Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARINA PARK LEASES VOL. I1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 *NEW FILE* Marina Park Leases Vol 1 MARINAPARK BILfiC iR MAILING LIST & RENT ROLL AS OF (FFB; UA RY 20, „-4j- 2.NNTJAL REPORT FOR CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH & COUNTY MARINAPARK MAIL LIST & RENTS BASE GAS TOTAL UNIT 1-A MARTINMORHAR (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 2265 AHUACATE ROAD LA HABRA HGTS, CA 90631 UNIT 1-B ARTHUR MINKY (1,225.08+22.00--$1,247.08) 7060-HOLLYWOOD BLVD. SUITE 900 LOS ANGELES, CA 90028 UNIT 1-C IRWIN ALBERT (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1770-W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 1-D ARONS % ABRAMOWITZ (924.83+22.00=S946.83) 29475 WEEPING WILLOW DRIVE AGOURA, CA 91301 UNIT 1-E JOHN DOWDEN (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 69 OAK TREE LANE IRVINE, CA92612 UNIT 2-A LOUIS LAWSON (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 604 N. KENTER LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT 2-B JOHN RETTBERG (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 42BELCOURT DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 UNIT 2-C (SPACE VACANT) HOME DEMOLISHED (2000) SPACE EMPTY, COLLECTING NO RENT AT THIS TIME UNIT 2-D DR MARVIN BLUM (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 4955 VAN NUYS BLVD. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 UNIT 2-E MORTON KERN (864.80+22.00=S886.80) 11500 SAN VICENTE BLVD. # 315 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT 3-A JOHN Mc DANIEL (1,225.08+22.00=$$1,247.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 3-B DERICKELLIOTT (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 131 N. GARFIELD PLACE MONROVIA, CA 91016 UNIT 3-C SELLERS STOUGH (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1176 HAVARD ROAD PIEDMONT, CA 94610 UNIT 3-D FRANK SWIFT (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 915 KENNETH RD. GLENDALE, CA 91202 UNIT 3-E BERRY / SHEA (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 1770. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 4-A NAT GORMAN (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) UNIT 4-B 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 4-B LEE J. BRENNER (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 1515 REMAH VISTA GLENDALE, CA 91207 UNIT 4-C JOHN NICKELSON (924.83+22.00=S946.83) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 4-D DR MARTIN MELTZNER (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 10350 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 804 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 0. MARINAPARK BILG•G MAILING LIST & RENT ROLL AS OF (FEBRUARY 2% 2002) ANNUAL REPORT FOR CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH & COUNTY UNIT 4-E EDWIN N. DILLON (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT S-A DAVID SHONHOLTZ (1,225.08+22.0041,247.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 5-B ROBERT WOLMAN (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 5-C RUTHANN COWAN (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 3071 McCONNEL DRIVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90064 UNIT 5-D DENNIS BERGER (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 9595 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 502 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 UNIT 5-E ALLEN JACOBS (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 10750 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 1003 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 - 4470 UNIT GA MARSHALL GOLDBERG (1,225.08+22.0"1,247.08) 612 N. OAKHURST BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 UNIT 6-B EUNICE BROWN (1,225.08+22.0041,247.08) 18847 LA AMISTAD PLACE TARZANA, CA 91356 UNIT 6-C K. CAMPBELL & J. RYBUS (924.83+22.0 =$946.83) 14 CHERRY HILLS LANE. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 UNIT 6-D TOBY VARGAS (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 4650 GREENBUSH AVE. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91423 UNIT 6-E GLADYS N. ESENSTEN (864.80+22.004886.80) 5269 AVENIDA DEL SOL LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653 2 * UNIT 7 A (All Electric Home) STEWART BERKSHIRE (1,225.08 = $1,225.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 UNIT 7-B HERBERT WILLIAMS (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 * UNIT 7-F ROY WHITEHEAD 15900 CALUMET CT. (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) RIVERSIDE, CA 92506 UNIT 8-A JIM MCPHERSON (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) P.O. BOX 1356 PALM DESERT, CA 92261 UNIT 8-B (1,225.08+22.00=S1,247.08) TOM WOOD %MICHAEL K. BLUE 23047 VENTURA BLVD. #201 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364 UNIT 8-C SONDRA SHAMES (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1667 W. WASHINGTON BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90007 UNIT 8-D EDWARD CRAWFORD (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 11310 LAMBERT AVE. EL MONTE, CA 91732 UNIT 8-E DANIEL F. GOLD (864.80+22.00=$$886.80) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-A ROBERT A. SEYMOUR (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-B STUART PROCTOR (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 72 LA CUESTA ORINDA, CA 94563 MARINAPARK BILL0, MAILING LIST & RENT ROLL AS OF (FEBRUARY 20, 2002) ANNUAL REPORT FOR CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH & COUNTY UNIT 9-C JEANNE O'BRYAN (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1770 W. BALBOA NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-D GEORGE AMTHOR (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-E CARL P. SPAULDING (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 1530 MIRASOL DR SAN MARINO, CA 91108 UNIT 10-A (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) PETR BALOV % SAN PEDRO FORKLIFT CO. 1861 N. GAFFEY ST. SUITE (E) SAN PEDRO, CA 90731 UNIT 10-B SPACE VACANT HOME DEMOLISHED OCTOBER 1, 2000 SPACE EMPTY, COLLECTING NO RENT AT THIS TRUE UNIT 10-C DR JOHN WESTERGART (924.83+22.00=$946.83) P. O. BOX 260225 ENCINO, CA 91426-0225 UNIT 10-D JACK A. COSKEY (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1905 SOARING COURT LAS VEGAS, NV 89134 UNIT 10-E (864.80+22.00=$886.80) AGNES E. ERICKSON % ANNE HARRIMAN P.O. BOX 3605 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 UNIT 11-A ROBT/JOYCE BROWNE (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 745 HAWK HILL TRAIL PALM DESESRT, CA 92211 UNIT 11-B DAVID BROWNSTEIN (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 190 SO. DENSLOW AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT it-C SIDNEY E. BOGIN (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 3137 WHITE CEDAR PLACE THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91362 UNIT 11-D NIRA ROSTON (1,362.60 +22.00=$1,384.60) 12 TRAFALGAR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 UNIT 11-E SHARON BOYAR (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 18601 PASEO NUEVO TARZANA, CA 91356 UNIT 12-A SHELDON GROSSMAN (1,225.08+22.00=S1,247.08) 344 TOMAHAWK DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92211 UNIT 12-B M. HARTUNIAN (1,225.08+22.00=$1,247.08) 18625 SIERRA MADRE GLENDORA, CA 91741 UNIT 12-C JACK HOROWITZ (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 12-D JANE MUSLIN (924.83+22.00=$946.83) 2354 VIAMARIPOSA AVE. LAGUNA WOODS, CA 92653 UNIT 12-E IRA GOLDBERG (864.80+22.00=$886.80) 3736 ALONZO AVE. ENCINO, CA 91316 * 7-A IS AN ALL ELECTRIC HOME (NO GAS) TOTAL RENT $1,225.08 * 7-F (LARGE SPACE) TRIPPLE WIDE UNIT SAME BASE RENT AS A & B SPACE'S $1,255.08+$22.00=TOTAL=$1,247.08 • MARINAPAIPPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDE1Vi' INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 MARINAPARK RESIDENT INFORMATION MORHAR (1-A) Part Time Marty & Sharon 949-6734775/562-691-1985 Home 310-993-6945 Larry's Cell ./ 310-843-1691 Larry 800-282-0497 Larry 2265 AHUACATE RD. LA HABRA HGTS, CA 90631 Son -Larry Dght-Sharma Dom------- 1955 ROD & REAL (1OX48) + CABANA SER# EIT331 DECAL# AAV6470 MINKY (1-11) Part Time Art (Gloria passed away 4-01) 949-673-1798 / 323-874-1955 Home 323-461-4453 Off. / 323-466-7761 Off. Fax 7060 HOLLYWOOD BLVD. SUITE 900 LOS ANGELES, CA 90028 Son -Bob Minky 714-825-8331 Off. 1989 BM SYSTEMS (24X52) SER# HSCASNA89350611 / HSCASNB89350611 DECAL# LAN7306 ALBERT (1-C) Full Time Irwin (Sonny) & Karen 949-673-2421 / 723-6477 (Karen) Donna Fisher (Dght) 949-854-6664 Sue Shermis (Dght) 949-552-8380 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Dght-Donna Fisher Dght-Sue Shermis 1986 SKYLINE (24X48) SER# 1571A / 1571B DECAL# LAH5697 ARONS (1-D) PartTime Shirly (Jack passed away 5-01) 949-675-9496 / 818-344-1400 Home (Billing Address Only - Daughter) @ ARONS % LAUREN ABRAMOWITZ 29475 WEEPING WILLOW DR AGOURA, CA 91301 SHIRLY ARONS 5315 YARMOUTH AVE..