Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Min 1991-01-28 12-24-90/1-28-91 Notice of Cancelled Meetina NOTICE IS EHREBY GIVEN athat the reqular Redevelopment Agency meeting of Monday, December 24, 1990, is hereby cancelled pursuant to action taken by the Seal Beach city Council at their reqular meeting on December 10, 1990. 'I ne M. Yeo, t y of Seal Beach Seal Beach, California January 28, 1991 The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Seal Beach met in reqular session at 6:59 p.m. with Chairman Forsythe calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Forsythe Agencymembers Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson Absent: None Also present: Mr. Archibold, Acting Executive Director Mr. Barrow, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Mrs. Yeo, Secretary I , WAIVER OF FULL READING Wilson moved, second by LaSZlo, to waive the reading in full of all resolutions and that consent to the waiver of reading shall be deemed to be given by all Agencymembers after reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such resolution. AYES: NOES: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson None Motion carried RESOLUTION NUMBER 90-3 - CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT/GUIDELINES Resolution Number 90-3 was presented to the Agency entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING PROCEDURES IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND THE GUIDELINES OF THE SECRETARY FOR THE RESOURCES AGENCY, AS AMENDED, AND REPEALING RESOLUTIONS NO. 85-3 AND 86-3." By unanimous consent, full reading of Resolution Number 90-3 was waived. The Director of Development Services noted that the guidelines before the Agency were the same as those adopted by the City Council at last meeting, previously reviewed by I the Environmental Quality Control Board and Planning Commission. Hastings moved, second by Wilson, to adopt Resolution Number 90-3 as presented. AYES: NOES: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Wilson LaSZlo Motion carried APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hastings moved, second by Hunt, to approve the minutes of the October 8, 1990 reqular adjourned meeting. 1-28-91 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Wilson None Laszlo Motion carried I Hastings moved, second by Forsythe, to approve the minutes of the October 31, 1990 regular adjourned meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo None Wilson Motion carried Hastings moved, second by Wilson, to approve the minutes of the November 26, 1990 regular meeting. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson None Forsythe Motion carried ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT Hunt moved, second by Hastings, to approve the annual Financial Statement of the Redevelopment Agency for fiscal year 1989/1990. The Acting Executive Director agreed to look into whether or not an annual report had been filed with the State Controller and to report his findings to the Agency. Agencymember Laszlo stated his intent to abstain from voting on this item given his question of certain Agency issues. I AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Wilson None Laszlo Motion carried I ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Agencymember Laszlo made reference to and read quotes from a recent news article regarding the January 16th Planning Commission meeting and comments of Ms. Sonja sonju relating to the Seal Beach Trailer Park. He inquired if the Trailer Park is subject to conditional use permits as claimed. The Development Services Director said it was his understanding that at the time the Park was established at its present location, approximately 1977, there was a Conditional Use Permit granted, and offered to research and provide the specifics of the original application and conditions of that Permit for the information of the Agency. Agencymember Laszlo said Ms. Sonju claimed the original map was for one hundred forty affordable housing spaces, later changed to one hundred twenty-six, also that a planter was removed last year at city expense without Council authorization, to which Councilman Laszlo recalled that the tree was part of the conditions of approval. The Director responded that Housing/Community Development Block Grant funds were used for the tree removal, that he believed such authorization was before either the Councilor Agency, and explained that a portion of H/CD funds had been previously allocated to assist the residents in their attempt to acquire the Park, the acquisition effort was never completed, the funds were not used for that purpose, and the planter removal from the driveway area was an eligible use of those funds. Agencymember Hastings questioned the requirement for one hundred twenty-six spaces where there is one hundred twenty- five acknowledged, and noted her understanding that two lots have been made into one. The Director confirmed that current agreement requires that one hundred twenty of the spaces are to be maintained for low/moderate income persons or families, with the remaining five available to be occupied by any person, and offered to review this matter 1-28-91 for the Agency. Agencymember Laszlo said the article claimed that a two unit apartment was recently constructed on Lot 6, a zoning violation, yet rent is paid for only one, also on Lot 122 City staff accommodated Park management in purchasing replacement of an older trailer for a new lot so that a new trailer could be placed on an old lot for the purpose of more building, however the new space had insufficient area. The Director reported that the city is currently researching that matter, however has not approved an apartment or attached two units in the Park, noted that if they were separate units that met the separation requirements they would be permitted under state law, and had this been done plans would be on file with the City, also with regard to a request to provide additional structures on the property, such request would be treated as would any other as to advising as to what would be allowed on a property and what the process for approval would be. Agencymember Laszlo continued, made reference to Lot 113 ~nd charges that the trailer was purchased with Park income and that no rent is paid, therefore the tenants are subsidizing this Lot until it is sold for a profit, a similar situation on Lots 70 and 7, that there are six additional lots that are rent-free, that difference made up by other Park residents, and that the Trailer Park is a subdivision without approvals, with rooms being built on unspecified lots. He suggested that the Agency should be interested in looking into the charges of Ms. Sonju. Agencymember Hastings questioned if Quimby Act fees are being paid if subdivision of the lots is occurring. The Development Services Director explained that the Park is under one ownership, the residents lease a specific area on which to place their mobile home, which does not constitute a subdivision. He noted the State Health and Safety Code requires a certain distance from structure to structure rather than a distance from an interior lease line, that there are setback requirements from the exterior property line boundaries, all of which must be complied with before issuance of any permits, which likewise must be submitted to and approved by the State. Agencymember Laszlo recalled the intent of the Trailer Park to be for low income elderly persons, stated that is no longer the case nor is there evidence that certain trailers actually