HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 3 MORATORIUM WAIVER 8-19-85~~GTEE N OLD BUSINESS
NO 3
DA
August 19, 1985
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE PAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
COHHUNITY DEVELOPHENT DEPARTHENT
REQUEST FOR FI~T ST~ET HORATORIUH ~AIVER
RECOItIENDATION:
Pleasure of the City Council.
DISCUSSION:
Attached are letters from Mr. Howard O. Jones, developer, and Irene Roberts,
land owner of properties at 430-440 E. First Street, the subject of a proposed
office building which has been precluded from development pending the First
Street moratorium. The Council may recall Mr. Jones testified during the appeal
of Use Permit No. 85-6 for Mr. Harry Gates. Mr. Gates filed a Use Permit
application which ultimately was approved by Council for a two story 5,600
square foot office building. The adjoining property formerly occupied by Hardy
and Harper Asphalt Paving is being acquired by the McMahon partnership and their
representative Mr. Jones requests Council permit his Use Permit to be processed
through the Planning Commission.
At present, design plans have been filed with the Planning Department and are
being reviewed for code compliance. Additionally, the Redevelopment Agency at
their meeting on August 19th should be awarding the First Street.Specific Plan
contract. Therefore, it is the Council's choice whether to preclude any
projects from being processed through.the Planning Commission until the First
Street Specific Plan has been prepared or whether to allow projects to proceed.
Director of Community Development
DDL:do
attach:
letter from Howard Jones
letter from Irene Roberts
,lcMahon
ray
' rtnership
July 22, 1985
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
RE= 430-440 EAST FIRST STREET PROPERTY
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
On March 26, 1985 I submitted a Development Review
Application with design drawings to the City of Tusti~
for a two-story professional office building at 430-444
East First Street. On April 8, 1985 the Department of
Colmuunity Development notified me by letter that the
preliminary design review had been completed and that
several aspects of the design would need to be revised
prior to further submittals for approval and process-
ing.
I proceeded to modify the projec='3 design to comply
with the coimuents contained in the design review letter.
As I was completing the revised design for submittal,
I was contacted by Mr. Harry Gates, the owner of the
adjacent property at 550 East First Street.
Mr. Gates advised me that he had been instructed by the
City Council to coordinate the design of his project
(Use permit Application No. 85-6) with the design for
my project. The City Council in their April 1st meet-
ing, according to Mr. Gates, had expressed concern
about the two adjacent projects being developed sep-
arately. The minutes of the April 1st City Council
Meeting confirmed the information from Mr'. Gates and
the Council's direction for the two developments to
be coordinated as to aesthetics and design character.
In an effort to comply with the directions of the City
Council and to produce a design that would be compat-
ible with Mr. Gates' project, I proceeded again to
redesign my project. I met with Mr. Gates and his
Architect and developed a concept that was compatible
to their design. I then proceeded to completely re-
design my project in order to produce a design for
the development that would satisfy all the concerns
that had been communicated to me.
)20 East First St.
~nta Aha. CA 927~
4 9730993 ..
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
July 22, 1985
Page Two
At the request of Mr. Gates I attended the April 15th
City Council Meeting to assure the City Council that
their concerns h~d been addressed, and that I was in
the process of redesigning my project to be compatible
with Mr. Gates' project. At that time the City Council
saw my revised site plan and was able to question my
intent.
On approximately May 21, 1985 a m~mher of my staff
attempted to submit my application for Conditional Use
Pez~uit and all the required drawings and submittals.
He was advised at this time that a moratorium was
pending and that no applications would be processed.
You must understand my concern over the course of
events that took place. First, I made every effort
to satisfy what I believed were the concerns of the
City of Tustin. Second, I patiently and willingly
redesigned my project twice in order to produce a
design that would satisfy all concerned. My efforts
probably even assisted Mr. Gates in gaining his approval.
To date I'have spe~...~approximately $7,500 in architec-
tural design fees in my attempt to arrive at a design
that would be compatible with Mr. Gates' project and
answer the concerns of the City of Tustin. To reward
my cooperation and efforts, I have been pushed out of
the process by the City of Tustin. To me this situa-
tion represents a breach of trust and good faith.
I am hereby requesting the City Council Of Tustin to
consider my situation and allow my project to process
for Conditional Use Pea~L,it approvaI outside the mora-
torium. Since my project had been submitted to the
City, and considerable time, effort and expense had
been expended byme long before the moratorium was
first discussed, I feel it just that you allow my
project to process.
cc: Donald D. Lamm, Community Development Director
Irene E. Roberts
613 Golden Avenue
Fullerton, CA
July 12, 1985
The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
City of Tustin
Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
REF TO: 430-440 East First Street Property
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
As the owner of the above referenced property, I hereby
request the City Council to allow the processing of a proposed
project that was submitted to development review on March 26,
1985 by The McMahon Partnership. My daughter and son-in-law
concur with this request.
This project was submitted on March 26, but application for
Conditional Use Permit was delayed while the applicant was
redesigning the project to satisfy the decisions of the City
Council by producing a design that complimented a project on the
adjacent site. The adjacent project is the project by Mr. Harry
Gates, which has since been approved by you.
Since the proposed project for our property represents our
desires as owners to sell this property to a viable and reputable
developer, I request that you do not jeopardize our position and
afford us the same rights and opportunities as those of Mr.
Gates.
Again, I urge and request processing of this project apart
from your Moratorium Ordinance 936, which the project preceded
and upon which much time, effort, and money have been expended.
Sincerely,
IER:flg
Irene E. Roberts