# 9 ENCINO, CA 91316 (Lauren & Phil Abramowitz Daughter 1983 MADISON (24X48) SER# A10318CCE MOCA / B10318CCU MOCA DECAL# OAL482492 DOWDEN (1-E) Part time John (Diane passed away 1998) 949-675-1843 / 552-8253 Home 69 OAK TREE LANE IRVINE, CA92612 1961 CASCADE (1OX52) + CABANA SER# 51236 Decal# ABH4500 LAWSON (2-A) Part Time Louis & Sylvia 949-673-2118 / 310-472-5681 Home. / 310-475-1373 Home LOU OFF. FAX-310-471-8264 (Son) Craig & Terry 310-838-3207 604 N. KENTER LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 Son-Graig & Terrry Lawson + 1 child Dght-........................ Dght- ........................ 1986 GOLDEN WEST (24X52) SER# 7103A / 7103B DECAL# LARS646 RETTBERG (2-11) Part Time John & Jackie 949-675-4716 / 949-644-7543 42 BELCOURT DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 Dght- ......................... 1975 LANCER (24X50) SER# 5-3284A / 5-3285B DECAL# AAP2703 MARINAPAIPPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDERINFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 VACANT (2-C) CITY OWNED BLUM (2-D) Part Time Dr. Marvin & Betty 949-673-7728 / 818-789-6189 Home / 818-343-9744 Off 4955 VAN NUYS BLVD. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 Niece -Susie & Ivor Cherry + 2 children 1987 GOLDENWEST (24a54) SER# DECAL# KERN (2-E) Part Time Mort & Gladys 949-6734929 / 310-979-0099 Home 11500 SAN VICENTE BLVD. # 315 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 Dght-Susie 1971 SKYLINE (20X48) SER# 11954XX / 11954XXU DECAL# AAR3776 Me DANIEL (3-A) Full Time John & Shirly 949-723-5635 / 949-960-5427 Office 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Son -John Son -Brian Dght-Marcey Grd-Son-Christision 1978 LANCER (24X48) SER# 34526A / 34526B JACAL# AAC51 ELLIOTT (3-B) Part Time Derrick & Daphine 949-673-4945 / 760-773-9548 Home 131 N. GARFIELD PLACE MONROVIA, CA 91016 73450 COUNTRY CLUB DR # 120 PALM DESERT, CA 92260 Son— — -- 1982 WESTWAYS{24X48) SER# 128160572 XXXXX DECAL# 3000M HALE (3-C) Full Time Ruth (Husband passed away?) 949-673-9376 / 626-286-5221 San Gabrial Dght-Cheryl Lyford 714-536-7716 Son-Aurther Hale 818-879-5191 Office Inter -Air 310-612-7371 Anther's Cell Phone Hale / Lyford (Billing Address Only) 1951 Lake st HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA. 92648 DghtCheryl Lyford Son-AurtherHale Grd-Dght Brandy & Dutch+ I child 1978 LANCER (24X48) SER# SR4030 DECAL# MHO128210 SWIFT (3-D) Part Time Frank & Betty 818-243-3926 Home 915 KENNETH P.D. GLENDALE, CA 91202 Son-Graig Swft Grd-Dght's-Maggie/Katie 1976 VIIGNG (24X48) SER# A62073 / B62073 DECAL# MH234713 / AM34714 XXXXX X BERRY / SHEA (3-E) Full Time (NOTE) Jim & Jacqualine Berry Passed away (2000) (Dan & Nancy Shea lives in home (Daughter) DAN & NANCY SHEA (DGHT) 1770 W BALBOA BLVD NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92663 Dght-Nancy & Dan Shea 1960 REDMAN MH (10s50) + (14a40 CABANA) SER# 3803EAITFK DECAL# ABD2729 GORMAN (4-A) Part Time Nat & Judy 949-673-39991310-441-9222 Home 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. (Billing Address) NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ALSO 10490 WILSHIRE BLVD. #1204 LOS ANGELES, CA 990024-4668 Son- ............................... 1986 GOLDEN WEST (24X48) SER# 9104A / 9104B DECAL# LAH5647 MARINAPAAERSONAL & FAMiLY RESIDE•INVFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 2% 2001 BRENNER (4-B) Part Time Lee & Mary 949-673-5225 / 818-243-3775 Home818-767-8560 Off. 1515 REMAH VISTA GLENDALE, CA 91207 LANCER (24X48) SER# 835912 / S35913 DECAL# NICEELSON (4-C) Fall Time John & DeDe 949-675-8462 / 714-898-3456 Ex-31(John's Office) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1978 LANCER (24X48) SER# 34932A / 34932B DECAL# ABCS832 MELTZNER (4-D) Part Time Dr. Marty & Enid 949-675-4659 / 310-271-6362 Home 10350 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 804 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 Son................................ Dght-................................... 1978 RYLMO (24X48) SER# A34499 / B34499 DECAL# SH3683 / SH3684 DILLON (4-E) Part Time Edwin (Ed) & Joy (Son.Ken) 949-673-9457 / 909-737-3277 Home 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Son -Ken Dght-............ 1977 VILLA WEST (24X52) SER# 27919A / 27919B DECAL# ABB7712 SHONHOLTZ (5-A) Fall Time David & Beverly 949-675-8545 / 213-718-1167 Cell Phone 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1976 LANCER (12X50) With Dbl Eapando's + Cabana SER# 13294A/13294B DECAL# MT1236 WOLMAN (5-B) Part Time Shirley (Bob passed away 6-25-01) 949-673-1931 / 626-441-1511 Home (Billing Address only) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Ord -Son -Alex Fisher 1986 GOLDEN WEST (24X48) SER# CA325102 Z000 DECAL# LAF828 COWAN (5-C) Part Time Ruth Ann (Herb passed away (2000) 949-673-3171 / 310-837-3455 Home 3071 McCONNELL DRIVE LOS ANGELES, CA90064 1968 LA CORONA (24X48) SER# S4218XXU / S4218XX DECAL# ABD6202 BERGER (5-D) Part Time Dennis & Edith 949-6754545/818-761-6519 Home 9595 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 502 BEVERLY BILLS, CA 90212 Son -Steven Berger310-274-6657 (Sect. Gloria) XXXX X (24X48) SER# DECAL# AAT2667 JACOBS (5-E) Part Time Allen &Beverly 949-673-8076 / 310-441-0033 Home 10750 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 1003 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 - 4470 1986 FUQUA (24X55) SER# 15168A / 15168B DECAL# LAH5791 MARINAPAPPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDE• INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 GOLDBERG (6-A) PartTime Marshall & Ruth 949-673-2227 - 310-278-5550 Home 612 N. OAKHURST BEVERY HILLS, CA 90210 1962 (OLD TRAILER) WITH POP OUT'S LIC# BY1781 STICKER# 9169465/2000 BROWN (6-11) Part Time Enuice (Howie passed away 2000) 949-675-2938 / 818-342-3881 Home 18847 LA AMISTAD PLACE TARZANA, CA. 91356 1978 ROLLAWAY (24X48) SER# 1077RA S652 / 1077RB 8652 DECAL# AAM6479 CAMPBELL / RYBUS (6-C) Part time Karen (K.C.) & Joe (Baby Olivia) 949-713-1678 / 949-760-9160 VM 949-760-1904 Joe's Office / 949-760-1905 Office Fax 714-463-6161 KC's Office 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ALSO ONE CHERRY HILLS LANE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 BABY (OLIVIA) 1995 DEL MAR (BARON) (24X48) SER# CB4118A / CB4118B DECAL# LAJ7038 VARGAS (6-D) Part Time Michael & Toby 673-1507 / 818-783-8144 Home 818-766-7585 Toby's Office 4650 GREENBUSH AVE. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91423 1976 LANCER (24X48) SER# S33253 DECAL# ABA3065 ESENSTEN (6-E) Part Time Sam & Gladys 949-673-2772 / 949-770-1261 Home Son -Bob & Mitra Esensten 310-472-1229 Home 5269 AVENIDA DEL SOL LAGUNA BILLS, CA 92653 Son -Bob & Mitra Esensten 1973 FASHION MANOR (24X54) SER# FM8325 /FM8326 DECAL# X1002= BERKSHIR (7-A) Full Time Stewart & Betty 949-723-0630 / 714-641-1479 Dght (Par Ary) 949-650-6050 Pat Ary's Office 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Dght-Pat Ary Son- .................... 