Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 06-18-84 REPORTS TUSTIN PLANNING CO~I~ISSION NO. 1 ACTION AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETING 6-18-84 June 11, lg84 7:00 p.m. ~J~LL TO ORDER 7:08 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRESENTATION BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS RErdUtDING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF #ZNUTES PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR AINSLIE, PUCKETT, WEIL, WHITE, SHARP All present For Meeting Held May 29, 1984 Approved as submitted (limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) i. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO ll~E 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 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. 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 At the request of the applicant, continued to the next regular meeting on June 25, 1984, to allow staff to readvertise for additional land use consideration. Planning Commission Action Agenda June 11, 1984 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 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. Continued to next regular r~--cttng on June 25, 1984. 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 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. Continued to next regular meeting on.June 25, 1984. 3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3c - RECREATION 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 within the document. Continued to next regular ~cting on June 25, 1984. 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3d Applicant: Location: Request: Goldrich, Kest and Associates 1262 Bryan Avenue That the General Plan be amended from a single-family classification to a multiple-family classification Planning Commission Action Agenda June 11, 1984 Page 3 Approved, 5-0. 5. ZONE CHANGE NO. 84-2 Applicant: Garrison Management, Inc. Location: 1122-1192 Laguna Road Request: Change of zone from the Retail Commercial (C-1) to the Commercial General (CG-PUD) classification Approved, 5-0. ADMINISTRATIVE MAI'rERS A. Old Business 1. Liquor in Proximity to Public Schools Continued to next regular meeting on June 25, 1984. B. New Business 1. Final Tract Map No. 12018 - 14452, 14472, 14492 Holt Avenue Richard L. Pierce Approved, 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS 1. Departmental Status Report Report received and filed. 2. Report on Council Actions - June 4, 1984 Report received and filed. COPIqlSSIO# CONCERNS ADJOURNMENT: At 9:30 p.m. to next regular meeting on June 25, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. TUSTIN PLANNING COI~4ISSION AGENDA FOR REGULAR MEETINF June 11, 1984 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M., CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRESENTATION BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES PUBLIC CONCERNS CONSENT CALENDAR AINSLIE, PUCKETT, WEIL, WHITE, SHARP For Meeting Held May 29, 1984 (limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda) IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE 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 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. None. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 Applicant: Matt Nisson Location: 14462 Red Hill Avenue Request: Authorization to change the designation of the Land Use element from Professional Office to Commercial and Multiple-Family Presentation: Edward Knight, Associate Planner PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 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. Presentation: Edward Knight, Associate Planner Planning Commission June 11, 1984 Page 2 jenda PUBLIC HEARINGS (cont.) 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 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. Presentation: Edward Knight, Associate Planner 3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3c - RECREATION 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 within the document. Presentation: Edward Knight, Associate Planner 4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-3d Applicant: Location: Request: Goldrich, Kest and Associates 1262 Bryan Avenue That the General Plan be amended from a single-family classification to a multiple-family classification Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner 5. ZONE CHANGE NO. 84-2 Applicant: Location: Request: Garrison Management, Inc. 1122-1192 Laguna Road Change of zone from the Retail Commercial General (CG-PUD) classification (C-1) to the Commercial Presentation: Alan Warren, Senior Planner ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. Old Business 1. Liquor in Proximity to Public Schools Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development Planning Commission *genda June 11, 1984 Page 3 $. New Business 1. Final Tract Map No. 12018 - 14452, 14472, 14492 Holt Avenue Richard L. Pierce 'Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner STAFF CONCERNS 1. Departmental Status Report Presentation: Alan Warren, Senior Planner 2. Report on Council Actions - June 4, 1984 Oral Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development COMMISSION CONCERNS ADJOURNMENT: To next regular meeting on June 25, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. XL~mej-aLd~LnH pue LeD~ammo3 o~ eoDJJO LeUO~SSejOdd mo~ ~ua~aL3 esfl pue9 e4~ jo uo~eu6~sap aq~ a6ueqo o~ uoD~ezDJoq~n¥ anuaA¥ LL~H pa~ zg~l :o, sanba~j : uo.