moved by Weil, seconded by Griffin, to approve page 61. The motion carried unanimously. Ken Fleagle presented revisions to page 68 as follows: Original: The East Tustin area does not represent an immediate potential for development of residential units, and those sites within the City that do are limited in scope. The City has attempted to improve housing opportunities for low to moderate income housing by re- zoning the 6.03 acre site from Manufacturing to Planned Development, creating a potential for 156 new units. Any other opportunities to provide low income housing in the next five years will have to occur from recycling or redevelopment. Revision: The East Tustin area does not represent an immediate potential for development of low and very low income family residential units, and those sites within the City that do have the potential for low income housing sites are limited in scope. The City has attempted to improve housing opportunities for low to moderate income families by rezoning the 6.03 acre site at the southerly terminus of Newport Avenue from Manufacturing to Planned Development, creating a potential for 156 new units. Any other opportunities to provide low income housing in the next five years will result from recycl- ing or redevelopment. City of Tustin Housing Element Adviosry Committee Minutes 5-2-84 Page 3 It was moved by Griffin, seconded by Weil, to approve page 68 as presented. The motion carried unanimously. Ken Fleagle presented an additional paragraph for page 80 as follows: Unfinished Housing. Developers will be encouraged to offer two story houses with the second floor unfinished. Electrical and plumbing connections would be required,but the application of drywall, mould- ings and painting could be accomplished by the owner as space needs dictated. The intent is to provide livable housing accommodations for new families at a reduced cost with the opportunity of expanding the habitable area as families increased in size. The committee revised the paragraph as follows: Basic Housing. To reduce initial housing costs, the City will encourage the construction of housing units that incorporate design features providing the opportunity of expanding the habitable areas as families needs change. It was moved by Erskine, seconded by Griffin to approve the revised paragraph 13 on page 80. The moti.on passed unaniously. A discussion was held on the Implementation Program found on page 76, paragraph 2 - Employer Contribution to Housing Costs. Both Weil and Schulte requested this section be deleted as it could potentially have a negative impact on industry in Tustin. Due to a lack of a quorum (Erskine and Griffin left at 8:45) the discussion was tabled. Gapastione agreed to look into tax exempt revenue bond financing as alternate financing program. The next meeting date was set for Wednesday, May 9, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Franz Schulte adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Coralee Gapastione Committee Secretary CITY OF TUSTIN HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES May 9,' 1984 The fourth meeting of the Housing Element Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:25 p.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 1984 in the City Hall Conference Room, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL: Present: Edward Knight John Erskine Hollis Griffin Ken Fleagle Coralee Gapastione Franz Schulte Kathy Weil It was moved by Weil, seconded by Erskine, to approve the minutes of the May 2 meeting as read by the secretary. The motion carried unaniously. It was moved by Weil, seconded by Gapastione, to delete paragraph 2, page 76, Employer Contributions to Housing Costs which read: Employer Contributions to Housing Costs. A proposal will be presented through the League of California Cities for State enabling legislation authorizing an employee tax for the purpose of contributing to the cost of low and moderate income housing. To be substituted with the following: e Bonding Programs. The City will study recent bonding authority legislation and will encourage utilization of State or County issue of these bonds. In keeping with the community goal of encouraging owner-occupied housing units, the City will place special emphasis on those bonding programs that promote homeownership, such as SB- 1862, AB-3507 and Section 235 of the Housing and Urban Recovery Act of 1983. The City will also consider the creation of rental occupied construction through the use of the AB-665 program. The motion carried unaniously. It was moved by Erskine, seconded by Weil, to amend page 72, paragraphs 5 and 9: 5. Secondary Residential Units. The zoning ordinance has been amended to authorize granny flats and secondary residential dwelling units. 9. Replacement Housin9. The demolition of housing units is likely to occur only within the Redevelopment areas. The Redevelopment Plan requires the replacement of housing units on a one-for-one basis. City of Tustin Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes 5/9/84 Page 2 To read: Secondary Residential Units. The zoning ordinance has been amended to authorize granny flats in the R-1 District and secondary residential dwelling unit in the E-4 District. Replacement Housing. The demolition of housing units is likely to occur only within the Redevelopment areas. The Redevelopment Plan requires the replacement of the housing units. The motion carried u~aniously . It was moved by Erskine, seconded by Hollis, to delete paragraph 3 on page 58 which read: Contrary to arguments made for rezoning to accommodate multi- family developments, construction costs for townhomes are equal to those of single family dwellings. Financing costs are constant. The buyer ofatownhouse pays 6% more for land costs, profit, sales expenses and development costs than the single family dwelling unit purchaser. The conclusion is drawn that the most economical housing would be smaller units of single-family detached dwellings, if con- struction costs were the only variables. The motion carried and no substitute language was added. It was moved by Weil, seconded by Erskine, to revise page 62 by adding the follow- ing language: The following objectives are the projected number and types of units to be constructed within the time frame of this element and are intended to comply with the State Government Housing Element code number 65583 -10.6. The motion carried unaniously. It was moved by Weil, seconded by Schulte, that the Housing Element Advisory Committee endorse the document as amended and authorize Chairman Schulte to send the document to the City Council and to represent the views of the committee to the Planning Commission and City Council. The motion carried