1968 CORNELL (24X51) SER# S2149XX / S2149XXU DECAL# AAX2803 WILLIAMS (7-B) Full Time Herb & Ethyl 949-673-6545 / 949-548-4000 Herb's Office Dght- Debbie Casden 310-553-6867 310-272-5553 Henry Caden's Office Dght-Gail & Barry Keyes 818-783-7240 (Tarzanna) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1976 LANCER (24X52) SER# SA3389 / SB3389 DECAL# MT1024 WHITEHEAD (74) Part Time Roy & lori 949-675-2782 / 909-780-1227 Home 15900 CALUMET CT. RIVERSIDE, CA 92506 1980 FUQUA (34X58) (TRUE TRIPLE WIDE) SER# A12285 / B12285 / C12285 DECAL# AAW1192 MARINAPAIOPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDE• INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 PEAKE (8-A) Part Time Neil & Jean 949-675-2721 / 714-283-1041 Home (Villa Park) 760-341-8741 (Palm Desert) Son -Steve Peak 714.637-6731(A Plus Contractors) PO BOX 10367 COSTA MESA, CA92627 ALSO 9761 DARON DRIVE VILLA PARK, CA92861 Son -Steve & ...............Peake + 2 children Grandson -Derek Wilson XXXX VBGNG (1OX40) TRAILER WITH (12X48) CABANA SER#XX2000OCKK DECAL# WOOD (8-B) Part Time Val Jean (Tom passed away 4-01) 949-675-2530/818-5014362 Home /80MOO 4011 Off TOM WOOD % MICHAEL K BLUE 23047 VENTURA BLVD. #201 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91364 % MRS. JEAN ALLEN 2220 CHEVY OAKS CIRCLE GLENDALE, CA 91206 XXXX xxxxxxxx C2000 I) DECAL# SHAMES (8-C) Part Time Sondra (Husband passed away?) 949-673-6930 / 310-550-8978 Home Dght-310-859-2332 Micky Lewis 800.653-0073 Micky's Office Son -Bradley J. Shames Office Q AMERICAN TEXTILE MAINTANCE COMPANY 213-731-3132 1667 W. WASHINGTON BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90007 XXXX XXXXXX (XXXXX) SER# 20000CKXXY DECAL# CRAWFORD (8-D) Part Time Ed & Carol 949-673-3842 / 626-350-1833 Home 626-932-2990 EXs Pager 626-932-6989 Carols Pager Dght-Sue Weir 818-357-9793 Son -Bill Crawford 626-812-9679 11310 LAMBERT AVE. EL MONTE, CA 91732 1976 LANCER (24X48) SER# A33253 / B33253 DECAL# M95742 GOLD (8-E) Full Time Daniel & Jane 949-723-4444 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Son -Grant Son -Andy 1956 WESTEC (1OX47) TRAILER WITH A (1OX47) CABANA ADDED SER# 96727 LIC# EH8574 SEYMOUR (9-A) Full Time Bob & Pat 949-723-4137 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 XXXX IMPERIAL (24X48) SER# S31662XX / S31662XXU DECAL# AAM5859 PROCTOR (9-B) Part Time Stuart (Owner) Brian & Jeanne (Parents) 949-723-8266 - 510-254-6981 - Off. 510-465-8000 Cell Phone 510-816-0400 (Primary Contact #) Stuart Proctor (Billing Address Only) 72 LA CUESTA ORINDA, CA94563 2177 ADAIR STREET SAN MARINO CA 91108 ALSO Brian & Jeanne (Parents) 626-576-0273 1975 ROLLAWAY (24X49) SER# 475RXS576A / 475RXS576B DECAL# AAX9880 MARINAPAPPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDENT INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 O'BRYAN (9-C) Full Time Jeanne 949-673 - 0038 / 472-0708 Office 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Jim Carpenter (Boyfriend) 714-320-1407 Pgr. Phyllis Cunningham (Mother) 949-653-8307 Chris Lowry (Son) 949-929-9275 Tracy Talley (Daughter) 714-970-2721 1958 PARAMOUNT (10X44) TRAILER+ (1OX34) CABANA SER# 4713712 LIC# LC4021 DECAL# XXXXXX AMTHOR (9-D) Part Time George & Trudy (Gertude) 949-675-1008 / 626-446-0042 Home + Daughter 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ALSO 3306 BARHITE STREET PASADENA, CA 91107 1978 MONTE CARLO (24X46) SER# 1019A / 1019B DECAL# ABA8922 SPAULDING (9-E) Part Time Carl & Susan (Owners) (San Tim lives in home) (Tim - Johnathon & Rich (Brothers) 949-675-2471 / 626-286.6403 / Parents - Carl & Susan 626-303-4676 Art Studio 626-683-1351 Johnathon & Diana- (Son) + Children 1530 MIItASOL DR SAN MARINO, CA 91108 Son -Tim Son-Johnathon & Dianna + 2 Children Son -Rich 1956 MAYFLOWER (8X32) + (11X32) CABANA SER# 6352641 LIC# DN648Z DECAL# X)t0C W BALOV (10-A) Part Time Pete 949-673-5759 / 310-739-5585 Cell Phone 310- 832-2724.Office / 310-832-9354 Office Fax 310-898-8960 Pager 1861 N GAFFEY ST STE E SAN PEDRO, CA. 90731 Son Pete Jr. Brother Reno Girl Friend (Andrea Moss) 805-377-9900 (Cell) ALSO SAN PEDRO FORK LIFT CO. 1742 HAYES AVE. LONG BEACH, CA 90813 1967 FLAMINGO (22X52) SER# S336XXU / S336XX DECAL# SL8243 VACANT (10-B) CITY OWNED WESTERGART (10-C) Part Time Dr.. John & Jane 949-673-2084 / 818-788-3844 Home P. O. BOX 260225 ENCINO, CA 91426-0225 Daughter-#1,Ioey & Dick Stillinger + Kay & Brett Hunt +Nan Stillinger Daughter-M-Jill & Fred Delano + Jonathan Delano + Kevin & wife Lyn Delano Daughter-#3-Kay & Ron Brankov + Janie & Jamie Bronkov Daughter-#4-Leslie & Bruce Kimmel +Micheal & Brian Kimmel COSKEY (10-D) Part Time Jack & Dania 949-675-1471 / 702-240-6017 Home 702-768-3192 Jacks Cell Ph. / 702-525-0229 Dania Cell 1905 S'OAIMG COURT LAS VEGAS, NV 89134 1980 LANCER (24X48) SER# A35828 / B35828 DECAL# ST8575 MARINAPAIPPERSONAL & FAMILY RESIDE• INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 ERICKSON (10-E) Full Time Agnes (Husband passed away ?) 949-673-6959 / 949-675-0493 Anni Harriman (daught) 949-548-7296 Dick Harriman (Grandson) 949-675-9088 ErickHarriman (Grandson) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 Dght-Amri Harriman Gr-Son-Erick Harriman Gr-Son-Dick Harriman 1980 WOODCREST (20X54) SER# SARC7595 / SBRC7595 DECAL# ABD1170 BROWNE (11-A) Part Time Robert & Joyce 949-675-7788 - 760-772-6782 Home 745 HAWKHH.L TRAIL PALM DESERT, CA 92211 XXXX Xxxxxxxxxx (XXXW SER# DECAL# BROWNSTEIN (11-B) PartTime Dave & Doris 949-723-0238 / 310-472-7028 Home 190 SO. DENSLOW AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 1985 SILVERCREST (24X54) SER# A6SC5697CA / B6SC5697CA DECAL# XXXXXX 315144 / 315145 BOGIN(11-C) PartTime Sid & Florian Miller (Girl Friend) (wife passed away 1999) 949-675-7871 / 818-329-5458 VM 760-772-3963 Palm Desert 5550 OWENSMOUTH AVE. APT-315 WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91367 1978 LANCER (24X48) SER# A34717 / B34717 DECAL# AAM6144 7 ROSTON (11-D) Part Time Nim (Husband passed away ?) 949-673-7021 / 720-1002 Home 12 TRAFALGAR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 Son -Dan Roston / Dan's wife Stacy Halpern 1977 ROLLAWAY (24X50) SER# 177RA5633 / 177RB5633 DECAL# SL5375 BOYAR (11-E) Part Time Sharon Boyar (Owner) NOTE: Son Allan Boyar Lives in Home with girl friend with his 2 children.(Son-Michael) & (Dght.--Brittney) 949-675-1315 / 760-341-1138 Sharon Home 760-346-7291 Sharon Home 18601 PASEO NUEVO TARZANA, CA 91356 ALSO P. O. BOX 11244 PALM DESERT, CA 92255-1244 Son -Alan Smolder Dght-Jennifer Smolder Dght- .............................. 1993 BARON (22X59) SER# CB5462A / CB5462B DECAL# LAT2647 LITHE (12-A) Part Time Dr. Martin & Mildred 949-673-0182 / 949-675-2275 Dr. & Mildred Home NOTE: Duaghter Ann Litke lives in home 427 HARBORISLAND DR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 Daughter -Ann Litke 1986 CHINO PLATINUM (24X51) SER# CH8854A / CH8854B DECAL# LAH5633 MARINAPAPPERSONAL & FAMELY RESIDE• INFORMATION UPDATED JUNE 29, 2001 HARTUNIAN (12-B) Part Time Marion Hartunian (Owner) (Bob passed away 1999) 949-675-7943 - 626-334-8102 Home NOTE: Heather (Granddaughter lives in home) 626-334-5526 Office / 626-969-2214 Marks Office 909-898-6830 Mark Home / 818-298-8445 Mark's Cell 18625 SIERRA MADRE (Biling Address) GLENDORA, CA 91741 ALSO 1017 W. GLADSTONE AZUSA, CA 91702 Son-MarkHartunian Dght-Holly Off. # 626-969-8445 Grd-Dght-Heather (Lives In Home) XXXX XV0000000M (21X50) OLDER TRAILER SER# XO00000C DECAL#X10000CX HOROWITZ (12-C) Full Time Jack & Anita 949-673-7878 1770 BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92663 Eldorado 6000 Mhp 111 Aliso Dr. #XXXXXX Patin Springs, Ca. XXXXX Dght-.714-893-6730 Dght- ............................. 1993 GOLDENWEST (24X48) SER# 176A / 176B DECAL# MO= 855573 MUSLIN (12-D) Full Time Jane (Joe passed away 1999) 949-675 3363 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 1971 BRENTWOOD (24X51) SER# 604OU 1604OX DFl�AL# AAX9948 REYES (12-E) Part Time Barry & Gail 949-675-9269 / 760-345-6512 Home Palm Desesrt 760-345-4225 Fax/818-344-7768 Fax 244 WHITE HORSE TRAIL PALM DESESRT, CA92211 ALSO 5108 VANALDEN AVENUE TARZANA, CA 91356 1978 STUGIS (24X54) SER# 997A / 997B DECAL# ABD6508 MARINAPARK BILLIN(�ING LIST & RENT ROLL EFFECTIVE - INFORMATION UPDATED VVH UNIT 2-E a a r MARINAPARK MAIL LIST & RENTS BASE GAS TOTAL UNIT 1-A MARTINMORHAR (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 2265 AHUACATE ROAD LA HABRA HGTS, CA 90631 UNIT 1--B ARTHURMINKY (1,129.42+22.00=$$1,151.42) 7060 HOLLYWOOD BLVD. SUITE 900 LOS ANGELES, CA 90028 UNIT 1-C ARWIN ALBERT (852.60+22.00=S874.60) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNPf 1-D JACK ARONS (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 5315 YARMOUTH AVE..