Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA MINUTES 1981 08 17 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA August 17, 1981 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Pro Tempore Hoesterey at 3:47 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. Agency Members Present: Edgar, H0esterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli Agency Members Absent: Sharp Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney Charles Thayer, Interim City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Dale Wick, Assistant City Engineer Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Royleen White, Community Services Director Nancy Miller, Administrative Aide Approximately 15 in the audience 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 3, 1981. It was moved by Edgar~ seconded by Saltare]l~, to approve the minutes of the August 3, 1981, meeting. Carried 3-0, Kennedy abstained, Sharp absent. 4. PROPOSED PLAZA IMPROVEMENTS ON "C" STREET The Community Development Director provided the staff report and recommen- dations, and reported that on August 11 a meeting was held with several businesspersons of the immediate area (Messrs. Lindquist, Gailbreth, John and Tom Prescott, Sy Nozick, Walt Fredrickson, and Margaret Pottinger) along with representatives from Tustin News and Gfeller Development Com- pany to discuss the proposed plaza improvements on "C" Street, where it was the consensus that the parking structure development is a forward- moving project. One businessman did state concerns re closing off the block as it will deter large trucks from using the route into the indus- trial area. In response to Mrs. Kennedy, the Community Development Direc- tor reported that only those property owners adjacent to the project area ("C" Street from Main to Sixth) which will be directly affected were invited to the meeting. Walter Flaherty, 190 E1 Camino Real, stated his objections to the proposed project and closure of "C" street. The Community Development Director responded to Mr. Flaherty's request for information on the cost of the project. Bill Moses, Editor of Tustin News, spoke in opposition to the closure of "C" Street. He requested a traffic count on "C" Street, but the Interim City Manager indicated that with the absence of the City Engineer, the information was not available. Howard Jamieson, St. Minister of Tustin Presbyterian Church, expressed concerns on the closure of "C" Street as it would affect the traffic flow on Main Street at the intersections of "B" and "C" Streets. Doug.Gfeller, Gfeller Development Company, responded to comments made by speakers in opposition to the project and/or closure of "C" Street. He apologized for the appearance of the construction site and indicated that the only modifications being made to the Stevens House are to remove any remodeling and restore it to original design. The plans for "C" Street actually call for realignment and still provide for public ingress/egress, but those wanting to travel on a through route would probably utilize another street. The traffic count information has been quoted previously by staff with extensive discussions on the amount of traffic In par- ticular, through concern over traffic on Main and "C" Streets, the realignment of "C" Street and a joint parking structure were suggested by / REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES page 2, 8-17-81 City staff. Mr. Gfeller stated that his office has never received any inquiries or requests, other than favorable, for plans or information from persons with concerns on the matter. Mr. Gfeller continued that it has been his experience that where a devel- opment provides joint benefits to the public and private sector, there is frequently a sharing of cost. The City's contribution was arrived at on the basis that if "C" Street were not realigned, there would ultimately be a need for a traffic signal on "C" and Main which would cost the city. approximately $50,000. Through the redesign of "C" Street, City staff felt the need for a signal would not materialize and, therefore, could contribute that amount to the redesign effort. The project will provide an opportunity for extraperking and a plaza in that location for weekend and after-hour usage with absolutely no conflict. A question-and-answer/discussion period followed regarding traffic move- ment, notification to and participation of area merchants, historical background of the project, and availability of information to the public. Ginny Flaherty inquired on the availability of funds for redevelopment at the entrance into downtown on North E1 Camino Real. Councilman Edgar assured Ms. Flaherty that redevelol~nent funding would be available for other downtown areas, although the projects may not be identical since the needs will differ It was then moved b~ Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to continue th? matter to the next meeting, with aninvitation extended to area residents/merchants to attend an open workshop on the matter. Mr. Gfeller suggested that staff prepar~ a written report to .Council in response to any questions raised at subject workshop, and relayed problems he is facing with delays on the project. The Interim City Manager sug- gested that staff could notify all those persons within the old town proj- ect area; that questions would be taken from the tapes on specific questions/comments with staff response prepared for the workshop; that said workshop be held the first week in September to allow two weeks to prepare the information and notice the workshop prior to the September 8 Council meeting. Mr. Saltarelli stated he was agreeable to the continuance but nothing beyond t he three weeks, and Mr. Gfeller ~ncurred. Motion carried 4-0, Sharp absent. 81 As suggested by Mr. Gfeller, and with the City Attorney's concurrence, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Saltarelli, to direct staff to prepare proper notice of intention to vacate with clarification that the matter is only under consideration at this point and that the matter will come up for a hearing before the City Council at the earliest meeting legally pes- sible to make a determination of the street vacation. Following Council/staff discussion regarding the street vacation legal process, motion carried 4-0, Sharp absent. Council concurred to schedule the workshop to be held Monday, August 31, 198~, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers. 8~ 5. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 5:0~ p.m. to the evening joint public hearing, thence to a 7:30 p.m. workshop to be held on August 3~, ~98~, in the Council Chambers, and thence to the next regular meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 198~. Carried 4-0, Sharp absent. SECRETY~~