unaniously. Chair adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Coralee Gapastione Committee Secretary prepared to · ~ess these and other issues, qntil infra- structure is provided, the City will have 'co look for housing opportunities in Infill projects and recycle of older homes in R-3 zones i'nto higher density projects. A set of quantified objectives are adopted as a guide]ine toward meeting Tustin's housing needs through 2988. It is recognized that due to limitations the objectives cannot satisfy the total needs as projected by i~e Regional Housing Allocation Model (RHAM). The Implementation program presents a set of on-going programs that will continue to be utilized, along with a set of new programs. The proposed new programs include: 1. Housing Affordability Study for East Tustin area; 2. Bonding Prog6ams; 3. Land Cost Write-Downs; 4. HCDA Funds for Rehabilitation; 5. Economic Integration within Sphere of Influence; 6. Senior Citizen Housing; 7. Substandard Housing; 8. Solar Energy and Conservation; 9. Filtering of Housing Units 20. Recycling of Existing Housing; 22. Department of Housing and Urban Development Project; and 22. Basic Housing. Demonstration -7- to $38.00 per square foot while custom housing has a $45.00 per square foot construction cost. The detached single'family dwelling represents 45% of all housing sales during 1983 in Orange County. The cost of constructing a single-family dwelling represents 40% of the sales price. The average townhouse constructed during [983 in Orange County has a sales price of' $[40,600. This represen~ a [,267 square foot structure with 2.[ bedrooms. The cost of construction at $38.00 per square foot is e~dal to the costs for single family detached structures. Townhouse sales represent 2[% of all housing sales in Orange County during 1983. The cost of construction of a townhouse represents 34% of the sales price. -58- ~o $38.00 per square foot while custom housing has a $45.00 per square foot construction cost. The detached single-family dwelling represents 45~ of all housing sales during 1983 in Orange County. The cost of constructing a single-family dwelling represents ~0% of ~he sales price. The average townhouse constructed during '1983 in Orange County has a sales price of $140,600. This represents a 1,267 square foot structure with 2.1 bedrooms. The cost of construction at $38.00 per square foot is equal to the' costs for single family detached structures. Townhouse sales represent 215 of all housing sales in Orange County r during 1983. The cost of construction of a townhouse represents 34% of the sales price. l~-fami 1 townh arg acc ~te -58- Housing accommodations by 3ocation, type, price and ownership or ~enancy for all residents of ~he cornauni~y regardless of Jncome, age, race, sex, marl~al s=atus, or ethnic background. The absence of discrimination in housing for any arbitary factor related to income, age, race, sex, marital status or ethnic background. The promotion and encouragement of owner-occupied housing for the purpose of correctin~ the imbalance between rental and owner-occupied units. Reducinq dependenc~ upon the automobile for transportation by locating housing facilities convenient to service and employment centers thereb7 enablin~ walkin~ or bicTclin~ %Q places of employment. The availability of a variety of housin~ accommodations and housin~ values to enable economic inteqration of neiqhborhoods and communities. 6. The conservation and improvement of existing residential neighborhoods. -60- The preservation of hi stori c significant residential structures. and architecturally 8. Housing stock that is safe, decent and affordable. 8. Objectives (1983-1988) The following quantified objectives are adopted as guidelines toward meeting Tustin's housing needs through 1988. It is recognized that these objectives cannot satisfy the total needs as projected by the Regional Housing Allocation Model.. Construction of new units will depend upon the timing' of the - landowner and developer for the submission of subdvision plans to meet market demands. Housing subsidies will depend upon the availability of federal funds. Redevelopment projects are subject to the, interests of private developers. The construction of secondary units depends upon the desires of the property owners as related to family needs for housing and economic resources. The ~chievement of the housing objectives are thus dependent upon the -private sector and other governmental agencies. The responsibility of the City is to ~ncoura~e the construction of affordable housin~ and to assist in its creation by facilitatinq the review and approval of development permits. -61- The following objectives are the projected number and type of units to be constructed within the time frame of this element*: Type Very Low Low Moderate Total East Tustin Subdivision - Senior Citizen Housing (Special Needs) [0 50 Granny Flats & 2nd Units 5 Apartments (In-fil~ units & Redevelopment P.rojects) 20 55 Apartments (Integration Within Sphere of Influence) - 150 100 500 600 50 - 150 225 TOTAL UNITS 35 365 700 1,lO0 Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Existing Units Rehabi I i tati on 5O Participation in the HCDA program, as administered by Orange County, with $250,000 available for renovation and rehabilitation of apartments, single-family dwellings and mobile homes during the five year period of this element should accommodate the rehabilitation of 50 housing units. * This is intended to comply with Section 65583(b) -62- The East Tustin area does not represent an immediate potential for development of low- and very-low-income family residential units~ and those sites within the City that do have the potential for low-income housin~ sites are limited in scoper The City has attempted to improve housing opportunities for low to moderate income housing by rezontng the 6.03 acre site from Manufacturing to Planned Development, creating a potential for 156 new units. Any other opportunities to provide low income housing in the next five years will have to occur from recycling or redevelopment. Within the City, there are approximately 13.2 acres of R-$ (Multiple-Family) zoned property that have old single-family dwellings on the lots. There is a potential that these can recycle to a higher density, although this change is predicated on several circumstances. Some of these units are within redevelopment agencies, and all of them are located in HCD target areas which are eligible for low-interest rehabilitation, loans. Although nearly all of these houses are old, not all are dilapidated or ready to be demolished. Many of the people living in these homes do not wish to sell. Although some of the homes are within a redevelopment agency, it has been the Agency's policy not to condemn owner occupied housing. In spite of these constraints, an opportunity does exist for recycling. Operating as a catalyst, the City should encourage -68- Equity-sharing. An equity-sharing ownership program has been approved and is operating at the Rancho San Juan condominium conversion located on Red Hill Avenue at San Juan. Secondar7 Residential Units. The zoning ordinance has been amended to authorize granny flats in the R-[ District and secondary residential dwellino units in the E-~ District. Occupancy Ordinance. A Certificate of Occupancy is required for new construction and prior to the sale of converted units. 