~:~eoo9 2-~B 'ON IN3WQN2W¥ NVgd · 6uDu~e2sq~ dJeqs '0-~ e^~JO q~u~9 96IEI-IBIEI - 8-~B ~mJed as~ - 9512 'ON uo~nkosa~ 'I UVQN39Y~ ~N3$NOD 'aUON · 6u~u~e~sq~ dJeqS '0-~ ~pe~JJe3 UO~)Ob~ 'pat~mqns s~ '~86I 'VI jo 6u~aam aq3 }o sa~nu~m ~q~ a^oJdd~ o: l)a~ Zq papuo~as 'a3)qM ~q pa^oW S3.U1NIW jaUU~Ld ~ue~s~ssv 's~^~O JeUU~Ld e~oss¥ 'UpeLJeq~eqO uuv jeUU~Ld e:e~Doss¥ '~q6~u~ P2 jeUUeLd JoLuaS 'u~Jde~ UeLV aUON 22a~ond SaLdeqO a[Lsu~y 4dew odd uemd~eq3 'e:Lqg pLeuo~ uema~eq3 'daeqS sem~p :~,uasaad OSL¥ ::;uesqv saauo ,LSS .L','mO 3 saeuo ,LSS .LWWO D ll¥O llO~ ~86I '6g X~W VINBOJIgV3 'NI£S~ JO Ali3 3~ JO NOISSIK~IO'J 9NINNVqd 3PJ. JO 9NI£3~ ~Vq~931J V ~0 S3£~NIW Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1984 Page 2 ~ indefinitely, but if any change were to take place, the property could possibly be used commercially. ~He stated his property has been taxed at the highest and best use, and in order to protect his property was requesting the zone change, even though he had no plans to develop it. In response to Commissioner Well, Mr. Nisson stated the life expectancy of the orange trees on his property was approximately 50 years. The existing trees replaced the original trees which died in 1957. He stated some of his avocado trees had been there 60 years. Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Commissioner White asked if the General Plan were amended as requested would a zone change be required? Mr. Knight responded that the multiple-family portion of the property would be in conformance but the portion to be designated commercial would require a zone change. Commissioner Well stated she had received a phone call from the President of the Tustin Meadows Homeowners Association who stated he had a presentation to make on behalf of the Association, and being unable to attend the meeting because of illness, requested the item be continued to the next regular meeting. Commissioner White asked if a traffic study had been done to determine which of the three uses would generate the most traffic. Mr. Knight stated the multiple-family use would probably generate the least traffic and the commerical and office would probably generate equal amounts of traffic, depending upon specific use. Commissioner White asked if the development of the property coul'd be controlled through zoning. Mr. Knight stated that a Planned Community designation would allow that type of control. Commissioner White asked if it would be ~ppropriate to designate a mixed-use designation to allow a certain percentage of square footage be. designated to each use, thereby allowing, greater development flexibility. Mr. Knight stated a specific plan could be required. After Commission and Staff discussion regarding Planned Community designation, Commissioner Puckett recognized Mr. Nisson who stated the property was two separate parcels and that is why the line between the commercial and multiple-family was drawn where it was. It was moved by Puckett, seconded by Weil, to continue the hearing to the next regular meeting on June 11, 1984¥ as requested by the Tustin Meadows Homeowners Association. Motion carried, 4-1, White opposed. 2. AMENDMENT NO. I TO USE PERMIT NO. 79-28 Applicant: Location: Request: Mr. E.W. Rosenberg on behalf of Red Hill Lutheran Church 13200 Red Hill Avenue Authorization to add a second story office of 1,880 square feet Jeff Davis presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 29, 1984. In response to Commissioner Well, Mr. Davis stated that the church was not exempt from annexation to the Street Lighting District, but the annexation carried no cost. He stated the cost of installing street lights was approximately $750 to $1,200. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. The following person spoke in favor of Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit 79-28: Mr. Blendle Scott, member of Red Hill Luthern Church requested the Commission's favorable consideration of the proposal. Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1984 Page 3 It was moved by White, seconded by Weil, approval of Amendment No. 1 to Use Permit No. 79-28, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2157. Motion carried, 5-0. 