# 9 ENCINO, CA 91316 UNff 1-E JOHNDOWDEN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 69 OAK TREE LANE IRVINE, CA92612 UNIT 2-A LOUIS LAWSON (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 604 N. KENTER LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT 2-B JOHN RETTBERG (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOABLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 2-C VACANT (852.60+22.00=$874.60) CITY OWNED GOING TO REMOVE UNIT 2-D DR, MARVIN BLUM (852.60+22.OM874.60) 4955 VAN NUYS BLVD. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 MORTON KERN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 11500 SAN VICENTE BLVD. #315 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT 3-A JOHNMcDANIEL (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORTBEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 3-B DERICK ELLIOTT (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 3-C RUTH HALE (852.60=22.00=$874.60) 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 3-D FRANK SWIFT (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 915 KENNETH RD. GLENDALE, CA 91202 UNIT 3-E JAWS D. BERRY (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 28418 BUENA VISTA MISSION VIEJO, CA 92692 UNIT 4-A NAT GORMAN (1,129.42+22.00+$1,151.42) UNIT 4-B 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 4-B LEE J. BRENNER (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) I515 REMAH VISTA GLENDALE, CA 91207 UNff 4-C JOHN NICKELSON (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 4-D DR. MARTIN MELTZNER (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 10350 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 804 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 MARINAPARK BILLING 1AMING LIST & RENT ROLL EFFECTIVE -OCTOBER 01,1999 INFORMATION UPDATED MARCH 06,2000 1 UNIT 4-E EDWIN N. DILLON (797.2$+22.00=8819.28) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 5-A DAVID SHONHOLTZ (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 5-B ROBERT WOLMAN (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 885 S. ORANGE GROVE BLVD. # 11 PASADENA, CA 91105 UNIT 5-C HERBERT COWAN (852.60+22.00--$874.60) 1770 W. BALBOABLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT5-D DENNIS BERGER (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 9595 WILSHIRE BLVD. # 502 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 902I2 UNPI' 5-E ALLEN JACOBS (797.28+22.0M819.28) 10750 WILSHIRE BLVD. # I003 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 - 4470 UNIT 6-A MARSHALL GOLDBERG(1,129.42+22.00=$I,I51.42) 612 N. OAKHURST BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 UNIT 6-B EUNICE BROWN (1,129.42+22.00=S1,151.42) I770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 6-C K. CAMPBELL & J. RYBUS (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 6-D BERNARD FELDMAN 5315 YARMOUTH ENCINO, CA 91316 (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 2 UNff 6-E GLADYS N. ESENSTEN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 5269 AVENIDA DEL SOL LAGUNAHILLS, CA92653 * UNIT 7 A STEWART BERKSHIRE (1,129.42+N/A=$1,129.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 7 B HERBERT WILLIAMS (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 * UNIT 7-F ROY WHITEHEAD (1,129.42+22.00=S1,151.42) 15900 CALUMET CT. RIVERSIDE, CA 92506 UNIT 8-A NEIL G. PEAKE (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) PO BOX 10367 COSTA MESA, CA92627 IINIT 8-B T.WOOD (1,129.42+22.00=S1,151.42) %PACIFIC PRINTING 707 EAST 62ND. STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90001 UNIT 8-C SONDRA SHAMES (852.60+22.00=5$874.60) 1667 W. WASHINGTON BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90007 UNIT 8-D EDWARD CRAWFORD 11310 LAMBERT AVE. EL MONTE, CA 91732 (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 8-E DANIEL F. GOLD (797.28+2ZOO=$819.28) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-A ROBERT A. SEYMOUR (1,129.42+22.011=$1,151.42) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 V r MARINAPARK BH LINGqAILING LIST & RENT ROLL EFFECTIVE -OCTOBER 0191999 INFORMATION UPDATED MARCH 06,2000 UNIT 9 B STUART PROCTOR (1,129.42+22.00=SI,151.42) 2177 ADAIR STREET SAN MARTNO, CA 91108-2605 UNIT 9-C JEANNE O'BRYAN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 1770 W. BALBOA NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-D GEORGE AMTHOR (852.60+22.00=874.60) 1770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORTBEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 9-E CARL P. SPAULDING (797.28+22.00=819.28) 1530 MIRASOL DR. SAN MARTNO, CA 91108 UNIT 10-A B. J. WEINFURTNER (1.129.42+22.00=51,151.42) 5015CENTRAL RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 UNIT 10-B WILLIAM RAINBOLT (1,129.42+22.00=$1.151.42) 1300 E. HIGHLAND AVE. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404 UNIT 10-C DR. JOHN WESTERGART (852.60+22.00=874.60) P. 0. BOX 260225 ENCINO, CA 9I426-0225 UNIT 10-D R. NORDQUIST / WICKEL (852.60+22.OM874.60) 3737 BEECHGLEN DR LA CRESCENTA, CA 9I214 UNIT 10-E AGNES E. ERICKSON (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 1770 W. BALBOABLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 11-A ROBT/JOYCE BROWNE (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 745 HAWK HILL TRAIL PALM DESESRT, CA 92211 UNIT 11-B DAVIDBROWNSTEIN (1,129.42+22.00+$1,151.42) 190 SO. DENSLOW AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 UNIT 11-C SIDNEYE. BOGIN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 19120 ROMAR ST. NORTHRIDGE, CA 9I324 UNIT 11-D NIRA ROSTON (852.60+22.00=$874.60) 12 TRAFALGAR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 UNIT 11-E SHARON BOYAR (797.28+22.00=$819.28) P. O. BOX 1I244 PALM DESERT, CA 92255-1244 UNIT 12-A DR. MARTIN LITKE (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) 427 HARBOR ISLAND DR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 UNIT 12-B M. HARTUNLAN (1,129.42+22.00=$1.151.42) 18625 SIERRA MADRE GLENDORA, CA 91741 UNIT 12-C JACK HOROWITZ (852.60+22.00=$874.60) I770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 12-D JOSEPH MUSLIN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) I770 W. BALBOA BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 UNIT 12-E GAIL KEYES (CASDEN) (797.28+22.00=$819.28) 244 WHITE HORSE TRAIL PALM DESERT, CA 9221I * 7 A IS AN ALL ELECTRIC HOME (NO GAS) TOTAL RENT $1,129.42 5. 7-F IS SAME BASE RENT AS A & B SPACE'S $1,129.42 + GAS $2100 --TOTAL RENT 51,152.42 a MARINAPARK 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723=0206 Joe Albano, Manager RESIDENT LEASE HOLDERS LIVING IN MARINAPARK PARK FULL TIME 1-C ALBERT 2-13 RETTBERG 3-A MCDANIEL 3-C HALE 4-C NICKELSON 4-E DILLON 5-A SHONHOLTZ 5-B WOLMAN 7-A BERKSHIRE 7-13 WILLIAMS 8-E GOLD 9-A SEYMOUR 9-B PROCTOR 9-D HEIN 10-E ERICKSON 12-D MUSLIN 16 Lease holders living in'ITMMI M-Fillt time, 6 Other then leas h�lders living in homes full time (See attached page) Total of ( 22 ) Homes that are occupied full time Note: There is a sale pending on space 6-C. If sale completes it would probably add one more to the above total of full time residents. AS OF JANUARy 20, 2000 f . • MARNAPARK 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723-0206 Joe Albano, Manager OTHER THEN RESIDENT LEASE HOLDERS LIVING IN PARK 3-E BERRY Dan & Nancy Shea Lives in Home with her husband Dan. Nancy is the Daughter of Mr. & Mrs. James Berry. When I came to the park 4/23/95 Chris J. Shea (Son of Dan & Nancy) and Grandson of the Berry's lived in the home with his wife. Chris J. Shea is on the lease. 6-D FELDMAN David Feldman lives in the home.