7. Condominium Conversions. Developers converting apartments to condominiums are required to process a use permit, provide relocation assistance, and/or to provide incentives and assistance for purchase of the units by low income families. 8. Demolition and Conversion to Non-residential Use. The Zoning Ordinance and Building Codes restrict and regulate the conversion of residential units to other uses. Replacement Housing. The demolition of housing units is likely to occur only within the Redevelopment areas. The Redevelopment Plan requires the replacement of housing units. required to comply With state accommodation of the handicapped. specifications for F. New and Expanded Implementation Programs The following programs are in addition to the on-going programs that have been adopted and implemented to assist in providing affordable housing within the City of Tustin: Housing Opportunities for All Economic'Segment~.. The City will adopt an affordable housing program as a part of the East Tustin Specific Plan. The City will take into consideration-the allocation of low- and moderate-housing needs as defined by SCAG in developing an affordable housing strategy. Housing policies will also be considered and incorporated in the affordable housing plan. Bonding Programs. The City will study recent bonding authority legislation and will encourage utilization of State or Count~ issue of these bonds. In keeping with the pommuntty qoal of encouraqinq owner-occupied housin~ units, the City will place special emphasis on those bondinq proqrams that promote homeownershipa such as SB, 1862~ AB 3507 and Section 235 of the Housing and Urban Recovery Act of 1983. The City will also consider the creation of rental occupied construction through the usq of the AB 665 program. -76- 12. Basic Housing. To reduce initial housing costs, the City will encourage the construction of housin~ units that incorporate design features providing the op.portunit~ ~ expand habitable area as family needs chanoe_ 13. On-Going Review of Housin~ Element Programs. From the date of adoption of the Housing Element, the Community Development Department will prepare an annual report to the Planning Commission to assess if housing objectives are being met. The report will cover the previous years accomplishments tOward meeting objectives, plus a proposed plan for the upcoming years. This report should be done in conjunction with the annual status report of the City's HCD funding program. G. Re~oval of Governmental Consl~'atnts Land Use Controls. Lot sizes can be reduced from the 7,200 square foot minimum upon approval of a specific plan for planned communities. Zero side yards and the consolidation of open space for each lot can be converted to common open space with utility. In addition to the increased utility of the open space, construction costs can be lowered by clustered development. The adoption of neighborhood plans for the East Tustin area will remove the necessity for lengthy hearings -80- HOUSING ELEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER ROSTER Mr. Jeff McElderry 1560 East Edinger Santa Ana, California (714) 835-5800 92704 Ms. Mary Ann Chamberlain c/o City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 (714) 544-8890 Mr. Franz Schulte Basic-Four Corporation 14101Myford Road Tustin, California 92680 (714) 730-2404 Ms. Cora Lee Gapastione The Irvine Company 550 Newport Avenue Newport Beach, California (714) 720-2333 92660 Mr. John Erskine. Executiv~ Director Building Industry Association of Southern California 2001 East 4th Street Santa Aha, California 92705 (714) 547-3042 Mr. Hollis Griffin Tustin Unified School District 300 South "C" Street Tustin, California 92680 (714) 730~7301 Mr. Donald Bird Bird & Associates 12841 Newport Avenue Tustin, California 92680 (714) 832-8800 Mrs. Kathy Well 1702 Summerville Tustin, California (714) 832-3390 92680 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2163 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING coMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE REVISED HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That Section 65588d(1) of the Government Code requires the City to revise its Housing Element every five years beginning July 1, 1984. B. That a Housing Element has been prepared with the participation of a Citizens Advisory Committee. C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on the proposed Housing Element. D. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council. E. That the State of California has been submitted a draft Housing Element and has reviewed said document and submitted a response to staff regarding the draft element. F. That the adoption of the Housing Element would be in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public. G. That the appendix of the Housing Element shall be a separate document from the main body of the Element. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the Housing Element as submitted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 25th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary Planning Commission June 25, Z984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-3b - Open Space and Conservation Element of the Tustin Area General Plan Background The Open Space Element and Conservation Element are ~o of the mandatory nine elements, as dictated by the state of California. The city of Tustin adopted its first Open Space and Conservation Element in July of 1972. The elements are usually combined under one document since many of the issues they cover are similar. Depending on circumstances, an element of the General Plan can be useful for a period of ten to fifteen years. With regard to the previous Open Space and Conservation Element, its circumstances changed dramatically with the annexation of the East Tustin area. While it was adequate at the time, this element does not address several important issues which are a part of the East Tustin Area, and an updated element is needed to address these issues and form policy. As the East Tustin Specific