Agenda Report
Fullerton City Council
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 6, 2026
TO: CITY COUNCIL / SUCCESSOR AGENCY
SUBMITTED BY: SUNAYANA THOMAS, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PREPARED BY: Benjamin Koff, ASSOCIATE pLANNER
SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE ON PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE LOWER GOLDEN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD
SUMMARY
The applicant requests a Zoning Amendment to rezone properties in the Lower Golden Hill Neighborhood from R-1-7.2 (Single-Family Residential, 7,200 square foot minimum lot size) to R-1-7.2P (Single-Family Residential, 7,200 square foot minimum lot size, Preservation Zone) thereby creating a new Historic Preservation area.
PROPOSED MOTION
Introduce Ordinance No. XXXX for first reading by title only and waive further reading of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX – AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, CHANGING A ZONE CLASSIFICATION FROM “R-1-7.2” TO “R-1-7.2P” ON PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE LOWER Golden Hill Neighborhood, generally described as the properties bounded by richman avenue, malvern avenue and west side of drake avenue
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
Approve the Proposed Motion
Provide alternative direction
Other options brought by City Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Proposed Motion.
CITY MANAGER REMARKS
None.
PRIORITY POLICY STATEMENT
This item matches the following Priority Policy Statements:
Infrastructure and City Assets.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
DISCUSSION
The Lower Golden Hill Neighborhood consists of properties zoned R-1-7.2 (Single-Family Residential, 7,200 square foot minimum lot size). The proposed zone change would add a “P” to the zone reflecting the Preservation Zone designation. A Residential Preservation Zone is a zoning classification applied to a mature residential neighborhood where the existing housing and environment provides a valuable asset to the City worthy of preservation (Fullerton Municipal Code (FMC) Section 15.48.020).
Request for Zone Change
The City received a request to reclassify the Lower Golden Hill Neighborhood to a Residential Preservation Zone on January 19, 2025. The City held an informational meeting pursuant to FMC 15.48.055 on May 29, 2025. The meeting sign-in sheet indicated 14 properties attended the meeting to explain Preservation Zone implications and the public hearing process for implementation.
Staff gave a presentation followed by a question-and-answer period. Fullerton Heritage participated in the meeting and provided information in response to certain questions. Fullerton Heritage provided a petition for property owners to sign in support or opposition to the Preservation Zone. Volunteers also went door to door in the subject neighborhood to circulate the petition with a 76.25 percent response rate. The responses resulted in the following:
Support
48 60%
Opposed
13 16.2%
No Response
19 23.8%
TOTAL PROPERTIES:
80 100%
The petition meets the minimum 51 percent property owner support for the Director of Community and Economic Development to initiate the zoning amendment to consider the request to reclassify the neighborhood to a Residential Preservation Zone.
Historical Significance
The majority of homes in the subject neighborhood were built in the 1920s through early 1940s. The neighborhood includes several designated Local Landmarks and Significant Properties. Fullerton Heritage provided the following in support of the request:
At the time of development of Golden Hill, Fullerton was experiencing a severe housing shortage. Despite the acute need for new housing, all the development was concentrated in the flat areas of the City within or just around the original townsite. There was a reluctance to build within the hilly areas of the City because they were considered too far out or prohibitively expensive to bring in gas, electrical, telephone and other utilities. The development of Upper and Lower Golden Hill changed those beliefs, and the overwhelming success of this hilly area led to the development of additional tracts in equally elevated areas, including Oceanview Drive, Hillcrest Park and Skyline Park. This trend continued after World War II.
Lower Golden Hill, with its attractive and affordable middle-class homes, provided much needed housing for the working class in Fullerton. Although many of Fullerton’s notable building contractors designed and built impressive and expensive homes in Upper Golden Hill, they also built speculative and commissioned homes in Lower Golden Hill. The area includes two designated Fullerton Local Landmarks: the Model Home of 1927 (701 North Richman Avenue) and the Clinton F. Abbott House (705 North Richman Avenue). A third home, the Suters House (621 North Richman Avenue), may become a designated Local Landmark. The Robert E. Corcoran House (600 West Union Avenue) is a potential Fullerton Local Landmark.
Although notable Fullerton building contractor Evan J. Herbert designed and built significant homes in Upper Golden Hill, he also was responsible for numerous residences in Lower Golden Hill, setting the architectural tone for the neighborhood. His Spanish Colonial Revival and Cottage-styled homes established the first architectural pattern for residences, which initially were built in these two revival styles. His residences, particularly the speculative ones, demonstrated how the new subdivision could look to potential homebuyers. Like Philip N. Schmoker in Skyline Park, Herbert became the dominant contractor within the district.