(Grandson of Mr. & Mrs. Bernie Feldman). David moved in to the house approx. November of 1999. I was told by the Feldmans that David would only be here temporarily. I have a partial app.on file (Cal Lic#N5555676) 9-E SPAULDING Tim Spaulding lives in the home. (Son of Mr. & Mrs. C. Spaulding) Tun has been living in the house since I have been here. My understanding is that was raised from childhood in the park. 10-A WEINFORTNER Joe Weinfortner live in the home. (Son of Mr. & Mrs. Weinfortner) Joe has been living in the house since I have been here. My understanding is that he was raised from childhood in the park. His Mother Mary has just passed away. 11-E BOYAR Alan Smokler lives in the home with his 2 children ages 8 & 10 (Son of Sharon Boyar) Alan move in 12/18/99 Mrs. Boyar said they will live here indefinite. I have a partial app. on file (Cal Lic#N960346 / SS#561-27-6742) 12-A LITKE Ann L.itke lives in the home. (Daughter of Mr. & Mrs. Litke) Ann has been living in the house since I have been here. I don't know when she moved in. Total of ( 6 )Homes that are occupied full time that are not lease holders AS OF JANUARY 20, 2000 MARINAPARK 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723-0206 Joe Albano, Manager RESIDENT LEASE HOLDERS THAT DO NOT LIVE IN HOMES FULL TIME 1-A MORHAR 1-B MINKY 1-D ARONS I-E DOWDEN 2-A LAWSON 2-C COROSU 2-D BLUM 2-E KERN 3-B ELLIOTT 3-D SWIFT 4-A GORMAN 4-B BRENNER 4-D MELTZNER 5-C COWAN 5-D BERGER 5-E JACOBS 6-A GOLDBERG 6-B BROWN 6-C MOSS Note, This home is in the middle of a sale and would rn bft add one more to the &11 time resident total 6-E ESENSTEN 7-F WHITEHEAD 8-A PEAKE 8-B WOOD 8-C SHAMES 8-D CRAWFORD 9-C ZUCKERMAN 10-B RAINBOLT 10-C WESTERGART 10-D NORDQUIST 11-A BROWNE 11-B BROWNSTEIN 11-C BOGIN 11-D ROSTON 12-B HARTUNIAN 12-C HOROWITZ 12-E CASDEN / KEYES Total of ( 36) Resident lease holders that do not live in homes full time AS OF JANUARY 20, 2000 F r ' ALUUNAPARK BILLINGMAILING LIST & RENT ROLL ACTIVE - OCTOBER / 1999 1I \!WAk J4' BASE GAS TOTAL MARTIN MORHAR (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 1-A 2265 AHUACATE RD. LA HABRA HGTS, CA 90631 ARTHUR MINKY (1,129.42+22.00=S1,151.42) UNIT I-B 6922 HOLLYWOOD BLVD.4321 LOS ANGELES, CA 90028 IRWIN ALBERT (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 1-C 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 JACK ARONS (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 1-D 5315 YARMOUTH AVE.#9 ENCINO, CA 91316 JOHN DOWDEN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 1-E 69 OAK TREE LANE IRVINE, CA92612 LOUISLAWSON (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 2-A 604 N. KENTER LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 JOHN RETT13ERG (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 2 B 1770 BALBOABLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 TONY COROSU (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 2-C 1295 E. BASELINE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 DR MARVIN BLUM (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 2-D 4955 VAN NUYS BLVD. SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403 MORTON KERN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 2-E 408 ROBINWOOD DR. LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 JOHNMcDANIEL (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 3-A 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 DERICK ELLIOTT (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 3-B 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 RUTH HALE (852.60=22.00=$874.60) UNIT 3-C 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 FRANK SWIFT (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 3-D 915 KENNETH RD. GLENDALE, CA 91202 JAMES D. BERRY (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 3-E 28418 BUENA VISTA MISSION VIEJO, CA 92692 NAT GORMAN (1,129.42+22.00+$1,151.42) UNIT 4-A 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 LEE J. BRENNER (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 4-B 1515 REMAH VISTA GLENDALE, CA 91207 JOHN NICKELSON (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 4-C 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 DR MARTINMELTZNER (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 4-D 10350 WILSHIRE BLVD. #804 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 W I MARINAPARK BILLINR AILING LIST & RENT ROLL ACTIVE - OCTOBER / 1999 EDWIN N. DILLON (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 4-E 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 DAVID SHONHOLTZ (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 5-A 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ROBERT WOLMAN (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 5-B 885 S. ORANGE GROVE BLVD. #11 PASADENA, CA 91105 HERBERT COWAN (852.60+22.00--$874.60) UNIT 5-C 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. DENNIS BERGER (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 5-D 9595 WILSHIRE BLVD. #502 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ALLEN JACOBS (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 5-E 10750 WILSHIRE BLVD. 41003 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 - 4470 MARSHALL GOLDBERG(1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 6-A 612 N. OAKHURST BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 EUNICE BROWN (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 6-B 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 L. MOSS/WELLS FARGO (852.60+22.00=$874.60) TRUST DPT•/oNICKERSON UNIT 6-C 9600 SANTA MONICA 2ND. FL. BERVERY HILLS, CA 90210 BERNARD FELDMAN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 6-D 5315 YARMOUTH ENCINO, CA 91316 GLADYS N. ESENSTEN (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 6-E 5269 AVENIDA DEL SOL LAGUNAHR.LS, CA92653 Pa STEWART BERKSHI RE (1,129.42+N/A=Si,129.42) UNIT 7-A 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 HERBERT WILLIAMS (1,129.42+22.0041,151.42) UNIT 7-B 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ROY WHITEHEAD (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 7-F 15900 CALUMET CT. RIVERSIDE, CA 92506 NEIL G. PEAKE (1,129.42+22.00=S1,151.42) UNIT 8-A PO BOX 10367 COSTA MESA, CA92627 T.WOOD (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) % PACIFIC PRINTING UNIT 8-B 707 EAST 62ND. STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90001 SONDRA SHAMES (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 8-C 1667 W. WASHINGTON BLVD. LOS ANGELES, CA 90007 EDWARD CRAWFORD UNIT 8-D 11310 LAMBERT AVE. EL MONTE, CA 91732 (852.60+22.00=$874.60) DANIEL F. GOLD (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 8-E 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ROBERT A SEYMOUR (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 9-A 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 STUART PROCTOR (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 9-B 72 LA CUESTA ORINDA CA 94563 v MARINAPARK BILLINGMAILING LIST & RENT ROLL EFFECTIVE - OCTOBER / 1999 STANLEY ZUCKERMAN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 9-C 524 HILLCREST RD. BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 CLEO G. HEIN (852.60+22.00=874.60) UNIT 9-D 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 CARL P. SPAULDING (797.28+22.00=819.28) UNIT 9-E 1530 MIRASOL DR SAN MARINO, CA 91108 B. J. WEINFURTNER (1.129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 10-A 5015 CENTRAL RIVERSIDE, CA 92504 WILLIAMRAINBOLT (1,129.42+22.00=$1.151.42) UNIT 10-B 1300 E. HIGHLAND AVE. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92404 DR, JOHN WESTERGART (852.60+22.00=874.60) UNIT 10-C P. 0. BOX 260225 ENCINO, CA 91426-0225 R. NORDQUIST / WICKEL (852.60+22.00=S874.60) UNIT 10-D 3737 BEECHGLEN DR LA CRESCENTA, CA 91214 AGNES E. ERICKSON (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 10-E 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 ROBT/JOYCE BROWNE (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 11-A 555 FALCON VIEW CIRCLE PALM DESESRT, CA92211 DAVID BROWNSTEIN (1,129.42+22.00+$1,151.42) UNIT 11-B 190 SO. DENSLOW AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 SIDNEY E. BOGIN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 11-C 19120 ROMAR ST. NORTHRIDGE, CA 91324 NIRA ROSTON (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 11-D 12TRAFALGAR NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 SHARONBOYAR (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 11-E P. 0. BOX 11244 PALM DESERT, CA 92255-1244 DR MARTIN LITKE (1,129.42+22.00=$1,151.42) UNIT 12-A 427 HARBOR ISLAND DR. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 M. HARTUNIAN (1,129.42+22.00=$1.151.42) UNIT 12-B 18625 SIERRA MADRE GLENDORA, CA 91741 JACK HOROWITZ (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 12-C 5402 S. ADELE WHITTIER, CA 90601 JOSEPH MUSLIN (852.60+22.00=$874.60) UNIT 12-D 1770 BALBOA BLVD. W. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 GAIL KEYS (CASDEN) (797.28+22.00=$819.28) UNIT 12-E 244 WHITE HORSE TRAIL PALM DESERT, CA 92211 BASE RENTS $55,762.78 UTILITY CHARGES---$1,254.00 TOTAL $57,016.78 NOTE: *7-A... NO GAS CHARGE ALL ELECTRIC HOME $19102.95 *7-F... SAME CHARGE AS FRONT HOMES $1,124.95 0 x0sionamO 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723-0206 Joe Albano, Manager NEW RENTS AS OF OCTOBER 1ST. 1999 (A) (B)(F)-$1J29.42+$22.00GAS =$1,151.42 (C) (D) - $852.60 + $22.00 GAS = $874.60 ( E ) - $797.28 + $22.00 GAS = $819.28 NOTE - (7-A) IS ALL ELECTRIC - NO GAS CHARGE NOTE - THERE IS ONLY ONE LETTER F - SPACE ( 7-F ) to STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF ORANGE On June 29, 1973, before me, the undersigned, in and for said State, personally appeared Hem Paul Henderson, personally known to me to be t names are subscribed to the within Instrument, thereto, who being by me duly sworn, depose ar That they reside in Newport Beach, County of O and that they were present and saw Herbert Will Allen D. Jacobs, Al Goodman, David C. Williams, Paul M. Henderson, G. W. O'Brien, Roy E. White Pichel, Marcella Emerson, Charles A. Raport, Fr Harry J. Crawford, Charles F. Schoenherr, Nile Ione Peterman, P. M. Passy, Frank T. Turnbull, Harry C. Patterson, L. J. Paddock, Jerry M. Lew Leon Benveniste, Malcolm Leo, Robert Clifford, Elman, Milton Werner, Robert Wolman, Lee Brenne Wayne Collins, Stanley R. Charlston, Budd L. Ch Brownell, John Westergart, James Loudon, Elizab C. M. Hawke, Carl P. Spaulding, Ruth J_ Nordqui Miller Fortner, Robert D. Spurgeon, Mark Stawis J. D. Jones, Kenneth V. Todd, J. H. Johnson, Ge Richard P. Kratz, Ethelyne E. McCarty, H. Briar. Konhei.m, Marian J. Anderson and Louise A. Seng to them to be the same persons described in an subscribed to the within and annexed Instrumen trailer park spaces. Parties thereto, execute and deliver the same,j ledged to said affiants that they executed the said affiants subscribed their names thereto a jWITNESS my hand and official seal. I Q VEHICLE/VESSEL TRANSFER FO APublfc Service Agency Bill o W le Odometer Disclosure PowervAttorney ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE IN INK. INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE SIDE SECTION 1: VehicleNessel Identification IDENTIFICATION NUMBER YEAR MAKE�YJjp ODEL LICENSE PLATEICF # MOTORCYCLE ENGINE # / �{ I I I I I I I I I I I I Ai lS,y(y v/f�) G 6/-< 01-�eo SECTION 2: Bill of Sale If this was a gift, indicate relationship: SECTION 3: Odometer Disclosure Statement »" sell, transfer, and deliver the above vehicle/vessel on for the amount of Is a MO DAY YR (SELLING PRICE) (i.e., parents, spouse, friend, etc.) Federal and State Law requires that you state the mileage upon transfer of ownership. Failure to complete or providing a false statement may result in fines and/or imprisonment. The odometer now reads ®F—J ® , [] [:] [:] 10 (no tenths) miles, and to the best of my knowledge reflects the actual mileage unless one of the following statements Is checked. WARNING —ODOMETER DISCREPANCY ❑ Mileage exceeds the odometer mechanical limits ❑ Odometer reading is NOT the actual mileage Explain discrepancy: SECTION 4: Power of I/We appoint (PRINT NAME[S]) (PRINT NAME[S]) as my attorney in fact, to complete all necessary documents, as needed, to transfer ownership as required by law. Signature required by person appointing Power of Attorney I DATE Signature required by person appointing Power of Attorney I DATE X SECTION 5: Buyer and Seller Information (Individual[s], Company, Dealership, Lessor/Lessee or Trust) BUYER MUST COMPLETE I acknowledge the odometer reading and the facts of the transfer. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information 1 have provided is true and correct. PRI N E SIGNATURE D TR / DL, ID OR DEALER ff X PRINT NAME SIGNATURE DATE OL, ID OR DEALER # 0 AND X❑ OR PRINT NAME SIGNATURE DATE DL, ID OR DEALER # ❑ AND X O OR MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP DAYTIME PHONE # ( ) SELLER MUST COMPLETE I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information I have provided is fruo anrt rnrrprt. r PRINT N E SIGNATU DL, ID OR DEALER # n Q S (/� V / X / /� PRINT NA E S ATURE DATE DL, ID OR DEALER # X PRINT NAME SIGNATURE DATE DL, ID OR DEALER # X MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP DAYTIME PHONE k ( ) REG 262 (REV, 3198) A Public Service Agdncy INSTATIONS FOR COMPLETING THISIORM MUST NOT CONTAIN ANY ERASURES OR ERRORS THIS FORM IS NOT THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE. IT MUSTACCOMPANY THE TITLE OR APPLICATION FOR A DUPLICATE TITLE. SECTION 1 — VehicieNessel Identification This section must be completed. SECTION 2 — Bill of Sale To be completed by the seller of the vehicle/vessel, identifying the buyer, the purchase price, and date of sale. SECTION 3 — Odometer Disclosure Statement To be completed by the seller disclosing the mileage at the time of sale, The seller is required to provide the buyer with a copy of the odometer disclosure. A record of this information must be retained for 5 years. SECTION 4 — Power of Attorney To be completed when appointing an attorney -in -fact to transfer ownership and/or complete necessary documents as required by law. SECTION 5 — Buyer/Seller Information Printed name and signature to be completed in ink. To be completed by the buyer to provide name and address, accept responsibility of ownership, and/or acknowledge mileage reported. To be completed by the seller to provide name and address, release ownership, and/or disclose mileage to the buyer. INSTRUCCIONES PARA COMPLETAR ESTE FORMULARIO NO DEBE DE TENER NINGUNA BORRADURA 0 ERRORES ESTE FORMULARIO NO ES EL CERTIFICADO DE PROPIEDAD. ESTE TIENE QUEACOMPANARAL TITULO O LA SOLICITUD PARA DUPLiCADO DE TITULO. SECCION 1 — Identificacl6n de Vehfculo/Barco Esta secci6n Ilene qua completarse. SECCION 2 — Factura de Venta Para completarse por el vendedor del vehiculo/barco, para identificar al comprador, el precio de compra y la fecha de la venta. SECCION 3 — Deciaraci6n del Recorrido an Millas del Od6metro Para completarse por at vendedor revelando el millaje al momento de la vents. AI vendedor se Is exige proveer al comprador una copia de to declaracl6n del recorrido an miilas del od6metro. Un expediente de esta informacl6n tiene qua retenerse por 5 ants. SECCION 4 — Poder Legal Para completarse cuando se designe a un apoderado o procurador para traspasar propiedad y/o completar los documentos necesarios qua se exigen por ley. SECCION 5 — Informacl6n del CompradorNendedor Nombre an letra de imprenta y firma deben completarse con bolfgrafo. Para completarse por el comprador para proveer nombre y domicilio, aceptar responsibilidad de to propiedad y/o aceptar el millaje reportado. Para completarse por el vendedor pars proveer nombre y domicilio, liberar la propiedad y/o revelar el millaje al comprador. 