Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-J (ADDITIONAL PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE))Attachment J Public Correspondence since PC 9-27-16 Dove, Elaine From: Marissa Monty <montymarissa@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 20161:24 PM To: Dove, Elaine Subject: RE: 6th Street VINTAGE housing development Dear Elaine, Last night, I attended the Tustin Planning Commission Meeting. I'm relatively new to the downtown Tustin area, though not to Tustin. My mom has lived here for nearly 30 years and I graduated from Tustin High 25 years ago. As such, we have witnessed much of the housing developments south of Tustin Ranch Road into the City of Leine. One of the greatest accomplishments of these new neighborhoods has been the commitment to incorporate numerous green spaces, parks and recreational areas for residents to gather and interact. One of the weakest points, in my view, is that they are overcrowded with physical residents (the buildings), depriving residents of adequate, private exterior space to call their own. Four years ago, I chose to move back to Tustin after more than 20 years away, because Tustin retained so much authenticity in terms of community, small business values, and diversity. Last night, it was those very strengths that the Planning Commission appeared willing to sacrifice in favor of "making a buck". I am pro -development. I am also a small business owner. Additionally, I understand the housing shortage and would support thoughtful efforts to meet demand. But please, within reason. Last night, I heard plans to build 140 units in a 5.81 acre space (I realize the area is 6.8 1, however my understanding is that approximately 1.0 acres is being commited to common space and amenities such as the "mini park", clubhouse, and pool). This puts 140 homes on 5.81 acres. The proposal for these units claims that the development will fit nicely within the existing downtown Tustin community. I would like to ask for evidence of 5.81 acres being used anywhere else in downtown Tustin for 140 residences with proof that such a project has been successful. What would determine its success? Parking was determined not to be an issue. Residents were responsible in consideration of their neighbors, despite conditions that put them living on top of one another, and common spaces were used as intended... for neighbors to get to know each other. I have lived in these types of communities and my experience was the opposite. I have seen homes overcrowded, far more than the "alotted" vehicles belonging to any one home (you simply cannot tell people how many cars they can have), and garages used for storage (no matter what the association says). Why? Because it is in our human nature to collect stuff and to break the rules. Period. Is there any reason the Planning Commission does not consider a development that uses that land for 50 single family homes instead? Why not take a little more time to explore more progressive community options? Please visit www.serenbe.com for an example of the possibilities that might be out there that are worth consideration before rushing into something that - regardless of the direction chosen - will have a lasting impact on the surrounding community and its residents for decades to come. Please do not add to the already overcrowded living conditions of southern CA by approving a project that packs residents in like sardines. Don't do it. Tustin has such charm and potential, in part, because it did not fall to the Irvine Company. Unfortunately, with this project, that statement would not longer be true. The renderings I saw mimic all the neighborhoods that look the same in Irvine. Carbon copies of residents on top of each other. No thank you. I sincerely hope the Planning Commission will reconsider and commit its resources to proposals that are more progressive, more collaborative with current residents, and far more appropriate for 5.81 to 6.81 acres of space. Respectfully, Marissa Monty Dove, Elaine From: James F Gominsky <jgominsky@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:19 PM To: Dove, Elaine Subject: Ref: Parking problems and new condo project on 6th Street. Hello Elaine My name is Jim Gominsky and live at 530 Pacific St. I wanted to express my concerns about the new project that may be going in on 6th St. Its my understand that it will be a 140 unit complex, which means 140 extra cars and most likely 190 to 210 due to people having 2 cars in a household. I know that the condominium project will have parking for their residents, but I also know that the condos and apartments directly behind me located on West Main street known as Tustin Acres also have parking for the residents, but they fill up our streets as either they don't have enough parking for their residents or as I have asked a few of them that have parked in front of my house why they don't park within the complex and was told it is safer as the dogs on Pacific street bark and seem to scare away those wanting to enter their cars illegally. I had Sgt. Coe from the Tustin Police department meet with me at house to go over the parking concerns and he seem to understand our concerns. Here is an example of what we have to put up with as well as cars parking 1 to 2 feet into my driveway. Several months ago i parked my van in front of my house to assure that no one would park in front of me and block my driveway ..... I left the van out in front of my own house for 3 days and got a warning put on my car for parking there more than 72 hours ... but as of today there is a red Chevy truck which by tomorrow September 29, 2016 will be 5 days parked there. I am totally not in favor of the new project going up as I am not sure how the area will handle the overflow of cars, its hard enough as it is...My brother worked for the Santa Ana Police for over 30 years and retired now came by my house to drop off a birthday card at 2 pm. I called in the morning to thank him and he actually laughed at all the cars parked on the street, he asked me about permit parking and i told him despite the parking problems n the street which all the neighbors will agree would not go for that as from my understanding