3. USE PERMIT NO. 84-11 Applicant: Location: Request: Mary Ann Union Oil Company 17280 E. Seventeenth Street (Enderle Center) Authorization to install an eight-foot by nineteen-foot {8'x19') storage room to an existing service station along with replacement of refuse enclosure Chamberlain presented .staff's report and recommendations as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 29, 1984. Chairman Sharp opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chairman Sharp closed the public hearing at 8:08 p.m. It was moved by Well, seconded by Puckett, approval of Use Permit No. 84-11 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2158. Motion carried, 5-0. ADMINIS~TI~ATIVE MA1-FERS A. Old Business None. B. New Business 1. Design Review #11-84 - New Industrial Buildings 2841 Dow Avenue - Banzuelo/Rierson, Inc., Architects Jeff Davis presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 29, 1984. In response to Commissioner Well, Mr. Davis stated the buildings were speculative. It was moved by Well, seconded by Puckett, to receive and file staff's report. Motion carried, 5-0. 2. Design Review #6-84 - New Industrial Building/Quality Beer 15201 Woodlawn Avenue Mary Ann Chamberlain presented staff's report and recommendations as contained in the Report to the Planning Commission dated May 29, 1984. In response to Chairman Sharp, Ms. Chamberlain stated that access from this location to the freeway would be Santa Fe to Red Hill Avenue. It was moved by Weil, seconded by Puckett, to approve the plan by the adoption of Resolution No. 2159. Commissioner Ainslie asked why this project, and many other projects in the area, showed twice as many parking spaces as required by district standards. He questioned if the streets would handle the traffic generated by these projects. Ms. Chamberlain stated that staff tried to encourage developers to provide more parking because the zone was currently inadequate in relation to parking requirements. The specific plan, currently in the process of preparation would overlay higher standards and determine traffic loads and capabilities. Chairman Sharp asked when the specific plan would be ready. Ms. Chamberlain stated she would have the first draft on Thursday, May 31, 1984. Motion carried, 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1984 Page 4 STAFF CONCERNS 1. Report on Council Actions - May 21, 1984 Alan Warren presented staff's report. In response to Commissioner Weil Mr. Warren stated that the Council did receive copies of the amended "Exhibit A" for Use Permit No. 84-8, Gwyneth Drive. In response to Commissioner Ainslie, Mr. Davis stated that the City Council had adopted the Ordinance regarding large day care homes with one change: that a residence with a swimming pool would not be allowed to operate a large day care home. By unanimous informal consent, the Commission received and filed staff's report. CO~ISSION O)NCERNS Commissioner Ainslie stated he would not be seeking re-appointment as a Planning Commissioner. The Commission expressed regret at his decision. Commissioner Weil asked if the Commission wished to consider changing the design review process to allow more in-depth review of projects by the Commission. By unanimous informal consent the Commission determineJto review the matter after a new Commission has been appointed. ADJOURNMENT: At 8:30 p.m. to a Public Works Presentation on June 11, 1984 · at 7:00 p.m. and thence to the next regular meeting on June 11, 1984 at 7:30 p.m. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary Planning Corn m 'sslon June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Continued Consideration of General Plan Amendment No. 84-2 Matt Nisson Authorization to change the designation of the Land Use element from Professional Office to Commercial and Multiple-Family Discussion The Planning Commission, at its last regular meeting on May 29, 1984, continued consideration of the subject General Plan amendment to its meeting on June 6, 1984. This action was taken at the request of the Tustin Meadows Homeowners Association. Additionally, staff has been contacted by property owners adjacent to Mr. Nisson's property claiming they did not receive public hearing notices. Upon researching the matter, it appears several of the adjacent residential property owners were not listed -in the County Tax Assessor roles but only their mortgage companies who apparently receive the property tax bills. Since it is doubtful mortgage companies would forward public hearing notices, it appears a few home owners did not actually receive a notice. Concerning the subject of reciprocal access and dedication of rights-of-way along Red Hill Avenue, staff will be prepared at the Commission meeting to verbally discuss this matter. Director of Community Development DDL:jh Community Development Department Report to the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING NO. 1 dune 11, 1984 SUBJECT: Discuss1 on General Plan Amendment No. 84-3a Housing Element of the Tustin Area General Plan 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 ~ears, beginning July 1, 1984. As a part of this revision, the State must review~each element and 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, 1984 Honorable Chairman & Members of the Planning Commission City of Tustin Tustin, California 92680 Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Tustin Tustin, California 92680 Subject: Revised Housin~ Element of Tustin General Plan Pursuant to California State Law 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 