Plan is finalized and brought for approval, decisions will have to be made regarding these issues, and a working knowledge prior to those public hearings will help decision makers. The State statutes indicate that a conservation element must "provide for the conservation, development, and use of natural resources, including water, forests, soils, rivers, lakes, and other natural resources". The open space element must "detail plans and measures for the preservation of open space for natural resources, for the managed production of resources, for outdoor recreation, and for the public health' and safety". Policies and implementation measures must be included that address these broader goals. Staff inventoried the natural resources, production resources, outdoor recreation and special management resources of the community and prepared issues summarizing this inventory. From the inventory and issues, goals and policies were developed, with implementation measures proposed to meet the identified goals and policies. Community Development Department General Plan Amendment No. 84-3b June 25, 1984 Page 2 Staff attempted to prepare the text and graphics in a style readable and understandable to the general public and hopefully that has been achieved. This element represents the City's policies with regard to the management of its' open space resources, and as such, is a concern of all the citizens of Tustin. After reviewing the draft for the umpteenth time, staff would like to include one more action program, which will read as follows: 11. Specific planning for the East Tustin area shall incorporate a flood sedimentary plan in keeping with the on-going programs to control sedimentation into the Upper Newport Bay area. Recom.endatton Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2165, recommending that the City Council adopt the Open Space and Conservation Element, General Plan Amendment No. 83-4b; Associate Planner EMK:jh Community Development Department 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2165 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE REVISED OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN The PlannJng Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby ~esolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: II. A. That Sections 65302d and 65302(e) of the Government · Code require that the City must have an Open Space and Conservation Element. B. That due to similar issues, the City has combined the Open Space and Conservation Element as one document. C. That a public hearing was duly called, held on the proposed Open Space and Element. noticed and Conservation D. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council. E. That the adoption of the Open Space and Conservation Element would be in the public 'interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public. F. That the appendix of the Open Space and Conservation Element shall be a separate document from the main body of the Element. The 'Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the Open Space and Conservation Element as submitted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 25th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary CONTINUED TO: $ LIB~ ECT: Planning Commission Royleen A. White, Director of Community and Administrative Services GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3C RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2164 approving the Recreation Element of the Tustin Area General Plan and recommend its adoption by the City Council. BACKGROUND: In April 1982, the City employed the Reynolds Environmental Group as planners to develop a Master Plan of Parks and Recreation for the City of Tustin. The Reynolds Group was chosen because of its outstanding background in this type of work and strong recommendations from previous clients. The Reynolds Group was judged most capable of creating a plan which could be used to project future developments and acquisitions in a realistic manner. A citizens committee worked closely with the Reynolds Environmental Group and City staff to develop the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation. The members of the Citizens Advisory Committee were: Lois Carr; Thomas Cunningham; James Dennehy; Audrey Heredia; Colonel Robert Mitchell, U.S.M.C.; Thomas Piercy; Charles Puckett; Sam Randall; and Larry Sutherland. The Committee members represented the many diverse and active elements of the community. Extensive research on existing and future park and recreation needs was completed during the data collection phase of the project. A random survey designed to measure residents' level of satisfaction with existing park and recreation facilities and programs, as well as desire for future facilities was also included in the Master Plan. After extensive meetings, research, and discussions, the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation was completed in draft form in spring 1983. The Master Plan was presented to the City Council during a study session on May 16, 1983. Several questions resulted from the City Council's initial review of the Plan, along with a request to delay final consideration of the plan until more information on the future Peters Canyon Development and other issues could be obtained. Over a year has elapsed since initial Council review of the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation. Since that time, City staff and the Reynolds Environmental Group have revised the Master Plan to conform to the requirements of an Element GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3C RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN Page Two June 18, 1984 of the Tustin Area General Plan. Information in the newly-titled Recreation Element has been updated to reflect the current trends of the East Tustin Specific Plan. In addition, staff and Reynolds Environmental Group consultants have revised the City's Park Dedication Ordinance to reflect recent legislative changes. Although the Citizens Advisory Committee was extensively involved in the development of the draft of the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, the group has not reviewed the changes made in the Plan since May 1983. Most of the changes are technical in nature and do not significantly alter the philosophical intent of the original document. The Recreation Element is designed to be used as a planning document for the future development and ongoi'ng maintenance of park and recreation facilities in the City of Tustin. Together with Ordinance No. 907, the City's Park Dedication Ordinance, the Recreation Element will provide for the planned development of recreation and park facilities for many years to come. Paul Edwards of the