one must use there garage first. Well that isn't going to happen on pacific street because most who live on Pacific use there garage as storage or a extra room ... So I am totally against this new project. My wife after 30 years are now starting to consider moving from Tustin and we do 90% of all our shopping in Tustin. Thank you for listening to my concerns. Dove, Elaine From: Alvaro Quezada <mayito2013@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 12:33 PM To: Dove, Elaine Subject: RE: Tustin Residents Against the Building of Condominium Units in Our Neighborhood! Dear Authors of the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Condominium Builders, am a proud resident of Tustin. All my life, I have enjoyed the quiet, harmonious, and safe residency that our Old Town Community has offered. However, my neighbors and I have been shocked to learn that 140 condominiums will be built at the intersection of 6th and B Street. I am not a financial advisor, an investor, or a millionaire. However, I oppose such proposed project for a multitude of reasons. The most powerful reason why I oppose such project though is because we want our families in Old Town area to continue to enjoy the peace and safety that we have enjoyed for years. Please do not bring the traffic, possible gangs, noise, and devaluation of our properties. Yes, understand this project is benefitting millionaires and investors and it will provide construction jobs and other occupations. However, moving forward with such project will violate our rights. Please conduct a survey and really take into consideration our opinions. We do not have time to go to those long and boring city council meetings. Decisions without residents' representation is a form of tyranny. If this project moves forward, we have no choice but to sell our properties and move to a quiet neighborhood. My neighbors are already planning on selling. Please respect our peace and harmony of our beautiful Tustin. How would you feel if we built over 100 condominiums near your home? Respectfully, Alvaro Quezada Tustin Resident Dove, Elaine From: Gretchen Whisler <gwhis001@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 20161:52 PM To: Dove, Elaine Subject: Re: 320-438 W. Sixth St. and 620-694 S. B Street (GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016.001, TTM 17993, DR 2016-004, DA 2016-002) Good Afternoon Ms. Dove, Thank you for sending me this email. I attended the Planning Commission's meeting of September 27, and witnessed quite a few negative comments regarding the impact on the increased need for parking spaces in that area this project will bring by building over 135 condo units (albeit providing garages for each unit). I have seen nothing in print reflecting the negative community input from that evening. While I do not live in Old Town, I do frequent the area almost daily and trying to find a parking spot in the area of EI Camino Real between Sixth Street and Third Street is nearly impossible during the hours our restaurants and merchants are open for business. (This is my personal experience; I invite staff from the City offices to drive down there and experience it for yourselves.) I can only imagine the "spillover" effect this added project will have. Old Town has too many vacant lots (at least FIVE come immediately to my mindl) and too few parking lots (only one public one adjacent to the area I mentioned abovel) and yet resolving this issue never seems to be on the City's agendal Therefore, it is my hope that the City will seriously consider solutions before allowing a project like this one which will no doubt exacerbate this parking problem. Surely there is a "fix" to this because growing and enriching Old Town is such a positive move which will and should bring more visitors and needed revenue to this community. Thank you again; I look forward to attending the City Council meeting on November 15, to see if the parking problem has been addressed regarding this particular project. Sincerely, Gretchen Whisler -----Original Message ----- From: Dove, Elaine <EDove@tustinca.org> Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2016 12:00 pm Subject: 320-438 W. Sixth St. and 620-694 S. B Street (GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016-001, TTM 17993, DR 2016-004, DA 2016-002) Good morning, You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in the proposed Downtown Commercial Core Plan (DCCP) in the City of Tustin. Please see the attached notice of a public hearing for a project located at 320-438 W. Sixth Street and 620-694 S. B Street, which falls within the proposed boundary of the DCCP. Although the public hearing is not related to the DCCP, its location within the proposed boundary of the DCCP may be of interest to you. Please feel free to send me an email if you have any questions or comments. Regards, Elaine Dove, AICP, RLA Senior Planner Dove, Elaine From: nathan@menarch.com Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 12:22 PM To: Dove, Elaine Subject: RE: 320-438 W. Sixth St. and 620-694 S. B Street (GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016-001, TTM 17993, DR 2016-004, DA 2016-002) Elaine, Is it to Iate to request the developer to provide off-site improvements for both sides of 6th Street? Future development should require fees to be collected to help improve the residential area of Old Town. Old Town residential area is in need of sidewalks throughout. Many of the street have sidewalks that start and stop mid -block (including 6th & B Streets). Sidewalk improvements would encourage and provide safer pedestrian traffic. The Old Town area would also look better with all utilities under -grounded. See you on the 16th of November! All the best, Nathan MENARCH MENARD ARCHITECTURE 225 N. Broadway, Suite 213 Santa Ana, California 92701 Cell :: 71 X1.552.2722 nathan@menarch.com www.menarch.com -------- Original Message -------- Subject: 320-438 W. Sixth St. and 620-694 S. B Street (GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016-001, TTM 17993, DR 2016-004, DA 2016-002) From: "Dove, Elaine" <EDove@tustinca.org> Date: Wed, November 02, 2016 12:00 pm To: Good morning, You are receiving this email because you have expressed interest in the proposed Downtown Commercial Core Plan (DCCP) in the City of Tustin. Please see the attached notice of a public hearing for a project located at 320-438 W. Sixth Street and 620-694 S. B Street, which falls within the proposed boundary of the DCCP. Although the public hearing is not related to the DCCP, its location within the proposed boundary of the DCCP may be of interest to you. Please feel free to send me an email if you have any questions or comments. 