Committee 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 public hearings and the adoption of the Tustin Housing Element as submitted. Respectfully yours, - ~ousin~'ElementAdvisory Committee prepared to ad ss these and other issues. "ntil infra- structure is provided, the City will have to look for housing opportunities in infill projects and recycle of older homes in R-3 zones into higher density projects. A set of quantified objectives are adopted as a guideline toward meeting Tustin's housing needs through 1988. It is recognized that due to limitations the objectives cannot satisfy the total needs as projected by the 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 Programs; 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 10. Recycling of Existing Housing; 11. Department of Housing and Urban Project; and 12. Basic Housing. Development 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 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 21~ of all housing sales in Orange County during 1983. The cost of construction of a townhouse represents 34~ of the sales price. -58- 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 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 21~ of all housing sales in Orange County during 1983. The cost of construction of a townhouse represents 345 of the sales price. Xtownh~es ar~equa~t~f s~,l~ ~ ' .~' ~a nci~ co,reCta n~~[ ~~ dev~ment~st~n~ si ng~ ~ ~el 1.i.~un~ ~e~dW~, if~constr~on co~s were~hes~ -58- Housing accommodations by location, type, price and ownership or tenancy for all residents of the community regardless of"income, age, race, sex, marital status, 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 correcting the imbalance between rental and owner-occupied units. Reducing dependency upon the automobile for transportation by locating housing facilities convenient to service and employment centers thereby enablin~ walkin~ or bicyclin~ ~o 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- 7. The preservation of historic and architecturally significant residential structures. 8. Housing stock that is safe, decent and affordable. B. 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 achievement of the housing objectives are thus dependent upon the 'private sector and other governmental agencies. The responsibility of the City is to pncourage the construction of affordable housin9 and to assist in its creation by facilitatinq the review and approval of development permits. -61- The following objectives are the ~_rojected number and typ~ of units to be constructed within the time frame of this element*: Typ~ Very Low Low Moderat~ ~otal. East Tustin Subdivision Senior Citizen Housing (Special Needs) Granny Flats & 2nd Units Apartments (In-fill units & Redevelopment Projects) Apartments (Integration Within Sphere of Influence) 100 500 600 10 50 50 110 5 10 - 15 20 55 150 150 225 TOTAL UNITS 35 365 700 1,100 Ma.intenance and Rehabilitation of Existin~ Rehabi 1 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. th 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 scope. The City has attempted to improve housing opportunities for low to moderate income housing by rezoning 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-3 (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. Secondary Residential Units. The zoning ordinance has been amended to authorize granny flats in the R-1 District ~nd secondary residential dwellin~ units in th~ E-4 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: 1. Housing Opportunities for All Economic Segments. 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. 2. 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 pommunity qoal of encouraging owner-occupied housing units, the City will place special emphasis on those bondinq proqrams 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 usq of the AB 665 program. -76- 12. Basic Housing. To reduce initial housin~ costs, the City will encourage the construction of housing units that incorporate design features providing the opportunity to expand habitable area as family needs chanoe_ 13. On-Going Review of Housing 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. Removal of Governmental Constraints 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- Planning Commission June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-3b Open Space and Conservation Element of the Tustin Area General Plan Discussion Staff is requesting a continuance Of this public hearing to June 25, 1984 to allow the Commissioners two more weeks to read and review the draft element. Additionally, The Irvine Company has requested that they be allowed to review and provide input to the draft element. The draft document was not completed as of the agenda mailing date and therefore will be delivered to you at the Planning Commission meeting on June 11, 1984. Recommendation Staff recommends that the public hearing be continued until the June 25, 1984 meeting of the Planning Commission. Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments i , Community Development Department Report to the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING NO. 3 June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment No. 84-3c Recreation Element Discussion Staff is requesting a continuance of this public hearing to June 25, 1984 to allow the Commissioners two more weeks to read and review the draft element. Additionally, The Irvine Company-has requested that they be allowed to review and provide input to the draft element. Recommendation Staff recommends that the public hearing be continued until the June 25, 1984 meeting of the Planning Commission. Associate Planner EMK:jh Attachments k,,,.._ .... Community Development Department PUBLIC HEARING NO. 4 Planning Commission June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: APPLICANT: OgNER: LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d Goldrich, Kest & Associates Robert F. Miller 1262 Bryan Avenue DESIGNATION: Single-family Residential ZONING: R-1 Single-family Residential REQUEST: Amend the General Plan multi-family residential from si ngl e- family rem denti al to Background & Discussion This 1.2 acre parcel of land is a residual piece Of property that remained for Mr. Miller's private home after the subdivision of Tract 4334 in 1961. presently, the general plan designation is single-family residential along the easterly and southerly property lines of this parcel. Along the westerly property line the general plan designation is multi-family residential with apartments. Goldrich, Kest and Associates is requesting that the City amend the general plan for this parcel from single-family residential to multi-family residential. The applicant has a particular use in mind for a development that would require a multi-family designation and ultimately a change of zone (from R-1 to R-3). The proposed use is a board and care facility that would accommodate senior citizens only. This use would be similar to Tustin Hacienda on Third Street. The issue in this request is which land use would be the best for this property and the City. Single-Family Residential - If the land use is retained as single-family, then 6 or 7 homes could be built with a substandard private street which would not be beneficial to the City. In this configuration the homes might also be built as close as five feet to the rear property lines. Community Development Department General Plan Amendment No. 84-3d June 11, 1984 Page 2 Multi-Family Residential If the land use is changed to multiple-family the project could have standard driveways with separate yards at a low density or could be a single purpose use such as a board and care facility with 30 to 50 foot setbacks from the single-family homes along the property lines. Conclusion Based on site design perhaps the board and care facility land use would be in the best interests of the single-family neighbors since this use would provide the greatest setbacks. Enclosed is a conceptual site plan which was submitted by the developer. Staff has not completed a detailed review of this plan since the issue at hand is the General Plan designation. Matters of design, height and density would be discussed at the time of a zone change and use permit review. Recommendation Direct staff to prepare a resolution for consideration at the next meeting. hamberl ~i n Associate Planner MAC:ih Attachment: Exhibit "A" General Plan Designation: Existing & Proposed Proposed Site Plan Community Development Departmen~ NYA~8- ' 3NY1 3^ll:{C{ 30NV1 I,- Z uJ Z Z Planning Commission June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: Zone Change No. 84-2 APPLICANT: Garrison Management, Inc. OWNER: P.D.F. (A General Partnership) LOCATION: 1122-1192 Laguna Road ZONING: Retail Commercial (C-1) District ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: A Negative Declaration has been filed in conjunction with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act REQUEST: To change the. subject property from the existing Retail Commercial (C-1) District to the Commercial General (CG) District Background & Discussion This application has been submitted by Garrison Management, Inc. to allow for the development of the subject property for use as an auto repair center. The property is east of Newport Avenue between the I-5 Freeway and Laguna Road right-of-way'near Tustin High School. The current zoning of the property is Retail Commercial (C-1) which does not allow for auto repair. The Commercial General District was established to allow most retail and heavy commercial uses in one zone subject to development standards which would mitigate many potential negative aspects of certain activities. In addition, a Planned Unit Development {PUD) designation was allowed in the district for those properties of particular interest or concern to the City to ensure a greater degree of review for development proposals. The applicant and proponent of the auto repair facilities have requested the zone change so that the City may consider the project if the change is approved. Staff has begun preliminary review of the development plans. Community Development Department Zone Change No. 84-2 June 11, 1984 Page 2 Conclusions 1. Staff at this time does not have an opinion regarding the proposed auto repair facility. The subject site does not appear to have 'any conditions which would make it unacceptable for such a use if adequate design features are incorporated into the final plan. 2. The request to upgrade the commercial zoning classification is in keeping with City policy to bring the central business district under similar zones with unified standards. The properties on the east side of Newport Avenue between Main Street and Laguna Road are also zoned Commercial General. 