The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11 DCCSP ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVEDMayor Al Murray, anhurray�tustinca.org Mayor Pro Teen Rebecca "Beckie" Gomez, R�Zomez�tustinca.org Council Member Dr. Allan Bernstein, abernsteincr tustinca.org Council Member Charles E. "Chuck" Puckett, cpuckett(cr�tustinca.org Council Member Letitia Clark, lclark a,tustinca.org C/O Erica N. Rabe, City Cleric cityclerk@tustinca.org City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Re: Tustin's Downtown Commercial Core Plan. Dear Mayor Murray, Mayor Pro Tem Gomez, and Council Members, This office represents Sutliff Trailer Park, LLC, owner of the Sutliff Trailer Park ("STP") located at 435 W 1st Street, Tustin, CA 92780, parcel no. 401-522-27. The park consists of 28 spaces with a total of 68 residences, and the average rent for each space is approximately $805. We are writing to object to the City of Tustin's attempts to force the closure of STP including but not limited to the City's attempt to suspend its permit to operate around May 19, 2016, the City's determination in February 2018 that STP lost its non -conforming status, and the City's inclusion of STP in the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan ("DCCSP"). STP did not receive notice of the City of Tustin Plamzing Commission's April 24, 2018 public hearing on the DCCSP. STP has been in existence since before the City adopted its original zoning code in 1947 and was a conforming use when it began. The property was substantially the same as it is today since its current owners purchased it in April 1986. The City has changed the zoning of this property several times since its incorporation. The property was zoned Central Commercial prior to 1985 and then zoned Residential in 1985. it continued to be zoned Residential pursuant to the First Street Specific Plan. Now, the City is proposing to change the zoning of STP to a high density residential. FINKELSTEIN BENDER & FUJII LLP OF COUNSEL A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP BRUCE M.LUBARSKY" ATTORNEYS AT LAW DAVID G. FINKELSTEIN't THOMAS J. BARGER 1528 SOUTH EL CAMINO REAL MARC D. BENDER IRENEY.FUJII SUITE 306 PARALEGALS V. WINNIE TUNGPAGASIT SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA 94402 JOHN F.FARBSTEIN ' ALSO ADMITTED INNEWYORK TELEPHONE (650) 353-4503 LEGAL ASSISTANTS ALSO ADMITED IN THE DISTRICT OF TELECOPIER (650) 312-1803 MICHELE JAUREGUI COLUMBIA GISSELLE GODOY ± PRACTICING AS LAW OFFICES OF INFO@DGFLAW.COM DAVID G. FINKELSTEIN, A WWW.DGFLAW.COM PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 9 -- • _ June 19, 2018 i JUN 2 5 2018 VIA: U.S. Mail and Email �_ 1tY��l1nCi1C(itllStli]Cd.01';� .. ___ �I Mayor Al Murray, anhurray�tustinca.org Mayor Pro Teen Rebecca "Beckie" Gomez, R�Zomez�tustinca.org Council Member Dr. Allan Bernstein, abernsteincr tustinca.org Council Member Charles E. "Chuck" Puckett, cpuckett(cr�tustinca.org Council Member Letitia Clark, lclark a,tustinca.org C/O Erica N. Rabe, City Cleric cityclerk@tustinca.org City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Re: Tustin's Downtown Commercial Core Plan. Dear Mayor Murray, Mayor Pro Tem Gomez, and Council Members, This office represents Sutliff Trailer Park, LLC, owner of the Sutliff Trailer Park ("STP") located at 435 W 1st Street, Tustin, CA 92780, parcel no. 401-522-27. The park consists of 28 spaces with a total of 68 residences, and the average rent for each space is approximately $805. We are writing to object to the City of Tustin's attempts to force the closure of STP including but not limited to the City's attempt to suspend its permit to operate around May 19, 2016, the City's determination in February 2018 that STP lost its non -conforming status, and the City's inclusion of STP in the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan ("DCCSP"). STP did not receive notice of the City of Tustin Plamzing Commission's April 24, 2018 public hearing on the DCCSP. STP has been in existence since before the City adopted its original zoning code in 1947 and was a conforming use when it began. The property was substantially the same as it is today since its current owners purchased it in April 1986. The City has changed the zoning of this property several times since its incorporation. The property was zoned Central Commercial prior to 1985 and then zoned Residential in 1985. it continued to be zoned Residential pursuant to the First Street Specific Plan. Now, the City is proposing to change the zoning of STP to a high density residential. June 19, 2018 Page 2 STP did not expand onto the two adjacent residential properties and the City's determination that it lost its non -conforming