Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 2 CABLEVISION SITE 06-15-81DATE: JUNE 3, 1981 OLD BUSINESS 6-15-81 No. 2 Inter-Corn TO: CHARLES THAYER, INTEPJM CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: BOB T.RDENDECKER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC ~DI~KS/CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: COLUMBUS ~JSTIN PARKSITE/SIX STAR NIRLe~3N CABLEVISICN STATION SITE BACKG~0UND At their meeting of June 1, 1981, the City Council received complaints and inquiries regarding the vacant Columbus Tustin Parksite and the proposed Six Star-Nielson Cablevision station in the vicinity of Beneta Way and Shasta Way northerly of Columbus Tustin school. Each of these u~(~laints or inquiries will be addressed separately. 1. What is the status on the landscaping and drainage situation that was promised over 8 years ago? The drainage situation is under the jurisdiction of the Orange County Flood Control District. This drainage channel is referred to as the F-12 Facility (North Tustin Channel) and is an earthen trapezoidal channel approximately 10 feet deep and 31 feet wide at the top. The maintenance and ~peration of this regional facility is under the jurisdiction of the County of Orange. Any improvements or nodifications to this facility would also be the responsibility of the County. A search of available records did not reveal any past prcmise by the City to improve any portion of this channel. This channel was existing when Tract No. 7420, containing 29 homes along Lucero Way, was developed in late 1972. As a condition of development, the developer was required to construct the decorative fencing along Shasta Way consisting of slumpstone pilasters and wrought iron fencing and gates. Therefore, I do not know of any other improvements the City would have promised 8 years ago. The future parksite area consists of all the vacant land on both sides of Beneta Way. This land was acquired frcm the Orange County Flood Control District, the Tustin Unified School District and other private individuals in 1972 and earlier. Again, available records do not reveal any past promise to landscape any particular portion of this parksite at any particular date. The proposed 1981-82 budget requests an amount of $50,000 to be budgeted for the final phase (non-structural) of design for Columbus Tustin Park. Construction funds have been requested over a two year period, 1982-83 and 1983-84. The original park development bond funds have ~cn depleted due to the extremely low amounts that were originally requested and approved by the voters. COLUMBUS ~JSTIN PARKSITE/ ~SIX STAR NI~qON CABLEVISION STATION SITE JUNE 3, 1981 PA~E 2 2. What are the zoning aspects of Six Star-Nielson's choice of location? The zoning of the entire Columbus Tustin Parksite and school is Public and Institutional (P&I). The purpose of this district is to identify uses which are authorized for public and quasi-public uses. In this district every use must be approved by the Planning Agency, which requires the filing and approval of a conditional use permit and at least one advertised public hearing. At this time, Six Star has not made application for the conditional use permit because they are also considering other sites. Because of the lack of application, the City can not make further c~.~ent. 3. Can a private cc~pany erect industrial equipment in a residential area? This equipment is not considered to be industrial since it does not involve a renu facturing operation. Antennas, towers and other similar structures are allowed in any zone subject to a use permit. Does Council consider it e. thical to support a private c~,~any such as Six Star-Nielson Cablevision with public land? It was never the intention of the City to support private enterprise with public land. This would be a misuse of public funds. Any public land owned by the City that would be utilized by private enterprise w~uld either be sold by public sale or leased at a fair market value by the proposed private user. What is the ability of the City to erect bars in bet'~cn the existing bars of the fencing to prevent a small child frcm entering the drainage area? As previously discussed, this facility is under the jurisdiction of the County of Orange Flood Control District. The City does not have the authority to do work on this facility. Staff has requested the County to repair, the areas on this fencing that have been damaged by vandalism. The County has indicated that they will respond as soon as their work schedule permits. The damaged fencing consisting of vertical wrought iron bars 6" on center have been pried aport by ~-andals creating a widened space of 9" to 11 ". Will the Six Star-Nielson structure be erected across the street from a Tustin school which develops an extreme attractive hazard to a junior high school student? Without adding another attractive nuisance in the area, can Council indicate the availability of other less hazardous sites, preferably in industrial areas for the Six Star equi~-ent, where if they are to receive profits, they should have to make an investment to pay the appropriate city, state taxes, etc? COLUMBUS ~JSTIN PARKSITE/ SIX STAR NIELSON CAR~.EVISION STATION SITE JUNE 3, 1981 PAGE 3 The present proposal frcm Six Star-Nielson is to locate their antenna, three earth satellites and equipment building on the Beneta wellsite across from Columbus Tustin Intermediate School. Prior to proceeding with this proposal, the following items must be accc~plished: 1. Application for a use permit filed by Six Star Nielson. 2. Staff review and a public hearing to receive input either pro or oon from the surrounding neighborhood. 3. Preparation of a focused EIR to discuss the 'impacts of the proposed development on the cu,,,,unity and the environment. 4. Final approval or denial by the Tustin Planning Agency. The selection of other sites for the proposed facility would depend upon the following items: 1. Availability of vacant land. 2. Gecmetrical center of service area to minimize overhead and underground cabling. 3. Area free of interference to incoming satellite signals. It would be to the discretion 'of Six Star-Nielson to search for and select any particular site. It is my understanding that an alternate site in another area of town is presenty being reviewed by Six Star-Nielson. Again, as previously indicated, any use of publicly owned land by the City would require a lease wherein the City would receive a lease fee. However, City owned land is not on the tax rolls, therefore, no taxes would be paid to the State or the City. I believe these were all of the questions and concerns presented by the residents at the June 1st Council meeting in opposition to the Six Star Nielson facility. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/ CITY ENGINEER BL:db cc: C~,.,~nity Development Department City Clerk