3. The Commercial General District allows for a greater number of possible uses while providing safeguards through more intensive performance standards. 4. The property under consideration should warrant special consideration in any development proposal by its proximity to Tustin High School, the E1 Camino Real Old Town area and high visibility from the I-5 Freeway, and if approved, a Planned Unit Development designation should be applied. 5. Approval of Zone Change No. 84-2 would not obligate the City to approve any use permit proposal that may be submitted under Commercial General provisions. Recommendation Recommend to the City Council favorable consideration for approval of Zone Change No. 84-2 by the adoption of Resolution No. 2160. Senior Planner AGW:jh Attachments: Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 2160 Community Development Department M HP R3 ! ZONE CHANGE NO. 84-2 ? ??' C2P PC COMM Zone Change No. 84-2: LOCATION MAP Properties changed from Retail Commercial (C-1) to Commercial General-Planned Unit Development(CG-PUD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 0.2 23 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2160 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON LAGUNA ROAD (ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 401-064-01 AND 401-064-02) FROM THE RETAIL COMMERCIAL (C-1) DISTRICT TO THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CG-PUD) DISTRICT The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application, (Zone Change 84-2) has been filed on behalf of P.D.F. (a general parntership) by Garrison Management, Inc. to change the zone for properties on Laguna Road (A.P. Nos. 401-064-01 and 401-064-02) from Retail Commercial (C-1) District to the Commercial General - Planned United Development (CG-PUD) District as indicated on Exhibit B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application. C. That a zone change should be granted for the following reasons: [. The proposed zone designation is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan. 2. The Planned Unit Development designation will provide greater review authority of any proposed development for the properties. D. Development of subject property shall be in accordance with the policies adopted by the City Council; Uniform Building Codes as administered by the Building Official; Fire Code as administered by the Orange County Fire Marshal; and street improvement requirements as administered by the City Engineer. E. Final development plans shall require the review and approval of the Director of Community Development Department. F. A Negative Declaration has been filed in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 25 27 Resolution No. 2160 Page 2 II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 84-2 to designate the Commercial General Planned Unit Development (CG-PUD) District for the property indicated on Exhibit "A". PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 11th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary -PUD ORANGE STREET ZONING 'MAP TUSTIN, CA. PER R ES. NO. DATED PER ORD. NO. DATED EXHIBIT A COMMERICAL GENERAL- PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Report to the Planning Commission OLD BUSINESS NO. i June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: Land Use Study Concerning Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Discussion The City Council, at its meeting on June 4, 1984, adopted an interim urgency ordinance which places a moratorium on the issuance of any new permits for the off-site sale of alcoholic beverages for the next 45 days. The moratorium was requested by a community organization known as "Parents Who Care" who is primarily concerned regarding the availability of alcoholic beverage sales near public schools. Parents Who Care has also questioned City regulations concerning alcoholic beverage sales at automobile service stations. Parents Who Care forma'lly requested this moratorium and asked the City to study all 'zoning regulations relating to businesses with alcoholic beverage licenses and permit their organization to participate in the study process. City Council requested the Planning Commission commence studying zoning regulations relating to alcoholic beverage sales and formally recommend a position. While the Commission may wish to preliminarily review the subject, Mr. Jack Miller, a representative of Parents' Who Care who initiated the moratorium request, is unable to attend the June 11, 1984 Planning Commission meeting and requests the discussion be delayed until the Commission's next meeting on June 25, 1984. City Staff will be available to comment or answer questions the Commission ~y have. Director of Community Development DDL:jh Attachment: Letter From Mr. Jack Miller Community Development Department 17352 Parker Dr. 