The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOB 2 SIDEWALK CONST 09-08-92OLD BUSINESS NO. 2 9-8-92 DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 1992 Inter -Com TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: REQUEST TO WAIVE REQUIREMENTS TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK AT 2512- 2522 CHAMBERS ROAD (CRESTMARK REAL ESTATE AND INVESTMENTS) RECOMMENDATION Pleasure of the City Council. BACKGROUND At their August 3, 1992 meeting the City Council discussed the subject item and continued it to their meeting of September 8, 1992 for further discussion and action. Council also requested staff to return with additional alternatives to possibly resolve the issue. A second field review was completed with respect to the landscaping within the parkway area. It appears that turf sod has been replaced a few months ago along with four flower and ground cover areas adjacent to the two driveways. The parkway area is also supported by an irrigation system which would require some modification. There are no trees that would require removal. It is anticipated that the sidewalk could be installed for an estimated cost of $4,800 to $5,000 across the frontage of the subject property. A copy of the previous staff report and request for waiver of sidewalk construction is attached for the Council's reference. DISCUSSION The following are the five alternatives the City Council may want to consider regarding this request for waiver for sidewalk requirement: 1. Rescind the requirement for sidewalk construction that was approved by City Council on January 19, 1987 within the industrial zoned areas: This alternative could have an adverse impact to traffic safety by forcing pedestrians in the street travel way area with the trucks and automobiles. 2. Place a moratorium on the sidewalk requirement within the industrial areas for a designated period of time or until the recession is resolved. 3. Require the developer to place a cash deposit in the amount of $5,000 in a joint account (bearing interest to the developer) for the construction of the sidewalk at the time the building occupancy rate increases to 85% from its current level of 50% as outlined in the letter of request. 4. Create an assessment district for sidewalk construction within each industrial area which would spread the cost of said sidewalk construction and administrative district costs over a multi-year payoff period of 10 or 20 years. This alternative would allow the sidewalk to be constructed at one time in lieu of on a piece meal basis as it is currently being done. 5. Deny the request for waiver of sidewalk construction and uphold the current City Council requirement of January 19, 1987. At their meeting of August 24, 1992, the Planning Commission reviewed the issue of requiring sidewalk construction in the industrial areas and was generally supportive of the assessment district concept described in number 4 above. -- Staff has recently received another inquiry regarding the sidewalk requirement, from the property owner Silicon Systems, at the northwesterly corner of Walnut Avenue and Myford Road. They have also requested a waiver for said sidewalk requirement, which is included within a separate agenda item. ik Robert . Ledendecker / Director of Public Worj�/City Engineer RSL:kIb:CHAMBER AGENDAL�;k PJ ATE : AUGUST 3 1992 Inter -Com , TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT.. REQUEST TO WAIVE REQUIREMENTS TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK AT 2512- 2522 CHAMBERS ROAD (CRESTMARK REAL ESTATE AND INVESTMENTS) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Tustin City Council deny the request to waive the requirement to construct sidewalk at 25.12-2522 Chambers Road in conjunction with their tenant improvements. BACKGROUND Attached for City Council consideration is a letter dated July 17, 1992 from Crestmark Real Estate and Investments, requesting that the City waive the requirement for them to construct a standard sidewalk within the public right-of-way adjacent to their building, located at 2512-2522 Chambers Road in conjunction with tenant improvements. At the City Council meeting of January 19, 1987 (minutes attached) , the City Council established a uniform policy for the construction of 5 -foot wide utility clear sidewalks within any industrial areas, except in areas with concentrated retail uses where the sidewalk width shall be 8 -foot wide. This requirement is a standard City condition of approval imposed for all new construction as well as tenant improvements within the industrial areas. DISCUSSION Five foot side utility clear sidewalks exist along the frontage of the adjacent parcel to the west as well as the property across Chambers Road at the northwest corner of Chambers Road and Franklin Avenue. At both of these locations the City standard condition of approval was imposed in conjunction with tenant improvements. a,e' c5l-'e Robert S. Ledendecker Director of Public Works/ City Engineer RSL:klb:WRCSC Jerry Otteson Associate Civil Engineer a �6�adr� '00. 