9810361 AEG 262(REV. 3108) oa c -T7 ZA6"e rgos� �1g.r�KBP�K ':r STATEMENT OF FACTS NUMBER (MOTORCYCLE) � f "1000 DATE t?J' the undersigned/hefeby state that the vehicle/vessel described above AleC4 ¢ch Ifurther agree to indemnify and save harmless the Director of Motor Vehicles, State of California, and'subsequent purchasers of said vehicle or vessel, for any loss they maysuffer resulting from registration of the above•destribed vehicle or vessel in California, from issuance of -a California certificate of ownership -cover- ing the some, or transfer to: Executed on Ltyat S4w#�YVIA Al %A DATE 1 certify under -penally of perjurythat the for ng is true and correct. Signature X G� Address City Daytime Telephone Number ( ) NO. 229-REG. 256 (REV. 11184) LAW PRINTING CO. INC , State BtaISTSma cm XUL an at POO-4,210 Raffir ARK 2770 •Bar LLWA 316M, i SVPM MUCr, CALI1. TAM 17aIT Ii2?l � SPAC! rO.L-,L AM= cITI �/�,� XIr Gms 9i�trc- vlrs�a r Im UMPaola No. Mims ADfDnS9 cI �G •T-� • zzr coDt 1MFf��yrc ° i(L►FiL CAM 4e eVto LIc. 1j row_ 8t '� - oL . CAR s LIC.iO. sTJTi f4' z�1 s� 14 ft 051° a_ MAP_Ism 3 `�°s�No. is jmzammy mrin c�EDft I%Io,PIQ z Pmoll, 2312moa •o._ sarri oQ�� :.i kll clzi fi/. ice— str cuma� CiQIi+Tom ai GUIMMLIM: IWa AOI MIR try 47. _ ' at tnr. 07-25 00 17:01 MARINAPARK NEWPORTBEACH T:7147230539 P:01 • MARINAPARK 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport MUb, CA 92667 (949) 7ZI-0206 Ax Albmo, Manager TO: DAVE KIFF FROM: JOE ALBANO DATE: DULY 260 2000 SUBJECT: SELLING OF UNIT ON SPACE 10-D DAVE: THERE IS A DEAL WORKING ON SPACE (10-D), I HAVE ALL THE SIGNED DOCUMENTS AND READY TO START A CREDIT CHECK ON THE BUYERS. It is a LANCER (1980) (24x52) wood exterior, comp roof Selling for $30,000, The buyers gave a $2,000 dollar non-refundable deposit to the seller and are asking to expedite the transaction. Do you want to take a look at it? Please let me know if I should continue with transfer. Thanks, Joe @ Marinapark CC: Robin Clauson IEE M N A N to co l .... - .-:�; � _�� ,�"` a.,e^ n «�;KTfi k .. a >-... � .. ;' ». , �"' `.�.-� •,...• H.s :S'v ? .-fie FRI�©o Ld L^ s -r n-"I , V T r kD 3 D n 9 H n :U r O D H Z N lk0 N m CO W Id 1 � I 'Z. Jt" x yrZ f:.s.£�_ ii'. u®®©© � '� -his 'F S✓. :.���•'�u +f s���i-�...5 v Z� .. atia'i � p • z' C'w("l 'i� �y 1�y. �t S.. ,1 � A � ' �W` S )'l t� S S )1 • '�.�1• - -t'i :e+. .," i e 1'�y[ i+y, ? .L�.�.x.{YTS.. �.� Yn+w.iSSw'lx'.".F ii4�y�Fx A �%P �.l.Arl�'YYi�'F��f 'J�j[a � �. "�iF+ r.'4± f-: :lCyp.TL�IGI •,• f ®®©®©®® ®®®© � Y• f ®®�®®®® III ®®©©®®®©®©®® ®® • mmm", ®®®I ME ®©©n®®®©®©®® f f G ® Jm� W NARMIA PARWRESIDENT SURVEY 'Modiar 1-A 2 2 Second WA 24x50 N WA WA NIA 1,15142 Whky 1-B 2 2 Both equal WA 24x 50 N 11 yrs. WA 11 yrs. 1,151.42 Albert 1-0 2 1 Permanent 5 -10 K 24 x 48 N 15 yrs. 3 25 yrs. 874.60 Arons 1-0 2 0 Second WA WA N 15yrs. 2 12yrs. 874.60 Dowden 1-E 2 1 Second ( 5K WA NIA 30yrs. 2 5yrs. 819.28 Lawson 2-A 2 2 Second WA 24x5O N 15yrs. 3 25yrs. 1,161.42 Rettberg 2-B 2 2 Permanent 15 K 24 x 48 N 20 yrs. 2 5 yrs. 1,151.42 Blum 2-D 2 2 Second 3-4K 24x52 N 14yrs. 3 30 yrs. 874.60 Kem 2-E 2 2 Second WA 10x20 N NIA 2 15yrs. 81928 McDaniel 3-A 4 2 Permanent NIA 24x48 NIA 15ym 3 12yrs. 1,151.42 ElIkAt 3-B 2 0 Permanent ( -5 K 24x54 N 12 yrs. 2 15 yr5. 1.151.42 Hale 3-C 2 1 Permanent NIA 24 x 50 WA WA WA WA 874-60 Swift 3-D 3 2 Second 4+ K NIA N 30 yrs_ 2 14 yrs. 874.60 Shea 3-E 2 0 Permanent WA Sngl WA WA WA WA 819.28 Gowan 4-A 2 2 Second 5 -10 K 24 x 53 N 14 yrs. 3 24 yrs. 1.15142 Brenner 4-B 2 2 Second 4+K NIA WA 25yrs- 2 30 1,151.42 N--dwlson 4-C 2 1 Permanent 5-10 K 24 x 54 Y 20 yrs. 2 10 yrs. 874.60 Melt ner 44:) 2 2 Permanent 2 -3 K 24 x 4B N WA 2 30 yrs. 874.60 Dillon 4-E 3 2 Permanent 2+K 20x56 N 22yrs. 2 gym 81928 Shonholz 5-A 2 2 Permanent 5 -10 K 24 x 50 N 25 yrs. 2 26 yrs. 1,151.42 Wolman 5-B 2 2 Permanent 5 -10 K 24 x 50 N 12 yrs. 2 29 yrs_ 1,151.42 Cowan 5-C 2 2 Permanent 5-10K 2Ox40 N WA 2 24yrs. 874.60 `Indlrates information ptovkied by otlt m. nottheadmi aWma e. J 0 in r 0 0 REPORT FOR DAVE KIFF (1-A)... ROD & REEL (1959) (10x50) + (10x50-cabana) both sections are recovered with a wood exterior, comp roof looks like a newer dbl. wide Serial# (E1T3311) Decal# (AAV6470) (1-B) ... (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting info) Decal# (LAP1082) (1-C) ... SKYLINE (1986) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof. Serial#1571A / 1581B Decal# LAH5697 (1-D) ... (24X48) alcan siding exterior, comp roof (getting info) (1-E)... CASCADE (1961) (10X50) + (10X32) Cabana, wood exterior, comp roof, trailer exterior recovered with a vinyl siding exterior, metal roof, Serial#S1236 Decal#4500 (2-A) GOLDEN WEST (1986) (24x48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# 7103A / 7103B Decal# LAH5646 (2-13) 'LANCER (1975) (24X48) alcan siding exterior, comp roof Serial# S-3284A / S-3284B Decal# AAP2703 (2-C) ANGELES (1958) (10X39) + (10X20) Cabana, wood exterior, comp roof, trailer recovered with a Vinyl siding exterior (UNIT IN VERY POOR CONDITION) Serial# 5638 Lic.Plate# CK6483 Still registered with DMV NOTE: CITY OWNED UNIT) 0 0 (2-D) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting info) (2-E) (20X50) vinyl siding exterior, comp roof (getting info) Decal# AAR3776 (3-A) LANCER (1978) (24x48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# 34526A / 34526B Decal# AAC51 (3-B) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting info) (3-C) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting info) Decal# SR4030 (3-D) (24X48) alcan exterior, comp roof (getting info) (3-E) (getting info) Decal# ABD2729 (4-A) GOLDEN WEST (1986) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# 9104A / 9104A Decal# LAH5647 (4-B) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting info) (4-C) LANCER (1978) (24x48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# 34932A /34932B Decal# ABC8822 (4-D) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting more info) Decal# ABC8822 W .° 0 (4-E) VILLA WEST (1977) (20X52) alcan exterior, comp roof Serial# 27919A / 27199B Decal# ABB7712 (5-A) LANCER (1976) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# 13294A Decal# MT1236 NOTE: (I believe it's a single wide with pop outs and enclosed) (5-13) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting more info) Decal# LAF828 (5-C) LA CORONA (1968) (20X40) alcan exterior, metal roof Serial# S4218XXU / 54218XX Decal# ABD6202 (5-D) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof Decal# AAT2667 (getting more info) (5-E) (24X52) wood exterior, comp roof (getting more info) Decal# LAH5791 (6-A) (12X48) With a pop out (12X22) and addition (12X15) Makes home onto a (20X48) size wise. Exterior recovered in wood, Metal roof (getting more info) Lic Plate# BY1781 Sticker# 9169465 / 2000 (6-B) ROLLAWAY (1978) (24X48) wood siding, comp roof Serial# 1077RA 5652 / 1077RB S652 Decal# AAM6479 (6-C) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting more info) (6-D) LANCER (1976) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# A33259 / B33259 Decal# MJ5741 03 s. (6-E) (20X52) alcan exterior, rolled tar paper roof Getting more info) (7-A) CORNELL (1968) (20x48) alcan exterior, comp roof Serial# 52149XX / S2149XXU Decal# AAX2803 (7-13) LANCER (1976) (24X51) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# SA3389 / SB3389 Deacal# MT1024 (7-F) FUQUA (1980) (34x58) wood exterior, comp roof (This is a true triple wide) the only one in the park Serial# A12285 / B12285 / B12285 Decal# AAW1192 (8-A) VRUNG (1OX40) (getting more info) (8-B) (24X48) wood exterior, comp roof (getting more info) (8-C) (getting more info) (8-D) LANCER (1976) (24x48) wood exterior, comp roof Serial# A33253 / B33253 Decal# MJ5742 (8-E) �rviv� Pn iJDGfL ��i TO oe( v. .- •-yc" iV$�ifiK.7�/Yf�+' �f^r ram.ms..+-...yP..��..an_,.-.,.-..+.-.+o w.a.ti....���_�.-...-�.�...........___- _..._....