Reynolds Environmental Group will be present to answer any questions about the process used to develop the Recreation Element and to provide clarification on particular portions of the Element.. Recreation Superintendent Jeff Kolin and I will also be present. We feel the Recreation Element will be a strong step for the City of Tustin towards developing a quality recreation and park system able to meet the present and future needs of the community. Royleen A. White Director of Community and Administrative Services RAW:sk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2164 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFDRNiA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE REVISED RECREATION ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That Section 65303d of the Government Code allows the City to prepare optional General Plan Elements, of which a Recreation Element is included. B. That Section 66477 of the Government Code states that the City may exact dedications for recreational purposes only if the City has adopted a recreational element to the General Plan. C. That the Recreation Element has been prepared with the participation of a Citizens Advisory Committee. D. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on the proposed Recreation Element. E. That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council. F. That the adoption of a Recreation Element would be in the public interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public. G. That the appendix of the Recreation Element shall be a separate document from the main body of the Element. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council adoption of the Recreation Element as submitted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 25th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary Planning Commission ,June 25, 1984 SUBJECT: Land Use Stud~v Concerning Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Oi scussion The City Council recently enacted an Urgency Ordinance placing a temporary moratorium on the issuance of land use permits related to businesses selling alcoholic beverages. The Moratorium was enacted at the request of the Tustin Parents Who Care organization who are specifically seeking a review of all land use regulations which apply to businesses selling alcoholic beverages. Parents Who Care has several specific recommendations that they wish to present to the Commission at your regularly scheduled meeting, which are summarized in the attachements hereto. The City of Tustin, like maw communities, requires use permits for liquor stores but does not require permits for most on-sale establishments such as restaurants, delicatessens, and similar businesses. In fact, Tustin does not require a use permit for the off-sale of beer and wine, which is readily available at convenience markets, whether located at a service station or not. While staff attempted to develop a chart indicating those uses which are required to obtain use permits and those that are not required, staff found it too difficult to co~ile in an understandable fashion. In summary, however, use permits are only required for the off-sale of liquor at a business classified as a liquor store. Use permits are not required for other types of businesses wishing to commence the sale of alcoholic beverages. Since the subject of alcoholic beverage sales is difficult to thoroughly cover in a single staff report, staff will be prepared to discuss the subject at the Planning Commission meeting. Attached are copies of letters from Parents Who Care for your consideration. At the Commission meeting on June 25, 1984, staff recommends an informal discussion of the topic and continuance of the matter to future meetings for further staff research and input. Since Parents Who Care has requested this hearing staff presumes they will present their recommendations directly to the Commission. DDL:jh Attachments Community Development Department TUSTIN June 20, 1984 TUSTIN. CA 92EI8! Mr. Donald D. Lamm Director of Community Development City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Dear Mr. Lamm~ Enclosed for information and use by the Planning Commis- sion and your department is background material on Parents Who Care, along with a statement by Ethel Reynolds, co- founder. Ethel cannot be present at the June 25 meeting of the Planning Commission, however our other co-founder, Lucy Strait, will be present and would like to present additional information. Also enclosed are alcohol and drug control ordinances and proceedings from the cities of Orange, Garden Grove and Los Angeles. As you know, they have been very active in this area of concern. Just yesterday I learned that the County of Los Angeles has become involved, too, and has been looking into the relationship of alcoholic beverage outlets, their negative impacts on communities and pos- sible zoning solutions. We trust this material will be useful to you and to the Commission. If additional information is needed at any time, please call Lucy Strait on the Parents Who Care number, 838-5931, or you may reach me on 544-6188. Sincerely yours, Jack F. Miller Chairman, Legislation Committee Enclosures TUSTIN P.O BOX 3186 TUSTIH. CA 9268t June 20, 1984 Dear Members of the Planning Commission, City of Tustin: June ment I am sorry I will be unable to address you personally on the evening of 25th, but as Co-Founder of PARENTS-WHO CARE, I would like to make a state- to you. As you can see from the enclosed literature, PARENTS WHO CARE emphasizes that the primary force in the fight against the serious problem of alcohol and other drug use by teens is the family. This premise is the basis of the PARENTS WH01CARE movement, and our principal efforts have been and will continue to be first, to educate parents, and second, to motivate parents to defend their families. We provide them with a plan of action, as outlined in the pledge for PARENTS WHO CARE, the party guide, and the parent networking outline. Over the last year since our founding, the subject of teen use of alcohol and other drugs in our community has been "brought out into the open," so to speak, and the awareness of the community has been remarkably heightened. Parents throughout the Tustin Unified School District are now willing to broach the situ- ation and have adopted PARENTS WHO CARE as the vehicle through which they can work against the subject problem. When we are approached with an expressed concern within the community and we feel that we can address that concern, we do so. I have made a personal observation in this work, and in many other areas of community involvement, that in general, ten out of ten people will have a preference toward a subject or issue, but