'm 1719T CQ,E8TMAQK TUSTIN PUBLIC Real Estate S Investments 23151 Moulton Pkway., Suite 103, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 (714)859-8511 FAX: 859-9940 July 17, 1992 City of Tustin Bob Ledendecker Director of Public Works 15222 Del Amo Tustin, CA 92680 RE: 2512-2522 Chambers Road, Tustin, CA E Per our conversation yesterday, I am writing this letter to explain the current financial situation of San -Joe Partners, the owner of the above referenced office building, in regards to the issuance of the building permit and the construction of a sidewalk on our property. San -Joe Partners purchased the office building from Home Fed Bank in September 1991. At that time, it was approximately 800 occupied with much deferred maintenance. San -Joe had set aside approximately $150,000 in capital in order to refurbish the property and lease up the balance of the building. To date, we have spent approximately $125,000 of that money and occupancy has dropped to around 50%. For the $125,000 we have completely replaced the landscaping (including the parkway where the proposed sidewalk would go), refinished the parking lot, refinished all four stairways, painted the building, refurbished the A/C units, repaired the roof and completely refurbished some of the suites interiors. In an effort to lease up the balance of the building, we have decided to change one entire building from general office uses into an executive suite with approximately 50 offices. We had our architect draw up the plans (at a cost of $9,500) and submit them to the planning department. After a iew minor revisions they have approved the plans. The only obstacle in our way now is the requirement that Public Works is placing on the plans that we install a sidewalk across the entire front of our property. During the plan check process we put the plans out for bid. We have since received bids from various contractors on the new construction, and all the bids have come in approximately $40,000 higher than we had anticipated. The sidewalk is the straw that breaks our back. We understand the city's concern in improving the city, however we think we have done more than our fair share in improving the exterior of the property considering the building next to us is completely vacant and gets vandalized regularly. We also know that turning the building into an executive suite will help the city by creating 50 new offices which will.in turn generate many new business licenses and help stimulate the economy within the city. I have enclosed a deposit check in the amount of $4,795 (on your request) so we can pull building permits, but this in no way means that i am agreeing to build the sidewalk. I fully intend to argue this matter with whomever will listen until it is resolved. ,r Thanks for your time and a I appreciate your help. Sincerely, Pete Genovese CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 1-19-87 7. RESOLUTION NO. 87-9 - A RESOLUTION OF THE :ITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. :_759 (EAST TUSTIN APART- MENTS) Approved Final Tract Map No. 12759 f:- the East Tustin Apart- ments project located north of the St -:a Ana Freeway, west of Jamboree, east of' El Camino Real , t; adoption of Resolution No. 87-9 as recommended by the Commune:y Development Department and Planning Commission. 99 .8. EXTEKSION OF CONTRACTS - EARL ROvEXHO$MT AND REED JENSEN Authorized extension of the employ-atnt contracts for Earl Rowenhorst and Reed Jensen to July 1::, 1987, as recommended by the City Manager. 79 VII. OROINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION None. VIII. OROINANCES.FOR ADOPTION None. IX. OLD BUSINESS 1. ELECTION CONSOLIDATION - RESOLUTION NO. 87-11 Pursuant to Council direction at the Jar.;ary 5, 1987, meeting, staff prepared subject resolution to consi;er consolidation of the municipal election with the Statewide Ge-eral Election held -in November of even -numbered years. Following a brief question -and -answer period, it was moved by SaItarelIi, seconded by Keil y. to adopt the foIIowl ng reso—� on setting the matter o the proposed consolication of elections for a public hearing on February 2, 1987, and prescribing notice. RESOLUTION NO. 87-11 - A RESOLUTION OF TH£ C17Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN,. CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS I,ti-NTION TO REQUIRE ITS GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE CONSOLI:�-7"c7 KITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL. ELECTION AND FIXING A TIME AND =°_,CE OF PUBLIC HERRING THEREON The motion carried 5-0. 