HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA NEWPORT EXTEN 07-15-85 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
NO. 5
AGENDA
TO:
FROM:
S U BJ ECT:
HONORABLE CHAIRFLRN AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS
COMMUNITY OEYELOPMENT OEPARTMENT
ALIGNMENT OF THE NEWPORT AVENUE EXTENSION
The Planning Commission on July 8, 1985 considered and denied without prejudice
Use Permit 85- 16, a submittal by the Ltncoln Property Development Company to
construct 160 apartments at the southerly terminus of Newport Avenue. This
vacant parcel bounded by Newport Avenue, the ATSF Rail Lines, and the Costa Mesa
freeway had previously been approved for condominium development in the early
1980's. However, since that time the city has been denied an at grade crossing
of the rail lines for Newport Avenue. This denial by the PUC has forced staff
to consider alternative overcrossings which would consume up to 50% of the
property being acquired by Lincoln Properties.
Rather than approve an apartment project and in the near future condemn and
demolish up to 80 units, the Planning Commission denied the project and referred
the issue of the Newport Avenue alignment to the Redevelopment Agency.
Specifically, the Planning Commission requests a study be completed within 60
days defining a precise right-of-way line thereby enabling Lincoln Properties to
resubmit a workable plan.
Should the City Council and Redevelopment Agency approve the South/Central
Project Amendment on July 15th, then the Agency should proceed with
realistic designs of the Newport Avenue extension.
RECO~ENDATION:
That the Redevelopment Agency direct staff to prepare feasible alternatives for
the Newport Avenue extension and present its recommendation to the Agency.
Director of Community Development
DDL:do
attach:
Alternatives 1, 2 and 3
Lh~COLN PROPERTY COMPANY
July 10, 1985
Mr. Donald D. Lamm
Director of Community Development
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
RE: NEWPORT GARDENS APARTMENTS (USE PERMIT 85-16)
EXTENSION OF NEWPORT AVENUE - ALIGNMENT ENGINEERING
Dear Mr. Lamm:
The purpose of this letter is to formally request that the
authorization for engineering, services for the alignment of the
Newport Avenue extension be formally considered by the Tustin
Redevelopment Agency for their meeting of July 15, 1985. As you
are aware, the Denial without Prejudice of our Use Permit
Application on July 8, 1985, by the Planning Commission was due
to the unresolved status of the alignment issue.
It is our hope that the desires expressed by the Planning
Commission at its regular meeting of July 8, 1985, are also made
known to the members of the Redevelopment Agency. Specifically:
1. That the Commissioners recommended against alternative No. 1
as it would preclude development of our site entirely.
e
That the engineering work be completed and a final decision
be reached in a timely manner, hopefully within sixty (60)
days.
3. That our Newport Gardens Apartment project as proposed would
make a positive contribution to the immediate neighborhood.
Furthermore, it is our desire to have other alignment
alternatives explored that would create less impact on our site.
We are prepared to offer any assistance you would desire to this
end.
Finally, should it be determined that the Newport Avenue
extension project cost is prohibitively expensive, exceeding
revenues which could be generated from the South-Central
Redevelopment Project Area, or should a decision not be reached
16152 Beach Boulevard Suite 160 East Huntington Beach, CA 92647 (714) 841-1419
Mr. Donald D. Lamm
July 10, 1985
Page 2
within the very near future, Lincoln Property Company should be
allowed to proceed with the project as currently designed.
I thank you for your assistance and look forward to the
successful and expeditious resolution of this issue--a resolution
which would allow us to develop the subject property as planned.
.~ROPER'
Parer ~
~?:m~ack~ '~nbach, Vice President
Lowe Associates, Incorporated
Dana $chiffman, Esq.
Allen, Matkins, Leck, Gamble & Mallory
AUSTIN-FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure IV-2
NEWPORT AVENUE EXTENSION
ALTERNATIVE I (OVEROROSSING)
AUSTIN-FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure IV-3
NEWPORT AVENUE EXTENSION
ALTERNATIVE 2 (UNDERPASS)
AUSTIN-FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC.
Figure IV-4
NEWPORT AVENUE EXTENSION
ALTERNATIVE 3 (OVERCROSSING)