only one in a thousand, perhaps, will have a true commitment. Those few of us (elected or appointed, employees or volunteers) who are committed to providing and maintaining a high quality environment for a health- ful and safe community must therefore be more dedicated and perhaps even courageous as we direct our efforts toward this goal. The moratorium approved recently by the City Co,ncil is most appreciated am it says that the City o£ Tustin, like many communities across the nation, and even the ConKress of the United States, is willing to study the need for action, accept that responsibility, and act as necessary. Thank you. Sincerely, ~Ethel D. ~s /edt cc: Members of tile City Council WHO ARE THEY? PARENTS WHO CARE, TUSTIN AREA, is a chapter of the National Federation of Parents for Drug Free Youth. It is a non-pro- fit volunteer group of parents and community leaders concerned about the use of alcohol and other drugs by the youth of our area. WHAT IS THE UNIQUENESS OF PARENTS WHO CARE? PARENTS WHO CARE is a grass roots movement which grew out of our concern about the alarming increase of alcohol and drugs used among our youth, and the growing social "acceptability" of this environment. Using authoritative resources and infor- mation about illegal usage of alcohol and other drugs by our minors, we attempt to educate and mobilize the parents of this community. We recognize that the first line of defense for our children is their parents. We propose to develop a parental network to counteract the attitudes and pressures of our child- ren's peer group. WHAT IS THE PLAN OF ACTION OF PARENTS W-HO CARE? PARENTS WHO CARE provides constantly up-dated information on alcohol and drugs and their effects through hand-out literature, special presentations and workshops. Informed parents will be anxious to build their own family's defenses. We encourage them to discuss their feelings, concerns and their stand on alcohol and drug use with other parents and to form inter-family networks. We will provide guidelines for these networks. PARENTS WHO CARE meet with other parents in self-help settings to share strategies for prevention and early intervention. PARENTS WHO CARE monitors drug and alcohol legislation and en- courages local enforcement of drug laws. PARENTS WHO CARE representatives attend local, state, and national conferences, seminars and workshops to maintain educational levels. PARENTS WHO CARE interacts with county and private agencies and health care facilities in order to make referrals to appropriate professionals when necessary. We invite all interested parents, teachers, and concerned individ- uals to join in this effort. Working cooperatively, in our own area, we can bring about a new, more positive environment for our youth. Each one of our children is in some degree of danger, if only by proximity. That's why we're all in this together. Every parent has a stake in deterring drug and alcohol use, first in the home, then in the local community, and in our nation. P.O. Box 3186 Tustin, CA 92681 (714) 838-5931 TUSTIN May 4, 1 984 P.O BOX 3t88 TU~TIN. CA 82e81 Tustin City Council Parents Who Care is vitally interested in all City Council actions which affect the distribution and availability of alcoholic beverages and other chemical substances which can adversely affect our children in the Tustin area. We appreciate the support you have given our organization in the past and particularly all efforts which contributed to Albertson's decision not to open a liquor store on Red Hill. Subsequent to the response of the community regarding Al- bertson's, the Board of Directors of Parents Who Care met to consider what additional steps could be taken to make the Tustin area environment better for our children, our schools and for the community as a whole. As a result of this study and of input from many people and. groups, Par- ents Who Care has four recommendations which are related to the May 7th City Council agenda (item XI.3). They are: I. Postponement of Alcoholic Beverage Outlet Approvals 1. Alcohol abuse is acknowledged to be a significant problem in our schools. 2. The City of Tustin has about 1½ times as many Type 21 liquor store outlets as the county-wide criter- ion would allow. In addition, there are 24 Type 20 outlets (beer and wine), and many, many more outlets of Types 41, 42, 47, 48 and 51! 3. Outlets both large and small contribute to the pro- blem, and the more there are the more the chance for abuse, misuse and violation of laws by students and by the outlets. 4. The ABC has indicated it does not have enough employees to adequately enforce non-sales to minors, and even when sales are made and reported, the outlets receive only a warning. May 4, 1984 City Council Page 2 II. 5. Therefore, Parents Who Care asks that there be a Postponement in the City to the addition of alco-' holic beverage outlets of all kinds, except res- taurant type locations. The Postponement should be for the maximum practical time to allow the Planning'Department and the Council time to study the negative impact of outlets; the recent outlet control actions by cities of Garden Grove and Los Angeles; and the legal requirements which would permit our city to halt the proliferation of so many outlets. Distance between Schools and Outlets 1. Evidence indicates that outlets, innocently or otherwise, occasionally sell alcoholic beverages to minors. According to reports, the smaller out- lets often sell other chemical substances (clove cigarettes for example), drug related publications and other items that are undoubtedly detrimental to students. 2. In some cities, outlets have become centers for drug dealing and other criminal activities. Al- though this may not be the case in Tustin at this time, with the growth in alcohol and drug abuse, this could easily become the situation here. 3. Therefore, Parents Who Care recommends that the criterion for the distance between schools and off-sale outlets be set at the 1,000 feet minimum used by Santa Ana to separate 6ars and schools, and in any case the distance should be at the least, the 600 feet (2 blocks) minimum required by the State for on-sale separation. The distance would be measured simply as the most direct pedes- trian path that would normally be followed by a student from the perimeter of the school grounds. Of course, this criterion would not be necessary dur- ing the time of Postponement. For on-sale outlets the 1,000 feet criterion of Santa Ana should also be our minimum. May 4, 1984 City Council Page 3 III. No Sales of Alcoholic Beverages and Motor Vehicle Fuel 1. Alcoholic beverage consumption while driving is both illegal and deadly. 