'D~s~n, CA 926~0 June 5, 19~4 Mr. Donald D. Lamm DLrector of Community Development C~ty of iusE~n 300 Centennial ~,[ay £ust~n, CA 926~0 Dear Don: 'lh[s is Eo ask that formal consideration of ~he alco- holic beverage ou~le~ moratorium by the Plann[nB Commission be scheduled for June 2~ because I will be ou~ of ~own on June 11. We on the Legislation Com~nittee of Parents Who Care look forward to meeting wLth the Commission and with members of your staff to mutually develop recommendaE~ons to the Counc£1 for guidelines and ordLnances which will benefit our communLEy. Ihank you for your assistance. S~ncerely, Jack F. Legislation Committee ChaLrman Parents %~ho Care Planning Commission NEW BUSINESS NO. I June 11, 1984 SUBJECT: Final Tract No. 12018 APPLICAI~F: Richard L. Pierce 14771-G Plaza Drive Tustin, California LOCATION: 14452, 14472, 14492 Holt Avenue ZONING: R-3 (2800) Multiple-Family REQUEST: Authorization to subdivide 1.167 acres into eighteen (18) lots for townhome condominiums and seven {7) lots for common open space area Background & Discussion A final tract map has been submitted requesting the subdivision of 1.167 acres into 18 townhome lots and six common open space lots. This map reflects the approved site plan for Use Permit No. 83-20 which was approved by the City Council and authorized the construction of 18 residential units. This final map is in conformance with the tentative map. This final map is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan which shows the site as Multiple-Family residential. The tentative map was approved by the City Council on January 3, 1984 by the adoption of Resolution No. 84-2.. Recommendation Recommend approval of Final Tract Map No. 12018 to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. 2161. Associate Planner MAC:ih Attachments: Resolution No. 2161 Final Map Community Development Department 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. 2161 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY O~ TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 12018 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application was filed by Richard L. Pierce pursuant to the provisions of Subdivision Ordinance No. 847 for the purpose of creating a 25-1ot (18 townhome condominium and ? common lots) subdivision from the north half of Lot 10 of the Vanderlip and Rowan Tract as shown on a map recorded in Book 5, page 160 of Miscellaneous Records, Los Angeles County. B. That said map is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan. C. A Negative Declaration has bee approved pursuant to the provisions 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 Tract No. 12018 subject to final approval of the City Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 11th day of June, 1984. James B. Sharp, Chairman Janet Hester, Recording Secretary i'RACT NO. 12016 'l STAFF CONCERNS NO. i Status Report JUNE 11, 1984 DEPARTMENTAL PROJECT STATUS - bT_.EK OF JUNE 4, 1984 This report is intended to inform the Council and Commission of Community Development Department projects and their processing or construction status. Should any member of the Council or Commission desire further information, please contact me at your convenience. 1. Preliminary site plans have been submitted for the following: a. The development of a savings and loan building (2,400 square feet) along the Newport Avenue frontage of Larwin Square; b. A proposal for a public storage facility on Sixth Street between the Boy's Club and the Foster Arts complex; A retail shopping center of 9,000 square feet at the northeast corner of Newport Avenue and Bonita Street; d. Renovation of the small commercial site at 130 S. Prospect for use by an architectural firm; and e. Renovation of the Ralph's shopping center at the northeast corner of Carroll Way and 17th Street. 2. East Tustin project consultants are in the process of developing three alternatives for testing fiscal impact, circulation and public facilities. 3. The first draft of the Santa Fe/Edinger Specfic Plan study has been submitted for staff review. Senior Planner AGW:jh ~ Community Development Depart ment J STAFF CONCERNS NO. 2 Planning Commission JUNE 11, 1984 SUBJECT: Report on Council Actions - June 4, 1984 Oral presentation to be given by Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development /jh Attachments: City Council Action Agenda - June 4, 1984 Community Development Department 7:00 I. ALL PRESENT II. NONE III. ACCEPTED IV. BY DOUG GFELLER V. ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL June 4, 1984 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION ROLL CALL PUBLIC INPUT PROCLAMATION 1. SHERMAN STEVENS HISTORIC PLACES PUBLIC HEARING - None HOUSE LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF APPROVED APPROVED VI. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 21, 1984 2. RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL in the amount of $109,851.09 APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in the amount of $326,225.24 APPROVED STAFF 3. RECOMMENDATION PROVED STAFF 4. RECOMMENDATION REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVAL (14611Danborough) Authorize the removal of the street tree at 14611 Danborough per Case II of current City Policy as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. MAGNOLIA TREE PARK TENNIS COURT RESURFACING Authorize the acceleration of the Magnolia Tree Park Tennis Court' Resurfacing project to the cu.rrent fiscal year '83-'84 and authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $4,500.00 for. this project as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. VII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 912 1. ORDINANCE NO. 912 - An Interim URGENCY Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM UPON THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR OFF SALE LIQUOR STORES IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN M.O. - That Ordinance No. 912 have first reading by title only. M.O. - That M.O. - That only. M.O. - That Roll Call Vote passage) Ordinance No. 912 be introduced. Ordinance No. 912 have second reading by title Ordinance No. 912 be passed and adopted. (four-fifths majority required for CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 1 6-4-84 A_DOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 913 2. MODIFICATION OF g SQ.FT. ON PAGE 5, SECTION 21 ORDINANCE NO. 913 - An URGENCY Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, REGULATING THE SALE OF FIREWORKS M.O. - That Ordinance No. 913 have first reading by title only. M.O. - That M.O. - That only. M.O. - That Roll Call Vote passage) Ordinance No.. 913 be introduced. Ordinance No. 913 have second reading by title Ordinance No. 913 be passed and adopted. (four-fifths majority required for IX. X. XI. RECEIVED AND FILED RECEIVED AND FILED OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - None REPORTS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - May 28, 1984 All actions of the Planning Commission appealed by the City Council. are final unless 2. COMMUNITY SERVICES WINTER 1984 QUARTERLY REPORT Receive and file. GREINKE XII. OTHER BUSINESS REPORTED THAT HE HAD A SUPER TIME AT THE CHILI COOKOFF AND THAT THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY HAD A RECORD 265 PEOPLE VISIT THEIR OFFICE. HE COI~4ENDED JEFF KOLIN, ROYLEEN WHITE, MAINTENANCE WORKERS AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR PART IN IT. LETTERS OF COMMENDATION TO BE SENT TO ~ 'EM. EDGAR ASKED STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING ABLE TO PUT UP BANNERS AT EVENTS SUCH AS THIS ONE. KENNEDY SAID SHE HAD TAKEN A POLL OF THE COUNCIL AND THEY WISH TO SUPPORT HENRY )(EDDA FOR THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND DICK TO CONTACT THE OTHER ~MBERS AS TO WHO THEY WISH ON THE AIRPORT LAND USE CO)~4ITTEE. THERE WAS DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN FLIGHTS FROM ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT. THIS WILL BE DISCUSSED FURTHER AT ANOTHER ~ETING. COUNCIL SET TUESDAY, JUNE 5TH AT 4 P.M. FOR A BUDGET WORKSHOP IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM TO BE FOLLOWED BY A CLOSED SESSION FOR PERSONNEL AND LEGAL MATTERS. GREINKE POINTED OUT THAT IN THE LETTER TO LAFCO ON PAGE 2, UNDER ITEM C, IT SHOULD BE THREE MEMBERS ARE COUNTY RESIDENTS INSTEAD OF 2. MR. MILLER, MR. MOSES AND MR. FREDRIKSEN. KENNEDY REPORTED THAT SHE HAD RECEIVED COMPLAINTS ALL DAY LAST MONDAY REGARDING THE SEl~FING OFF OF EXPLOSIVES IN THE CORNFIELD NEXT TO PEPPERTREE AND TUSTIN HEADOWS. STAFF HAS BEEN IN CO)~4UNICATION WITH THE MILITARY ON THAT AND WILL REPORT BACK. 8:04 XIII. ADJOURNMENT - TO a Budget Workshop on Tuesday, June 5th at 4:00 P.M. followed by a Closed Session for legal and personnel matters and thence to the next regular meeting on June 18, 1984. CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 2 6-4-84 ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUSTIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY June 4, 1984 7:00 P.M. 8:04 1. CALL TO ORDER ALL 2. PRESENT APPROVED 3. ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES of May 21, 1984, and addition to Minutes of May 7, 1984 STAFF TO 4. OTHER BUSINESS LOOK INTO COSTS OF A TRAILER STAGE FOR EVENTS SUCH AS THE CHILI COOKOFF. THAT THIS MIGHT BE A JOINT VENTURE WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. GREINKE SUGGESTED KENNEDY POINTED OUT THAT THE PLANNING CO~ISSION IS NEARING THEIR ONE YEAR APPOINTMENTS. SHE WELCOMED JOHN ORR BACK FROM HIS HONEYMOON. Pt~OCLAMATION TO BE GIVEN TO HANS VOGEL WHO IS RETIRING ON JUNE 15TH. 8:08 5. ADJOURNMENT - To the next regular meeting on June 18, 1984. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page I 6-4-84