HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Hearing #1 6-15-87A.... m PUBLIC HEARING.·
TO:
WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY INANAGER
FROM:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTHENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION
SU~ECT: PUBLIC HEARING, TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT
RE CO MME NDAT I ON:
For the City Council meeting of June 15. It is recommended that the City Council
take the fol 1 owl ng actions:
1. Open the pUblic hearing and take testimony of property owners and
. citizens wishing to speak.
·
2. Continue the hearing until 7:00 p.m., Monday, July 6, 1987.
3. Direct staff, .with BSI Consultants, to'revise the Engineer's Report based
on withdrawal from annexation to the district the Irvine Company lands
north of Irvine Boulevard.
BACKGROUND:
Due to a change in The Irvine Company's development schedule no street lighting
operation is anticipated on their lands_north of Irvine Boulevard until after July
1, 1988. The Company has filed a letter requesting that annexation of these
parcels be postponed for one year. A copy of the letter is attached.
The Engineer's Report will need to be revised with these 16 parcels deleted. As
most of the base data is in the computer at BSI Consultants, this will not be a
major task. A revised report would be ready for the next Council meeting on July 6
at which time the continued public hearing could be resumed.
At their May 18 meeting, City Council members discussed the pos.~ibility of
assessing higher density residential such as condominiums and apartments at a
lesser rate than that for single family detached housing. If Council wishes,
this approach could be used in the revised Engineer's Report.
·
·
4rector of Public Works/City Engineer
Ronald E.
Engi neeri ng Ser~i ces Manager
BL:REW:jm
Attachment
June 8,~ 1987
Bob Ledendecker
Director of Public Works/
City Engineer
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Re: Landscape Maintenance District.
Dear Bob:
Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on the formation of a
landscape maintenance district in the Tustin Ranch project. We understand
that the district will be confirmed by the City Council at their meeting
on June lSth.
Since the presentation of the engineers report, various delays have
occurred which have caused us to reconsider the engineers report as
drafted. Based on current schedules, we do not feel it is appropriate
to include the area north of Irvine Boulevard in the district. We feel
the timing of development in that area would dictate that it be included
within the district next year.
With this in mind we request that the City Council hearing of this issue
be continued and be reheard in the future. We understand that the engineers
report could be revised and the hearing could be rescheduled within
a month.
We look forward tO working with you on this district. If you have any
questions, please let us know.
~~'~~~'-~'-~ ISincerely,
J~nnings O. ierce, Jr.
PrOject Manager
JDP:wb
550 Newport Center Drive, P.O. Box I, Newport Beach, California 92658-8904 (714) 720-2000
A Divis~)n o~ The I~ne Coml3any