2. One of the most obvious ways to discourage one source of drinking and driving is to make it more difficult for drivers needing additional fuel to also "fuel up" on alcoholic beverages at the same stop. This applies particularly to impulse buy- ers, of which there are so many. 3. Therefore, Parents Who Care asks that an ordi- nance be established, similar to Orange and the majority of other cities in the County have done, to prohibit sales of both alcoholic beverages and motor vehicle fuel at the same place of business. IV. Use Permit for On-sale Outlets 1. These outlets stand to suffer penalties for sales to minors and most are careful not to do so. 2e Nevertheless, this is a problem as evidenced by recent news stories about difficulties in identification and age determination. e Therefore, we recommend that all on-sale outlets also be subject to the Conditional Use Permit process, the same as required by most other cities in the County. Because you also are parents and business people with sub- stantial interests in the Tustin area, we trust you will agree that these recommendations will benefit the health, safety and general welfare of the entire community, and that you will act favorably upon them. Most sincerely, --- Ethel Reynolds Lucy Strait JaCk F. Miller Co-founder Co-founder Legislation Committee cc: Planning Department SN£~? ! l~r Z t~lll AIRES PARCEL MAP NO. 83-1026 DAMS nF BEARI#BS*. MDIIUM£NT #~TES: f t~ttt 1 L(~ 1 -*,,~* Planning Commission dune 25, 1984 SU~ECT: RPPLICANT: LOCATION: ZONING: Final Parcel Map No. 83-1026 K.W. Lawler & Associates, Inc. on behalf of James S. Bower Southwesterly corner of Sixth street and "B" Street Planned Industrial (PM) Background & Discussion The request is to subdivide this existing 6.8 acre industrial park parcel into three (3) separate parcels. This map meets the standards of the PM zone and is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan. The tentative map was approved by the Planning Commission on February 14, 1983 and by the City Council on February 22, 1983. All conditions of that approval have been met. The final map is in substantial compliance with the tentative map. Rec~ndatton Recommend approval of Final Parcel adoption of Resolution No. 2166. Map 83-1026 to the City Council by the MAC:ih Attachment s: Resolution No. 2166 Final Parcel Map N0..83-1026 Community Development Department 1 4 5 ? 9 10 13 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 26 RESOLUTIdN NO. 2166 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 83-1026 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SIXTH STREET AND "B" STREET The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That Final Parcel Map No. 83-1026 was submitted to the Planning Commission pursuant to Ordinance No. 847 by K.W. Lawler & Associates on behalf of James S. Bower as a three-lot subdivision for a parcel known as portions of Lot 2 of the Stafford and Tustin Tract, as per map recorded in Book 2, pages 618 and 619 of Miscellaneous Records of Los Angeles County, California and Parcel 3 as per map filed in Book 106, pages 31 and 32 of Parcel Maps, Orange County, California. B. That said map is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan. C. That said map is categorically exert from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. D. That the final map is in substantial compliance with the tentative map. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Final Parcel Map No. 83-1026 subject to final approval of the City Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 25th day of June, 1984. dames B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary 28 Planning Commission JU#E 25,' 1984 SUBJECT: Report on Council Actions - June 18, 1984 Oral presentation to be given by Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development /ih Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - June 18, lg84 i Community Development Department 7:01 ALL PRESENT ACTION AGENDA OF A R~GUtJ~ ~ETING OF THE TO~IN CITY COUNCIL June 18, 1984. 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION II. ROLL CALL PRESENTED PROCLAPJ~TION TO FRANCES LOGAN AS "WOI~AN OF THE YEAR'. RECESSED TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR LEGAL MATTERS AT 7:09. P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 7:32 COMPLAINT III. PUBLIC INPUT REG~RDING SEWER (For City of Tustin Residents and Businesspersons on any matter, and for WATER BAC~I~ U~ Water Service Customers having a concern unresolved by Administretive proce- ON ANDREWS, TO kilt dures.) TO LANCE AND G~.EEN VALLEY. PRESENTATION OF A flEW Bb~GLAR SYSTEM BY P~ILIP COSTA~IZO. HE )iRS DIRECTED TO SEND A lETTER TO THE POLICE CIiIEF. IV. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED TO JULY 16 1. APPEAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 84-8 - APARTMENT 13195 GWYNETH DRIVE Pleasure of the Council. EXPANSION AT 13181- Ye APPROVED WITH ONE 1. CORRECTION ON PAI~ 4, ITEM 4 APPROVED 2. AOOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 84-44 CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 4, 1984, June 5, 1984, June 6, 1984 RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL in the amount of $109,399.24 APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in the amount of $878,090.18. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 84-44 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 12018 Adoption of Resolution No. 84-44 as recommended by the Com- munity Development Department. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 84-45 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, INFORMING THE ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FINANCING PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE STATUS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS Adoption of Resolution No. 84-45 as recommended by the Direc- tor of Public Works/City Engineer. 