This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
East Orange v Orange Park Acres v Villa Park v Anaheim Hills v Cowan Heights Crawford Canyon v Silverado/Modjeska Canyon Areas v North Tustin

A Monthly Community Newspaper Est. 1969

County supervisors agree to rescind amendment to North Tustin Specific Plan

By Tina Richards The OC Board of Supervisors

agreed to rescind an amendment to the North Tustin Specific Plan (NTSP) that would have allowed a two-story senior living facil- ity to be erected in the midst of single-family homes. The amendment, passed by a

previous board in 2011, created a new zoning designation – senior residential housing (SRH) – that applied only to the seven-acre Newport Ave. property and did not appear on any other planning document in the county. Third District Supervisor Todd

Spitzer proposed reversing the amendment because it did not honor the NTSP, and altered the zoning for the benefit of one landowner and not the commu- nity. He recalled the remarks of outgoing Board President Shawn Nelson, who was the only “no”

vote in 2011, that “changing a specific plan is an academic exer- cise. It must involve the commu- nity, it requires public hearings, you don’t change a specific plan that’s been in place since 1983 for a particular project.”

One step over the line Spitzer also noted that the di-

viding line between residential and mixed use in North Tustin is at 17th St. The proposed senior living facility on property owned by the Catholic Diocese of Or- ange is on the wrong side. “This is a commercial development,” Spitzer said. “You can call it se- nior residential housing, but com- mercial activities will take place there; it is an inappropriate use for the neighborhood.” North Tustin residents who

See "Specific Plan" continued on page 7

Tuesday, February 10, 2015 NEWS INSIDE

We can work it out

Clash turns to compromise as church developer and OPA meet in the middle over growth plans. See Salem Church, page 2

Grass not always greener

Jonah Meis (left) and Caden Krup beat out much of the competition at the annual Indian 500 Pinewood Derby hosted by the Longhouse of the Orange Skies. See more pictures, page 12.

OUSD Board belabors Measure K loss, but defers meaningful public discussion

“It’s a legacy piece of prop-

erty,” Mike Lopez said. “Don’t focus on money, focus on the vi- sion.” During the ensuing board dis-

By Tina Richards Trustees of the Orange Unified

School District voted not to sell the surplus Peralta property and approved a new teachers’ con- tract at its Jan. 22 meeting. The board ran out of time before it could fully address the communi- ty-requested topic of funding for facilities upgrades, following the defeat of Measure K. The meeting room was packed

FCA meeting slated

Foothill Communities As-

sociation will hold its 51st Annual Town Hall meeting Monday, March 2 at Hewes Middle School at 6:30 p.m. Or- ange County Supervisor Todd Spitzer will be the keynote speaker. On hand for public discussions will be represen- tatives of OC Public Works, the Sheriff’s Department, OC Parks and the CHP. FCAmem- bership runs with the calendar year. It is time to renew mem- berships or join. Electronic and paper forms are available at

with teachers anxious to hear the fate of their long-awaited con- tract, Measure K supporters pre- pared for an exchange of ideas, and neighbors of the Peralta site lined up to dissuade the board from selling the property. Peralta, along with four other

properties, was declared surplus in 2004. A portion of the site was subsequently leased by Su- per Sports, a golf and recreation complex used extensively by the community and OUSD students. Two years ago, the board at-

tempted to generate income from Peralta by leasing it to an apart- ment developer. The idea was tabled after trustees were pum- meled by unhappy neighbors and a financial analysis that demon- strated the fallacy of the plan. The lease with Super Sports ex- pires March 31.

More than money All but one of the public com-

menters encouraged the board to extend the lease and keep the site. They cited the property’s prime location, the possibility that the district may one day need it for students, Super Sports’ benefit to the community, and its continued use by high school golfers.

cussion, Trustees Kathy Moffat, Diane Singer and Alexia Delgi- anni-Brydges sided with the pub- lic, while Rick Ledesma, John Ortega, Tim Surridge and Mark Wayland all found the failed Measure K to be a compelling reason to sell Peralta. Moffatt pointed out that although Peralta had been declared surplus, it had never been specifically targeted to be sold. Delgianni-Brydges advised that once sold, the district would have no say in what hap- pened to it. “The buyer might put in multi-units,” she said. Mark Wayland held up a sheaf

of paper, telling the audience that he saved every letter written to him opposing the Peralta lease to an apartment developer. “I read every one of these letters,” he said. “You told me that if we didn’t put apartments on the site that you would support a bond measure to pay for school im- provements.” He then explained that an analysis of the Measure K vote indicated that the Peralta neighborhood had largely voted against the bond. “That’s all I’m going to say,” he said. “You’re putting us in a box,”

Ledesma told the anti-sale audi- ence. “You didn’t support Mea- sure K and you don’t want us to sell Peralta.” He noted that school facilities need repairs and upgrading, and the money has to come from. “I gotta be able to sell something,” he said.

Tomorrow never knows Both Surridge and Ortega re- jected the notion that future de-

velopment might create a need for another school site. Several public commenters referred to the 1,500 homes the Irvine Company had entitlements to build in East Orange, with no school included. “We don’t have funds to support the schools we have,” Surridge reported. “We shouldn’t be man- aging property for a mythical fu- ture generation.” Ortega insisted that the Irvine

development did include a school site. When Ortega’s comment was challenged by the audience, he dismissed the correction with a terse “whatever.” The sale of district property

requires a super-majority vote -- that is, five of seven. The fifth vote wasn’t there. Ledesma, Sur- ridge, Ortega and Wayland voted “yes;” Moffat, Singer and Delgi- anni-Brydges voted “no.” Moffatt and Singer began the

discussion of the teacher’s con- tract by applauding those in the room for “working with the board” during tough times. Mof- fatt noted that teachers had gone without a pay raise for seven years, and that they had accepted furlough days to stretch the bud- get. Singer reiterated the board’s appreciation of district teachers and indicated that the contract’s eight percent pay raise was over- due.

Say what?! Ledesma jumped in with the

revelation that the teacher’s union had given money to both Singer and Moffatt during the last election, suggesting that their praise was bought and paid for.

See "OUSD" continued on page 6

Photo by JJ Meis

City says landscaping fees must grow if neighborhood wants its plants to. See Santiago Hills, page 4

The pipes are calling

A last minute suitor muddies the waters for local control of county sewer system. See Council agrees, page 5

One for the road

County explores "adopt a roadway" status for scenic canyon cruiseway, see Santiago Canyon, page 7

What you don’t know

Lunch at a Villa Park group home changes perceived threat into acceptable asset. See Sober living, page 10


Letters To The Editor Page 7 Soup's On

Canyon Beat Prof. Directory Classifieds

Page 8 Page 8

Page 13 Page 13

Services Directory Page 14-15 Real Estate Obituaries Sports

Page 17 Page 17

Page 18-19

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20