48 X. NEW BUSINESS 1. WIDTH OF SIDEUALXS IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREAS The Planning Coam,iss;on has requester a for -el policy decision from Council regarding sidewalk widths and re_-',rements in the indus- trial areas. On two separate occasions a: :ne request of devel- opers, projects were granted 5 -foot sidewa'c wic_ns in lieu of the full 8 -foot widths required by Council Rest :ticn No. 81-4. Since then, sidewalk requirements have I-een esti_ 'sner on a project -by - project basis subject to site c:rcumstar�_s, ,roposed use, and specific zoning regulations. Engineering staff indicates a uni`trn rol-=f fcr 5 -foot, utility clear sidewalks for the entire i-,dustria' area is appropriate, except areas with concentrated retail use:. Sidewalk meandering would be subject to specific des —i guise -es of specific plans and other documents. Community=evelopme-: staff supports this position with the note that Plannir, Co.anis_-_n ce allowed to devi- ate from those standards it cons i ce--eo The staff report was presented by :ne -evelopment Direc- tor as contained in the inter-com sated Ja-_ary :9, 1987, prepared by the Community Development Depart.-ent. Mayor Saltareili was supportive o' :ne rec3rm endation. The Director of Community Oeveiopmen: ane _'.�r of Public works FICA C61r,`a, CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 1-19-87 responded to Couf cwt qions build Ing ng sidewalk placement and retaining right a Yuest - - was moved b Keened seconded :)y Hoesterey, to establish a unl- it form po cy or - oot w dth,•utt ,ty clear sidewalks for the entire i.ndustri al area. i except x8e foot nwi areas TMeh�t� ane �a��i 4 retail uses where it shall rem 92 3 s 2. SANTA ANTI FREEWAY ( I-5) /COVA MEA FREEWAY ( RTE. 55) IHTERCN/1t16E • M40IFICATION • � CalTrans is planning � bathttreeo ays wlfritn the lfication of subject irtrnedlstetvicinity along with widening o of the interchange. The Director of Public Works InformedwilMayor be l araffectedli that any interchange modification project delays on the basic widening project. The newspaper article refer- enced pertained to the 1-5 freeway between the Costa Mesa and Garden Grove freeways. representative gat the recent Transportation ar noted that this was * • firmed by the Commission meeting. The Director added that it is CalTrans' desire to accelerate Stage III and attempt construction concurrently with Stage Ii if The design and right-of-way 'acquisition can be completed in time. Mayor thought Tustin -should will pressure ncrease CalTrans access to obut traffic f 1 c sincedo SO will the interchange modification still be bottlenecked on the narrow freeways. As recommended in the inter-com dated January 14, 1987, prepared by the Public Works Department/Enguneering ove theiFreeway Cwas Ag ee ente wit Keened 'seconded b Ed ar, to app work on the the tate o a ornia or Stage II and Stage anallauthor{ze the I-5/Rte. 55 Interchange Modification Project; 45; 87-8 Mayor and City Clerk to execute same. Carried 5-0. Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey requested staff contact CalTrans about the passibility of restriping the merging lane on the I-5 between Rte. 55 and the Newport Avenue of out relieve some of the congestion where vehicles mergen c. 3. COLUMUS AUSTIN PARK CONCESSION STA110 LEASE AGREEMENT Proposed agreement is for use cf, the concession stand at Columbus Tustin Park MfDavid Ascher A ��d�to make the concession stand a for-profit orpothetentionof making dona- tions to non-profit youtn orgar::azicr.s in the Tustin area. does not �.l' Councilwoman Kennedy e:presszaJvyineyroupst the. Council/staff discus-- ? 4'7 require a minimum donation to , to C tion foll'cwed. The Recreation .uper.ntendent responded .�uncil questions. The City Manager suggested t^a:. to if mere is Council consensus that there should be a hat built-in fc�-:ula for ing it back krototCouncil so t� a^c groups, staff will wori on _- g there is no question abcut "at 's required of Mr. Ascher. Mr, Ascher stated he will pay :ne %;ty low of gross profits after the first year of operation. -e exol ainea the procedure for donat- __ ing profits to youth groups cr as -needed basis, with requests to be submitted in writing. He .ta-er ne would not be interested in operating ' a concessi on start requires built-in percentages for various donations. Councilwoman Kennedy was str�n.iy in favor of setting aside a cer- tain percentage for youth crc,.- ccnations, rather than leaving it to Mr. Ascher's discretion. view period at the expiration Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey sugges:y' a "e