exist. Agencymember Hunt noted the responsibility of the Agency is to ensure that the conditions in the Park are fair and in conformance with the law, and that the Planning Commission has done a good job of making determinations relating to the Trailer Park, also that one Commissioner had made inquiries of officials in Sacramento for clarification of the law and whether this City is meeting its obligation under the law. Mr. Joe Orsini, Planning Commissioner, stated his inquiry had basically been directed to two story cabanas, that he was informed they are legal to build, the height falls within the regulations of the Fire Department rather than the State or City, that control of rent falls under the Redevelopment Agency, that sixty spaces must remain low income pursuant to CC&R's or State requirements, low income as it presently exists, not qualifying income, and should that income level be exceeded the person is not required to leave the Park, however the next available space is required to be available to low income. with regard to maintaining low income in the Park, he explained that according to the State the qualification of a person as low income is governed by the Redevelopment Agency and the Trailer Park, that a periodic review is to consider the current level of income if governed by State law, however income can increase if CC&R's exist and provide for such increase. Agencymember Hunt offered that the intent of low income housing is to I I I I I" I :.f..~,'1~1"~ ~:. .1 'Jt l:f'-::~...-: .- ". '," . 1-28-91 allow persons affordable living and adequate monies to meet their other needs, that he believed all residents within that category had initially qualified as such, however through education or some other means many have improved their income level and living status, thus the city can take pride in meeting the intent of low income housing. Dr. Anton Dahlman, ~lanning Commissioner, said as a result of the discussion before the Commission his interest was directed to an alleged subsidy of five spaces within the Park that are apparently being used for profit and where, if that is the case, the low income residents should be entitled to a share of that profit proportionate to their investment in rent subsidy, and suggested this matter be looked into by means of an audit. Agencymember Hunt noted that the City'S Finance Director had gone to the Park, reviewed the books, and indicated that the procedures being followed are correct, however Agencymember Hunt stated should there be evidence that the allegations are true, he would agree with the action suggested by Dr. Dahlman. Ms. Joyce Risner, Driftwood Avenue, cautioned that the City is being drawn into matters relating to the Trailer Park as a result of a civil matter between the Park owners. Mr. Gordon Shanks, 215 Surf Place, suggested the possibility that the Project Area Committee could be requested to look into the concerns and possibly provide some clarification to unanswered questions. with regard to reactivating the PAC, the City Attorney noted a PAC is typically active for only three years however may be extended, and suggested that this ,.matter be placed on a future agenda for consideration. . Chairman Forsythe asked that this matter be placed on the next agenda. Agencymember Hunt objected to the formation of more committees, acknowledged that the most important aspect for Agency consideration is the rents that apply to the Park residents, yet in this case the rents are far below the cost of living index, and as long as that is maintained the Agency is meeting its obligations. Discussion followed. In response to the Agency, the Director said it was his understanding that at the time application was made for residence in the Park the applicant would have had to qualify under low and moderate income criteria, that the qualification standard changes each year, currently moderate income is about $45,000 to $48,000 annually, and by agreement the Park is required to provide sixty spaces for low and sixty for moderate income. He noted that there have been a number of changes to State requirements over the years, including cabana regulations, and as an example until recently the State required that the existing trailer be physically able to be removed from the cabana structure, now the State basically allows retention of the floor of the trailer and a new structure to enclose the floor area or whatever expanded area that one wishes to add to their structure, and noted the concern of the Planning Commission was whether the City had any authority over what the State presently allows, and it was found that was not within the purview of City control, but under State control, therefore in a number of instances a trailer may not now be visible in the Trailer Park. There being no further comments, Chairman Forsythe declared Oral Communications closed. CLOSED SESSION No Closed Session was held. ADJOURNMENT It was the order of the Chair, with consent of the Agency, to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. 1-28-91/2-25-91 ~4 / ;2~)#~ efial.rman /h I (,etary Seal Beach, California February 25, 1991 The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Seal Beach met in regular session at 7:02 p.m. with Chairman Forsythe calling the meeting to order with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Forsythe Agencymembers Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson Absent: None Also present: Mr. Archibold, Acting Executive Director Mr. Barrow, Assistant City Attorney Mrs. Yeo, Secretary WAIVER OF FULL READING Wilson moved, second by Hunt, to waive the reading in full of all resolutions and that consent to the waiver of reading shall be deemed to be given by all Agencymembers after :,1 reading of the title unless specific request is made at that time for the reading of such resolution. AYES: NOES: Forsythe, Hastings, Hunt, Laszlo, Wilson None Motion carried ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Forsythe declared Oral Communications open. Agencymember Laszlo recalled that at the last meeting he had read a news article containing statements of Ms. Sonju relating to the Trailer Park, and questions he had posed dealt with whether the Trailer Park is subject to conditional use permits, whether the Agency or Council had approved the removal of a tree from a driveway area, what funds were used for the tree removal, is there an apartment complex on Lot 6, what was built on Lot 6, is there a zoning violation on Lot 122, did City staff accommodate the Park management on Lot 113, was that trailer purchased with Park funds, was no rent paid, does that then mean other tenants subsidized this and other lots, are there six free lots and why, and do those lots rotate so that building can be accomplished at the expense of the residents. He also made reference to his expressed concerns at the last Council meeting with regard to the Bixby Company proposing housing I under the flight patterns of the Armed Forces Reserve center, and read a July 26, 1990 letter from Dawson Development Company to Mr. Hotchkiss of the BiXby Ranch company regarding the three remaining areas to be developed in the City, the Hellman Ranch, the Bixby property, and the Department of Water and Power site, and offering the services of Dawson Development to coordinate the efforts of the three developers, organize the City selection of experts and silent majority, manage public relations and press efforts, towards a satisfactory entitlement process for all three projects. Agencymember Laszlo said he has received