Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC MINUTES 08-10-21 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 MINUTES VIDEO CONFERENCING TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 10, 2021 6:04 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. Given. INVOCATION: Reverend Ken Suhr, Aldersgate United Methodist Church All present. ROLL CALL: Chair Mason Chair Pro Tem Kozak Commissioners Chu, Higuchi, and Mello None. PUBLIC CONCERNS: CONSENT CALENDAR: Approved the 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —JULY 27, 2021 Minutes of the July 27, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the July 27, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Mello, to approve the Minutes of the July 27, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried: 5-0. None. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. REGULAR BUSINESS: Adopted the 2021 2. 2021 CITYWIDE HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY UPDATE City of Tustin HRS REPORT Update Report and authorized the Community Development Director to make minor modifications to the final survey report and forward the report to the City Council. Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 1 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 The City's Historic Resources Survey (HRS) was originally prepared in 1990 and was last updated in 2003. The survey update is being prepared with the assistance of Architectural Resources Group (ARG), a consulting firm with extensive preservation planning experience. The Survey is now complete, subject to minor modifications, and includes a historic context statement and survey findings. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, acting as the HCRA, adopt the 2021 City of Tustin Citywide Historic Resources Survey Update Report and authorize the Community Development Director to make minor modifications to the final survey report and forward the report to the City Council. Dove Presentation given. Mello Mello asked what resources ARG utilized regarding the historical context statement. He also asked if more outreach to the community will be conducted. Mary Ringhoff In response to Mello's question, Ms. Mary Ringhoff, ARG, stated the following, in general: resources included the previous surveys (i.e. Carol Jordan, columns from the Historical Society and Tustin Preservation Conservancy, secondary sources); several dates came from First American Title Company online database, Orange County GIS Data, including historic aerial photographs, historic photographs through the Orange County Archives, members of the community and all of the newspaper articles found via Newspapers.com; per the outreach, there is one (1) individual they are still trying to obtain information from but overall, ARG is complete with their outreach; and due to COVID-19, could not meet community members in- person. Higuchi Higuchi's questions/concerns generally included: if the report moves forward to the City Council, what action would they be taking? ARG outlined recommended next steps — what would those next steps be if the report is adopted? Per the recommended action — ARG is recommending that the City amend the ordinance to reduce the number of eligibility criteria -would that be further detailed in the revised report or is there any further information with the criteria we would be losing? Willkom Per Willkom, if the report goes forward to the City Council, they will receive and file the report. She reminded the Commission that staff is not asking the City Council to adopt or designate any of the historic resources, it is just a survey inventory for City staff to use and for the public and property owners to utilize when they are proposing any improvements to their homes. If the Commission adopts the survey, what is left for City staff to do is for ARG to Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 2 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 Willkom refine the survey then complete the DPR Forms which will have each of the historic resources' detailed information (i.e. the significance of the resources, character defining features, classification, category the historic resource qualifies under, and other detailed information that is required for CLGs). Then, City staff will upload the database to the City's website for the public to access. The GIS map will be connected to the database as well. With the completion of the survey, there may be some resources that will be dropped off from the survey inventory and some that would be added. Chu Chu asked staff if this survey overview would count towards the HCRA training hours. Willkom Willkom confirmed this survey overview does count towards the HCRA training hours. Kozak Kozak commended ARG and Dove for their hard work on this item. Very thorough update of the historic resources survey. Kozak was in support of the recommended action. Mason Mason also commended staff and ARG for all of their hard work on this historic resources survey. She requested the Planning Commission receive a copy of what is sent to the City Council upon completion. Hurtado Hurtado confirmed no public comments received. Higuchi Higuchi expressed the importance and seriousness of historic and cultural resources. His comments generally included: would like the Commission to be very cognizant and aware when deciding to adopt the survey, it could be taken out of context and used for other projects; with respect to Tustin, the pillars of historic Tustin listing agricultural roots (i.e. Cox's Market &Arvida's Book Store, and Old Town, MCAS); the survey potentially identifies multiple historic resources (i.e. Tustin Meadows and the adjoining properties such as the mobile home parks); how are they potentially a historic resource?; mobile home parks are aesthetically unpleasing, although he was in support of preserving them for affordable housing; did not understand the need to designate every mobile home park or manufactured housing park as potentially historic; he did not see how they contribute to the history in Tustin; and Higuchi requested the opportunity to continue the item to the next meeting in order to allow more time to review the item. Daudt Since Higuchi asked for the opportunity to make a motion to continue the item, Daudt asked the Commission if there was a second on that motion then the Commission would take a vote or discuss the matter. Depending on the outcome of the vote, the Commission can entertain additional motions or that can be the final vote on the matter. Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 3 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 Mason Mason invited the other Commissioners to comment on Higuchi's proposal and/or give him the opportunity to make a motion. Willkom Willkom asked Mason if she would like staff to address Higuchi's comments/concerns. Mason affirmed. Mary Ringhoff In response to Higuchi's concerns with the mobile home parks being included in the survey, Ringhoff stated the following, in general: there was a revision ARG made to the findings after the July revision due to a conversation with the City where it was decided that any newly identified properties (i.e. mobile home parks) would be given a 7R Status code which means identified in reconnaissance survey but not evaluated; these are properties flagged for the future research, but they are not being called eligible at this point; the reason why ARG identified the mobile home parks is because in the research/analysis ARG conducted, they found that the mobile home parks were actually pretty important in the post-war residential development history in Tustin; this is when the population was growing rapidly, the groves were becoming residential subdivisions but there still was not enough housing for people; the reason why the City had to put together this ordinance to restrict mobile home parks was because they were popping up everywhere because people needed a place to live and everyone wanted to live in Tustin; at this point, they are unevaluated and they are being flagged; in the future, if somebody does more research on these properties, they may find that mobile home parks are eligible, or they may find they are not; ARG is confident the Sutliff Trailer Park is eligible, which was originally the Hannaford Trailer Park located on West First Street and was established in the 1940's before the end of World War II; Tustin Meadows was not recommended as a potential historic district, but as a Planning District which carries no weight, in terms of CEQA, or any other kind of compliance; it is a way for ARG to tell the Planning Department "this is an area that is very consistent", in terms of property types (i.e. scale of the building, general setbacks, planning features, etc.) and to alert the Community Development Department that this is an area that is a very distinctive place, not necessarily historic, but to keep in mind for future planning. Higuchi Higuchi asked if the homes in Tustin Meadows are subject to CC&R's or HOA. Mello Mello is a resident of Tustin Meadows and he confirmed there are CC&R's and an HOA in Tustin Meadows. He was not aware of what it meant to be an eligible property or a planned community. If designated as a planned community will there be any impact to the HOA and would the HOA go to the City for any changes to maintenance updates (i.e. light fixture changes, brick veneers to the exterior of the community)? All properties being considered as eligible properties, would there be a follow up investigation or further public outreach? Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 4 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 Willkom In response to Mello's comments, Willkom stated the following, in general: any exterior improvements will need to go through the Planning Division to review the proposed improvements for compatibility with the character or style of the building; regardless of whether the property has historic value or designation, included in the survey or not; with respect to Tustin Meadows, the survey does not designate any of the properties within Tustin Meadows as historic; as far as the Planning District, it is not being suggested for the Commission to adopt the area as a Planning District at this time, this is just to alert staff and the community of the nature of the area; Tustin Meadows is the first Irvine Company project, the first master planned community in Orange County; if there is an interest to include Tustin Meadows as a historic district or Planning District, there would need to be additional studies and analysis; then staff would need to bring the item to the Commission for consideration and potentially adoption; the resources and areas that ARG has studied were all recommendations for inclusion within the survey update; at this time staff is not proposing for the Commission to officially designate any of the identified properties as historic resources; what is being asked of the Commission is to adopt the survey inventory; and any designation will need to be done separately or any adoption or expansion of the historic district would be a separate action. Mason Mason's questions to Willkom generally included: to confirm that this item is a survey of all of the properties in the designated area; when staff says the property is eligible, it does not change any process and/or procedure that would occur when it comes to preservation in the areas identified; if further research is needed to be done with Tustin Meadows, would that hinder the Commission adopting this survey or is that something that would be a separate work stream following the adoption of the survey; and the last survey was done in 2003 -what was the reason for the large gap of time? Willkom Willkom's response to Mason's questions generally included: when a property is identified as eligible for State or Federal designation, that means that potentially the property owner could file with the State or Federal offices to designate their property as a landmark; at this time, the Tustin Meadows is identified only as a potential Planning District; the adoption of the survey is not going to designate Tustin Meadows as a Planning District or any of the properties within it as a Historic Resource; and the reason for the large gap between surveys is due to the cost and not being successful with obtaining grants. Daudt Daudt agreed with Willkom's assessment. The approval of the survey does not do anything to change the characteristic of the neighborhood, in terms of a planning approach or historical designation. That would require a separate route of approvals by the City. Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 5 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-BO39-4A46-9OF3-91AOA042D9B2 Chu Chu agreed with staff that adopting the survey would not change the status of the properties. She reiterated that the Community Development Director has the ability to make minor changes to the survey and staff and ARG are not completely done with the survey. Chu was ready to move forward with the adoption of the survey. Higuchi Higuchi asked Ms. Ringhoff about Appendix C (Master Findings Map)within the report and the three (3) color identifications. He asked about Ms. Ringhoff's comment earlier stating that the report would be revised to designate the mobile home parks as a further study category. Will the Historic Resources Master Findings Map be updated as well? With respect to identification of Tustin Meadows as a Planning District, he asked for an example locally where a historic survey identified an area as a Planning District and what came of that? Higuchi also asked Ms. Ringhoff about any recent surveys identifying post-war subdivisions as potentially eligible or as areas that need further study. He asked staff about the history of Tustin Meadows being identified as a master planned community. Higuchi asked for clarification: the plan is to amend Appendix C (Master Findings Map). If so, he suggested the Commission should wait to adopt the survey. Ms. Ringhoff [The Master Finds Map] does not just identify the mobile home parks but all of the newly identified properties (both individual and districts) which were identified in the reconnaissance survey and that were not identified in 1990 or 2003 surveys. All of those get the unevaluated code and are recommended for further study and they are all on the findings map as newly identified properties. At the request of the City, ARG will be making the revisions by assigning different color codes to districts versus individual properties. Several of ARG's city-wide surveys elsewhere have recommended areas for special consideration in planning. For example, Redlands conducted a context statement only, not a survey. ARG has done surveys in San Marino and Los Angeles where they have recommended areas as Planning Districts. Typically, the historic research finds they are historically significant but they do not retain sufficient physical integrity to convey that significance or to convey their association with historic events or patterns of development. Some cities create an overlay zone or a specific plan to address future development in those areas. ARG did identify nine (9)or ten (10) potential historic districts, but as they are newly identified, they are considered unevaluated. This was a big difference between this survey and the previous survey. ARG was looking at everything up to 1976 to capture the post-war development. 1St Motion: It was moved by Higuchi, seconded by Mello, to continue the item to the next meeting. Motion failed 2-3. Chu, Kozak and Mason dissented. Kozak Kozak asked that there be a review and better understanding of the Planning Districts and bring back to the Commission for consideration. Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 6 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 Willkom Willkom clarified Kozak's intention, in that, only if the area is being proposed to be adopted as a Planning District, then staff would need to bring the item back to the Planning Commission. Daudt Daudt understood the motion to approve staff's recommendation and adopt the survey, but there is the direction embedded in the Commission's action which is to return to the Planning Commission with information concerning the Planning Districts once the report goes to the City Council. If the Commission does want to communicate with the City Council, in terms of reporting actions, he asked the Commissioners to identify they are speaking on behalf of themselves, either as a resident of Tustin, or as an individual member of the Planning Commission rather than a representative to speak on behalf of the majority of the Planning Commission when they do go before the City Council. Willkom Willkom's point of clarification was, any of the recommendations for potential historic district expansion or designation of a planning district could not be acted on without the Planning Commission's separate consideration. Willkom reiterated that the item before the Commission is a survey inventory of potential historic resources. There is no designation included in the survey if the Commission is to adopt the item. There is no expansion of the district. There is no designation of the planning district in any shape or form proposed with the adoption of the survey. 2nd Motion: It was moved by Chu, seconded by Mason, to adopt the 2021 City of Tustin City-wide Historic Resources Survey Update Report and authorize the Community Development Director to make minor modifications to the final survey report and forward the report to the City Council. Motion carried 4-1. Higuchi dissented. STAFF CONCERNS: Willkom Willkom reminded the Commission of the Chili Cook-Off on August 15, 2021 from 11:00 a.m. —6:00 p.m. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Mello Mello had no concerns. Higuchi See you at the Cook-off! Chu Chu thanked staff for tonight's meeting/training. She completed the six (6) hours of HCRA training! Kozak Many thanks to staff and consultants for the work and report. This is an important step in moving forward with Tustin's history. Kozak attended the July 28, 2021 Concerts in the Park (Queen Nation). Looking forward to the 37th Annual Street Fair and Chili Cook-off in Old Town and traffic signal Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 7 of 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: B5CAF058-B039-4A46-90F3-91AOA042D9B2 Kozak cabinet wrap on Red Hill Avenue. Additional cabinet wrap sponsorships can be arranged by calling (714) 573-3326. Mason Mason commended the great survey that was completed. A lot of difficult decisions ahead of this community, but this is a great start on where we go from here! Thanks to ARG and staff. 7:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, August 24, 2021. D/o/pc_u-Signedby- AMY MASON DocuSigned by: Chairperson uu -. O�� ED45DA2623B54A5... JUSTINA L. WILLKOM Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning Commission August 10,2021 —Page 8 of 8