Although a few original dwellings have been severely modified, most of the homes within Lower Golden Hill retain a high degree of historic integrity, and the historic district looks very much like it did in the 1920s and 1930s. Most of the alterations and additions to the residences are successful in scale, if not always in their design and finish. The majority of residences are of pre-World War II construction and are very well-maintained, having experienced very minimally to no alterations. The Minimal Traditional dwellings added in the 1940s blended well with the original residences. However, no attempt was made to blend the 1970s built residences with the historic housing, especially on North Drake Avenue. Overall, the historic district has aged well and still conveys its original development pattern as a single-family residential development.
A City-recognized potential historic district, Lower Golden Hill consists exclusively of duplexes and single-family homes in the 500 block of West Malvern Avenue; the 600 to 800 blocks of North Richman Avenue; the 600 blocks of North Drake and Golden Avenues; and the 500 and 600 blocks of West Union Avenue. Unlike Upper Golden Hill, which was laid out for expensive homes, Lower Golden Hill consists of middle-class houses designed primarily for the working class. While there was an occasional expensive home (e.g., 662 North Golden Avenue, 701 North Richman Avenue, 600 West Union Avenue), nearly all the dwellings ranged from $4,000 to $5,000, the average price of a period revival home in the 1920s and 1930s. The first owners of the attractive residences include machinists, gardeners, electricians, carpenters, grocers, real estate agents, auditors, salesmen, teachers, postal clerks and oil workers.
There are presently 83 residential units on 80 properties in the historic district. The tracts of the historic district were laid out to take advantage of the hilly terrain, with dwellings along North Richman and West Malvern Avenues situated well above the street level to capture views, as well as houses along the north side of Drake Avenue which are located below the street level. Lower Golden Hill is most often accessed from Richman Avenue, the main thoroughfare, where heavy traffic is concentrated; side streets have considerably less traffic. There is adequate street parking, but each residence has either an attached or detached garage, many of which are accessible from alleys. The neighborhood is enhanced by concrete sidewalks, mature landscaping and tree-lined streets. Lower Golden Hill is noted for its homogeneous collection of 1920s and 1930s housing, with the glaring exception of the north end of North Drake Avenue where much larger residences with contemporary architecture were added in the 1970s.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 10, 2026, to consider the request (Attachment 4) and received the following input:
A property owner spoke about the benefit of being located within a Historic Preservation Zone.
A speaker representing Fullerton Heritage urged approval of the request and spoke of the diligence of property owners providing outreach to other property owners.
A speaker conveyed concerns about selling a home within a Historic Preservation Zone.
A speaker conveyed concerns about constructing additions on a home within a Historic Preservation Zone.
Planning Commissioners indicated the data provided, including percentage of supporting property owners, provides a strong case for approving the zone change request. The Planning Commission voted 4 – 1 (Opposed: Fleenor) to recommended City Council approve the Zoning Amendment.
Request for Appeal
Stephanie Howard submitted a request for appeal on behalf of Jim and April Miller. Ms. Howard stated opposition to including her family’s property in the proposed Lower Golden Hill Preservation Zone during the Planning Commission meeting due to modifications to the subject property, constructed around 1908, over the last 100 years (Attachment 7).
Staff conferred with the City Attorney’s office to ensure that no issues existed with the appeal request timing per FMC Section 15.72.050(c). The City Attorney’s Office advised the 60-day time element does not apply as the item requires final approval by City Council. Additionally, FMC Section 15.72.050(c) only refers to an appeal from a recommendation to deny but says nothing about a recommendation to approve.
Nonetheless, staff recommends including the property in the proposed Preservation Zone as it represents a contributing property to the neighborhood. Staff acknowledges that owners modify properties as time progresses and that there is no expectation or code requirement to convert properties to original construction. Also, no requirement exists that all homes within a Preservation district have the same architectural design or age.
National and state-accepted planning and zoning practices dictate that zones contain blocks of properties, and not individual parcels. Removing individual properties goes against this principle and against past City approval actions for other Preservation Zones.
Lastly, The Fullerton Plan (i.e., General Plan) states the following regarding Historic Preservation:
Historic Preservation represents a responsibility of the present generation to maintain unique and significant structures, sites and areas established in the past for the use and enjoyment of future generations. Fullerton has a rich and varied mix of historic resources, including buildings and neighborhoods, with historical, architectural or cultural significance. These resources represent important aspects of the history of Fullerton and the region.
Staff recommends approving the proposed Preservation Zone.
Environmental Review
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 (Class 8 – Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) because the project proposes a Zoning Amendment to add a Preservation designation to an established neighborhood with historic characteristics with no public review required. Staff would file a Notice of Exemption this project.
Attachments:
• Attachment 1 – PowerPoint Presentation
• Attachment 2 – Draft Ordinance No. XXXX
• Attachment 3 – Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 10, 2026 • Attachment 4 – Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-2026-10 • Attachment 5 – Planning Commission Minutes dated June 10, 2026 • Attachment 6 – Portion of June 10, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting Transcript cc: City Manager Eddie Manfro
Lower Golden Hill Zone Change
October 6, 2026 - Page 2