Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA MINUTES 1982 02 16 MINUTES OF A REGULARA MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA February 16, 1982 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sharp at 4:04 p.m. in the City Coualcil Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. ! 2. ROLL CALL Agency Members Present: Edgar, Kennedy, Sharp Agency Members Absent: Hoesterey, Saltarelli Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Huston, Exec. Director/City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Bob Ledendecker, Director of Public Works Royleen White, Community Services Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Edward Knight, Associate Planner Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk Approximately 20 in the audience 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the minutes of the February 1, 1982, regular meeting. Carried 2-0, Hoesterey and Saltarelli absent, Sharp abstaining. 4. NEWPORT AVENUE BIKE TRAIL BERM CURB REPLACEMENT As reconunended in the memo dated February 1, 1982, prepared by the Engi- nesting Division, it was moved by Edgar, seconded b~ Kennedy, to adopt the following resolution and assuming no claims or stop payment notices are filed within 30 days of the date of recordation of Notice of Completion, authorize payment of the final 10% retention amount at that time: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 82-1 - A Resolution of the Tustin Community Redevelop- merit Agency of the City of Tustin ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (Newport Avenue Bike Trail Berm Curb Replacement - Alfredo's Excavating & Paving Construction) Motion carried 3-0, Hoesterey and Saltarelli absent. 86 5. ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS - VARIOUS LOCATIONS Pursuant to the reconu~endation contained in the memo dated January 22, 1982, prepared by the Engineering Division, it was moved by Edgar, sec- onded by Kennedy, to adopt the following resolution= RESOLUTION NO. RDA 82-2 - A Resolution of the Tustin Community Redevelop- ment Agency of the City of Tustin, California, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECI- FICATIONS FOR ALLEY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT I - Alley Fast of E1 Camino Real Between Main St. & 3rd St. PROJECT II - Tract No. 3994 Alley PROJECT III- E1 Cemino Bank Alley Between 3rd St. & E1 Camino Real Carried 3-0, Hoesterey and Saltarelli absent. 95 6. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to approve General Demands for the month of January, 1982, in the amount of $443,912.60 as recommended by the Director of Finance. Motion carried 3-0, Hoesterey and Saltarelli absent. 81 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES Page 2, 2-16-82 7. PR0SPECT AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS AS recon=aended in the memo dated February 4, 1982, prepared by the Direc- tor of public Works, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by sharp, to direct staff to include within the 1982-83 ~A Capital Improvement progr~ fun~ ing for ~e s~ject project in the ~o~t of $14,000.00 and ~rect staff to execute the s~ject Improv~ent Agreement- In response to Mrs. Kennedy, the Director of Public Works stated that the City ~11 get a fair ret~n by including the property o~er's dedication of the required right-of-way in exchange for the City construc~in~ all required street ~provMents by saving acquisition costs, appraisal fees, and a~inistrative staff costs, aside from the benefits to the City and c~ity · Motion carried 3-0, Hoesterey ~d Saltarelli ~sent. 45 95 8. SITE PLAN REVIEW - 175 "C" STREET ~e Com~ity Develo~ent Director presented the staff report. He pointed out ~at the facility faces ~e ~rk ~d has ~en designed to give it a residential appearance. More importantly, if the proposal is approved, it will inhibit ~e ~ility of ~e Redevelo~ent Agency or pro~rty o~ers in the area to consolidate lots since it would mandate that the alley access to the rear of ~is facility ~ mintained in order to provide ~rking. ~e ability to cosine either fo~ or six lots (r~aining lots to the south) into a single integrated development ~uld be restricted. At ~e present time the Agency does not have any active progr~ of lot purchase and ~nsolidation for resale to developers. ~e pro~sed project conforms with the C2 zoning ~derlying the Redevelo~ent District plan. If the Agency detemines this development is inappropriate and not in keeping with the Redevelopment area, it should direct staff to work with this property o~er and other property o~ers to att~pt to accomplish more comprehensive develo~ent in the area. If not, then the Agency should direct staff to work with the property owner for ~e development as pr~ posed. ~. Edgar stated his opposition to perpetrating the alley. He stated he is in favor of supporting consolidation of adjoining lots for continuity- In tems of architectural style, he does not think it matters so long as it is not stark ~tra-modernistic. Mrs. Kennedy concurred, but stated her preference for Victorian or Queen ~ne architecture d~inating the down- to~ area. The C~ity Development Director stated ~at he ~derstands ~e Agency's direction to be to work with the applicant to see if a proposal cannot be ex~nded to include additional property. Secondly, ~at any development, even if l~ited to one lot, should not place dependence on ut~i~z'~lon of the alley for access and utilization; if a project could be developed on one lot but did not utilize the alley for any of its purposes, it might be pemitted, but ~e primary ~al ~uld be to see if consolidation could ~ 81 generated · 9. AGENCY CONCERNS None · 10. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 4:16 p.m. to the next regular meeting on March ~, 1982. Carried 3-0; Hoesterey and Salta- relli absent.