5. REQUEST FOR RESTRICTED PARKING DURING STREET SWEEPING OPERA- TIONS - WALNUT PARK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Authorize the installation of signing to restrict on-street parking during street sweeping hours, 6:00 A.M. to Noon on Monday, on all the streets within the Walnut Park Community Development and that warnings be issued in lieu of citations for the first 30 days after sign installation as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. AOOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 84-45 APPROVED STAFF RECOI~ENDATION CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page i 6-18-84 APPROVED STAFF RECOI~4ENDATION VI. VII. VIII. APPROVED AND AREP~RT TO BE GIVEN IN 6 MONTHS BY POLICE C~IEF _JAN TO TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVE 'MENT AGENCY, SOUTH CENTRAL'. PROJECT AREA Authorize the Mayor to sign the subject Agreement loaning the South Central Redevelopment Project Area $125,000 at 12% interest as ~ecommended by the Finance Director, ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None OLD BUSINESS 1. PARKING COMPLAINTS AT 200 BLOCK WEST SIXTH STREET AND 500 BLOCK SOUTH "C" STREET Authorize the following: 1. Two hour parking tow away zone, 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday on Sixth St. between "B" Street and 150 + feet easterly of E1 Camtno Real; 2. Install handicapped--parking zones on westerly side of "C" Street and the northerly side of "B" Street; and 3. Install red zones at the intersections of Sixth and "C" Street, and Sixth and "B" Street as reconm~nded by 'the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. IX. NEW BUSINESS APPROVED STAFF 1. RECOI~ENDATION APPROVED STAFF 2. RECOI~NDATION PUBLIC HEARING - 1984-85 BUDGET Conduct a public hearing on July 2, 1984, at 7:00 p.m., regarding the preliminary 1984-85 budget as recommended by the City Manager. ANNUAL TREE STUMP REMOVAL AND GRINDING PROGRAM Award the Annual Tree Stump Removal and Grinding Program to Edney Tree Service for $7,175.00 as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. APPROVED SIDEWALK CON- 3. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITY PROJECTS (F.Y. 1984-85) STRUCTION 0~( THE N. SIDE OF Pleasure of the Council. NC FADDEN AVE. AND 200+ ft. E. OF TOSTIN VILLAGE WAY AND PASADENA AVE. APPROVED STAFF P. ECOI~E~DA- 4. PROPOSAL TO REPLACE CITY WISHING WELL ENTRANCE SIGNS TZOR AND ALSO LOOK II(TO PUTTING Authorize staff to obtain competitive bids and expend a maxi- SIGNS AT Z OR 30ll~ER LOCATIONS ~m of $5,000 from the Beautification Fund to replace three FOR ll~AFFIC GOING NORTH City entrance signs as recommended by the Director of Commu- nity Development. COIeNUNICOM GAVE A PROGRESS REPORT AND IT WAS MOVED THAT COOl, UNICOM REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR $10,000 LEG~J. FEES AND PAY FOR STAFF TIME, ALLOd 30 DAYS EXTENSION WITHOUI' $500 PENALTY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND 90 DAYS FOR ACQUISITION WITH AN UPOAll~ REPORT TO 8E SUBIMITI'ED XN 60 [XRYS. X. REPORTS RATIFIED PLANNING COMMIS- SION A~TIONS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - June 11, 1984 All actions of the Planning Commission appealed by the City Council. are final unless RECEIVED AND FILED 2. COLUMBUS-TUSTIN WELL PROJECT STATUS REPORT Receive and file. RECEIVED AND FILED STATUS REPORT CONCERNING ZONING PLAN Receive and file. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 2 6-18-84 'APPROVED STAFF ~ECO~4ENDATION REVIEW OF CITY'S ZONING AND BUILDINu CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM Direct City staff and the City Attorney to prepare the necessary documents for a citation program to enforce Zoning and Building Code violations as recommended by the Community Development Department. MOVED ll~T FINANCE OIR. 5. PAI~K AND CIVIC CENTER BOND REDEMPTION OPTIONS EXPLORE BUYING THE BONDS WITH NO Pleasure of the Council. LIMITATIONS AND THAT WE PURSUE Tl~AT WITH I~L~TEVER CASH WE THINK IS ACCESS. HUSTON XI. OTHER BUSINESS .ASKED FOR CONTINUANCE 'OF THE C$.OSED SESSION FOR LEGAJ. MAI'FERS. ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE CITY A/iD ROll NAULT HAS RECEIVED A NATIONAL AWARD FOR FINANCIAL REPORTING FROM THE GOVERNMENT FINAJICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION WHICH IS A VERY PRE~IGIOUS REWARD. COUNCIL WILL SEND A COIr~RATULATORY LEI'TER AND POSSIBLY A PRESS RELEASE. EDGAR ASKED ABOUT THE LETTER FROM TOM RILEY REGARDING A ~ DIEGO CAEEX SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN. HUSTON RESPONDED THAT NEWPORT BEACH, IRVINE, THE COUNTY, AND THE IRVlNE CO#PANY ARE ABOUT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT ON A SEDI~IENTATION CONTROL PROGRN~ FOR THE BAY. UNFORI~INATELY THEY ASKED US TO ~OIN A~-~ER THEY HAD WORKED OUT MOST OF THE DETAILS AND THEN SAID BY THE WAY, WE NEED A CONTRIBUTION OF ABOUT $100,000 OR THE CAPITAL COS"TS AND ABOUT $20,000 A YEAR MAINTENJUi~E. AND OUR OPINION IS CONTRARY TO THE SUPERVISOR'S LE]'FERo WE HAVE ASKED A LOT OF Q~STIONS ABOUT THE PROGRA~ AND HAVE NOT GOI'FEN A RESPONSE BACK AND OUR POSITION IS UNTIL WE ~ THEIR RESPONSE, WE ARE NOT GOING TO BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL. HOESTEREY SUG~iESTI~D THAT STAFF ESTARLISH GUIDELINES FOR APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING COI~ISSION APPLICATIONS. THE COre, UNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR RESPONDED ll~AT SONE STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN AND THAT THE TER)~S EXPIRE ON JUNE 30TH. IT WAS MOVED THAT THE PI.ANNING COI~ISSION CONTINUE IN ITS RESENT FORM UNTIL APPLICATIONS ARE RECEIVED AND COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED. GREINKE REPORTED THAT HE WAS IN WASHINGI~)N D.C. A COUPLE OF W~EICS AGO AND HAD ~ WIT)( CONGRESSi*JU( DANNEMEYER AND BADHAN AND HE THANKED DANNF_~EYER FOR HIS SUPPORT ON THE BUrl ET TRAIN AJqD CONGRESSMAN BAD,lAN FOR HIS ASSISTANCE ON THE REALIGIqt~ENT PROBLEM THROUGH THE MILITARY BASE. GREINKE SAID THAT HE HAD ASKEB THAT WE W~ITE NEW REGULATIONS ON POLITICAL SIGNS. DON LAI~4 RESPONDED 1ThaT WE SHOULD HAVE SOtNETHING FOR THE NEXT ~ETING. GREINKE CONGRATULATED DICK EDGAR FOR HIS SERVICE AS JOINT C~U&IRMAJ( OF THE SANITATION DISll~ICT. SALTARELLI THANKED STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR EXCELLENT JOB ON FOLLOW lip ON THE LAFCO MATTER WITH THE WATER WELL ANNEXATIONS. SALTARELLi REPORTED ll~T THERE IS A PROBLEM WI~14 THE BRIDGEPORT-OREENMEADOW DIe, IN IN TUSTIN MEADOWS. IT NEEDS TO BE FLUSHED OUT. KENNEDY THANKED BOB LEDENDECKER FOR GEI"FING THE 55 FREEWAY ~CE GOING NORTH CLEANED OUT. 10:22 XII. ADJOURNMENT - Recessed to the Redevelopment agency, thence adjourned to a Closed Session for legal ~atter$ and thence to the next regular meeting on July 2, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 3 6-18-84 ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY June 18, 1984 7:00 P.M. 10:22 1. CALL TO ORDER ALL 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT APPROVED 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of June 4, 1984 APPROVED 4. LOAN TO TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, SOUTH CENTRAL PROJECT AREA STAFF RECOI~ENOATION Authorize the Chairperson to sign the subject Agreement accepting loan of $125,000 at 12% interest from the City's General Fund as recon~nended by the Finance Director. GREINICE 5. OTHER BUSINESS REPORTED SOME MAJOR CP, ACICS IN THE Pd~MPS OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE. STAFF TO OIECK INTO IT. 10:24 6: ADJOURNMENT - To the next regular meeting on July 2, 1984. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page 1 6-18-84