status due to the alleged illegal expansion is not correct. Our clients were renting out the mobile home spaces on the two residential lots along with renting out the houses. In order to pay off the mortgages that was due on the main mobile home park, our client sold the two homes and reserved an easement for the then existing mobile home pads on those two lots. The use was never changed or expanded at least since 1986, and the State Housing and Community Development Department has since inspected the park and issued permits to operate. The lack of housing is a critical problem that threatens the economic, enviromnental, and social quality of life in California and the California Goverimlent Code requires that each City adopt a Housing Element as a mandatory part of its General Plan and the City of Tustin is no exception. The Housing F.1_eme��t of Tustin General Plan dated October ': , 2013 includes the identification of strategies and programs that focus on conserving the existing affordable housing stock. One of the Housing Element Program is to preserve affordable housing units including maintaining the City's mobile home park zone and process conditional use permit applications as received for manufactured homes. We contend that the City's recent determination that STP lost its non -conforming status and its inclusion of STP in the DCCSP is in essence paving the way to allow the City to eventually force the closure of the mobile home park and is in violation of the Goverrinient Code and also the Housing Element in the City of Tustin's General Plan. Based on the Affordable Rent for Low Income Households, the majority of the residents living at STP fall within the Low or Very Low Income tier. The Housing Element is designed to prevent discrimination against low-income household and the City's recent actions paving the way to allow the City to eventually force the closure of STP is discrimination against the 68 residents currently living at STP. We request that STP be allowed to continue operating as a legal non -conforming use and/or that the property be zoned to allow mobile home park ("MHP") in the proposed Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan. If the park is eventually forced to close because of your re -zoning, we have been requested to pursue all available legal remedies for removing affordable housing, inverse condemnation and economic and racial discrimination against our clients' tenants who are almost all working class families and Hispanic. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact our office if you have any questions. Very Truly Yours, FINKELSTEIN BENDER & FUJII LLP Dd G. Finkelstein, Esq. L (((`� CITY MANAGER'S 0FIrtICE JUN 2 7 2018 June 22, 2018 REE C E I V E Beckie Gomez — Tustin Mayor Pro Tem I spoke at the City Council meeting on June 19th and I expressed concern about the proposed one-way streets. I have owned my business, EI Camino Pet Grooming, for over thirty five years in Old Town. My business is located at 301 EI Camino Real which is on the south side of Third Street. For years, we have had a yellow curb in front of the business. I have many elderly and handicapped customers who bring their dogs to my shop. The yellow curb enables them to park close to the door. There are many occasions when we get the pets from their vehicles because they are unable to bring them to the door themselves. My main concern is for the safety of my customers. If there is only diagonal parking across the street, this will pose a major hazard to those people and their pets. Legally, the people who park west -bound on the north side of Third Street, must walk to the corner of EI Camino Real to cross the street in the crosswalk. After navigating the busy intersection, they must then walk eastward to get to my shop entrance. Doing that with a cane or a walker while controlling their dogs on a leash or carrying their cat in a tote could prove dangerous to my customers. . There are fourteen existing parallel parking spaces on this block. It doesn't seem possible to put fourteen diagonal spaces on the north side of the street without causing traffic flow problems at the alley. Big rigs regularly come and go through the alley next to my shop. They need all the room they can get. This one-way street plan may look good in a drawing, but from a practical standpoint, it does not work. Perhaps more thought should go into this concept before it is implemented. The chance that any of my customers or their pets could be seriously injured makes this a major concern for me. Thank you for taking the time to read this. You are the one on the Council who seemed genuinely interested in -the safety of pedestrians. Sincerely yours, WColan