1 November 9, 2016 Dear Esteemed Members of the Tustin City Council, I am writing to express my concerns regarding the condominium development proposed in Old Town Tustin. I attended the Planning Commission meeting in September where it was approved, despite the overwhelming opposition of many downtown residents. And, contrary to the Orange County Register report, there were many more than 6 people who voiced opposition! One after another, the residents voiced a litany of grievances: vehicles of residents who don't live in the neighborhood (many of whom have been tracked to Santa Ana!) clogging the streets, preventing tax -paying residents from parking in front of and putting their trashcans in front of their own homes, increased noise from rowdy late-night drop-offs and unattended car alarms, concern about the drought -induced water shortage, increased safety concerns, etc. It was indeed disheartening to hear the chairman lecture the audience that the condominium project must be considered as a separate project, that the issues facing the rest of the neighborhood are not pertinent to the approval of this new venture! How breathtakingly ludicrous, and it proved costly to him. If a doctor tells his patient that he must lose 25 pounds for the benefit of his health, he shouldn't proceed to gain 100 pounds—and that is precisely what you are expecting the residents of Old Town to do. I have resided at 230 South A Street for 28 years, and I have had to call the city or the police department for parking, safety, and nuisance issues more times in the last 8 months than I have in the last 28 years combined. I have had to start locking my doors and instituting security and self-defense measures for the first time. Cars clog the street along my southern boundary (multiple cars park here, then another driver comes and picks up the drivers and takes them away). Not only that, they dump the contents of their cars along my curb and fence and inside my yard. This is not only an annoyance and eyesore, it is a health and safety issue for my grandchildren and dog. I have been cited several times for not following the Tustin water restrictions. My home is blessed to have some of the first trees planted by the Tustin family on its grounds, including some spectacular palms which are part of the Tustin skyline (they are clearly visible from the freeway flyover). Those palms are along the public right of way, and yet my sprinklers (and money) keep them alive. Tustin is known as the "City of Trees," and you have Arbor City signs promoting this fact posted at the city limits. Downtown Tustin is losing a number of its old majestic trees to the drought, and I have been penalized in my attempts to keep this part of Tustin's history alive. Because of this, it was galling to hear the water company representative reassure the planning commission that Tustin has plenty of water for its existing residents and the proposed condo projects will not present a problem! We ALREADY have a problem! The residents of Old Town have very real issues which have not been solved, despite much protest and communication. A few streets have been posted "permit only parking," but that has only pushed the problem into adjacent areas. Everyone has seen their quality of life diminished. I hear people express loss of enchantment with living in the neighborhood. Because of this, I fear the prospect of more single family homes being rented out to large groups and/or turned into sober living homes. The city staff blamed much of the increased parking on so-called granny cottages in Old Town, but the number of such properties is miniscule—the gross increase in vehicular parking is the result of existing multi -unit dwellings in Tustin, and just across the border, which are renting to more people than should be residing there. The project representatives touted their two -car garages and ample on -street parking plans, and yet those calculations are misleading, at best. No one parks in their garage, they use it for storage (or housing!). They are projecting families with two cars to reside in these condos, but, as in the rest of Tustin, a family group with 4 or more cars will end up living in each unit. Mrs. Libby Pankey spoke at the planning commission meeting and stated that she vividly recalls when Stevens Square was being developed. A parking structure was included in the plans, and she was assured that no one was going to be parking on B Street along her property because they would all be parking in the parking structure. That has never been the case, and there are many times when she literally cannot get in and out of her driveway because of cars blocking her. She is confined to a wheelchair, and her elderly friends find it difficult to visit her because of the same problem the rest of us face—non-residents parking their cars along Main Street for long periods of time. I strongly urge you to place a moratorium on the proposed condo project, and any other projects that will inpact the quality of life in downtown Tustin, until the pressing concerns of its residents are resolved. We don't need the City Council to "direct staff to look into the situation." The problems are self-evident, of which the staff is fully aware. We need the City Council to FIX THE PROBLEMS NOW. Please return our streets to us and restore the sense of neighborhood and safety which is slipping away from us. If you fail to protect our properties now, your legacy will be the demise of the very treasure you give lip -service to defending and promoting. If you take steps to remedy the existing problems for the residents, you will no doubt find a more receptive audience to your development plans. Thank you very much, Nancy Shumar