� Per paragraph 21.A of Amended Lease dated March 15, 2000, to March 15,.2002, I acknowledge receipt of copy of previous lease dated 1985 to March 15, 2000. Date Lessee Date Lessee 01 AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION OF�ASE This Amendment and Extension of Lease (Amended Lease), entered into this of day of , 2000 by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation and charter city (City) and (Lessee), is made with reference to the following facts, the materiality and existence of which is stipulated and agreed by the parties: A. City is the owner, and is in possession and control, of a parcel of real property, consisting of tidelands and/or uplands, located northerly of Balboa Boulevard and between approximately 16th Street and 18th Street in Newport Beach, commonly known as Marinapark, generally described in Exhibit "A" (Property); B. The Property was under lease prior to the effective date of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach and, pursuant to the provisions of Section 1402 of the City Charter, the City Council is empowered to authorize execution of this Lease by the Mayor; C. Prior to the effective date of this Amended Lease, and pursuant to a lease dated March 24, 1976, (hereinafter "1976 Lease"), the City leased 58 mobilehome spaces on the Property pursuant to a standard lease which would have expired on September 30, 1985, subject to the right of the Lessee to extend the term for a five (5) year period under certain conditions; D. Prior to the expiration of the 1976 Lease, the City leased the same 58 mobilehome spaces on the Property pursuant to a lease that would have . expired on March 15, 2000 (1985 Lease) but for this Amended Lease; E. The City Council finds and declares that this Amended Lease will continue to preserve an important and unique housing resource and is a benefit to the citizens of Newport Beach; F. The Parties acknowledge that, subsequent to the effective date of the 1985 Lease, State Lands Commission staff has discovered evidence that suggests, but does not establish, that all of the Property consists of tidelands. The City and Lessee contend that all of the Property leased for mobilehome residency purposes is uplands owned by the City. The Parties also acknowledge that they are awaiting a determination 'by State Lands Commission staff as to the nature of the Property and that determination may have a bearing on the types of land uses permitted on the Property. City and Lessee, or Lessee's representative(s) will continue to cooperate in good faith to obtain a determination that all or a portion of the Property is uplands; G. The Parties also acknowledge that the City has requested interested parties to submit responses to a Request for Proposal — Marinapark Future Use/Development (RFP) published in November, 1999. The RFP requests interested parties to submit proposals for the future use of the Property, the means by which the proposal would be implemented and the benefits of the proposal to the City. The City has received eight (8) responses to the RFP including Pleast three proposals that propte a continuation of a mobilehome park use of the Property (Mobilehome Proposals). The Mobilehome Proposals contemplate the continued use of the Property as a mobilehome park; H. The City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of this Amended Lease comply, and are consistent, with the Charter of the City of Newport Beach including, without limitation, the provisions of Sections 200 and 1402 of the Charter; The City Council also finds and declares that the provisions of this Amended Lease are consistent with the plans, policies, rules and ordinances of the City of Newport Beach. The City Council also finds that this Amended Lease is consistent with the General Plan and the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program; The terms and conditions of this Amended Lease are in compliance, and consistent, with the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Section 798, et seq. of the Civil Code) and the State Zoning and Planning Act (Sections 65863.7 and 65863.8 of the Government Code). K. The purpose and intent of the Parties is to amend, and extend the term of, the 1985 Lease to give the City and Lessee an opportunity to resolve issues related to the ultimate use of the Property while preserving the benefits accruing to each Party pursuant to the 1985 Lease. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties do hereby mutually agree as follows: DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The City leases, and Lessee accepts the lease of, the portion of the Property described as space as shown on Exhibit "A" (Premises). 2. TERM. The tenancy created by this Amended Lease shall extend the expiration date of the 1985 Lease from March 15, 2000 to March 15, 2002, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the terms of this Amended Lease. 3. USE OF PREMISES. A. The Premises shall be used only for residential purposes, and no business or commercial activity shall be conducted on the Premises. Permitted occupants are (i) Lessee; (ii) an additional person if Lessee is living alone; (iii) family members entitled to occupy the premises pursuant to the Mobilehome Residency Law; and (iv) short term guests. The term "short term guest shall mean any person who does not stay with Lessee for more than a total of twenty (20) consecutive days or a total of thirty (30) days in any calendar year. Other persons may occupy the premises with the prior written consent of the City. 2 B. Lessee agrZses that the primary residence require lent is fundamental to this lease, stipulates that the residency requirement will not constitute an undue burden or hardship on Lessee in light of the time allowed for compliance in the 1985 Lease, and, subject to the provisions of Section 8, Lessee agrees that the Premises shall be Lessee's primary residence unless this requirement is waived by the City Council due to hardship. Lessee shall provide satisfactory proof of residency to the City. C. Lessee agrees to comply with the rules and regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B") and further agrees these rules and regulations may be amended as provided in the Mobilehome Residency Law or other relevant statute. 4. CONSIDERATION: A. Introduction. The City and Lessee agree that the terms and conditions of the 1985 Lease and this Amended Lease preserve and protect substantial and important rights and advantages, economic and personal, that each Party would not otherwise be entitled to receive. These economic and personal rights and benefits are the consideration for the 1985 Lease and this Amended Lease. The more important rights and benefits gained and given up by each Party are specified in this paragraph and the Parties agree that, like the 1985 Lease, this Amended Lease should be interpreted such that each party receives the benefits and advantages identified in this paragraph. B. Consideration to Lessee. (1) As consideration for Lessee's approval of this Amended Lease, City commits to maintain the Property as a mobilehome park until March 15, 2002. (2) Additional consideration for Lessee's approval of this Amended Lease is the right to occupy the Premises subject to the payment of below market rent as specified in the 1985 Lease and continued in this Amended Lease, and limitations on timing and amount of future rental increases. (3) As additional consideration, this Amended Lease supplements the benefits of the 1985 Lease relative to the value and transferability of Lessee's interest. (4) As additional consideration, Lessee obtains the City's commitment not to close the mobilehome park on, or shortly after, March 2000 as contemplated by the 1985 Lease as well as City's commitment to fairly consider the Mobilehome Proposals. Lessee also obtains City's commitment to cooperate in good faith with any organization representing a majority of lessees of mobilehome spaces on the Property in an effort to obtain a determination from the State Lands Commission that the Property is uplands. 3 C. Consideration to City. • As consideration to the City, Lessee agrees and acknowledges that City may convert Marinapark to a different use upon expiration of this Amended Lease, or shortly thereafter. Lessee agrees that if City chooses to close the mobilehome park on the Property it may do so without obligation to pay relocation benefits, or provide other forms of relocation assistance. Lessee acknowledges that the terms of the 1985 Lease and this Amended Lease constitute full and adequate mitigation of any adverse impact on Lessee of any conversion of the Property to a non-mobilehome use, and the extended term of the 1985 Lease and this Amended Lease gives Lessee sufficient time to secure replacement space in another mobilehome park or other alternative housing. Accordingly, LESSEE HEREBY WAIVES, GIVES UP THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE, AND RELEASES CITY FROM ANY OBLIGATION TO PAY, RELOCATION BENEFITS, OR ANY OTHER FORM OF RELOCATION ASSISTANCE OR OTHER PAYMENT OR CONSIDERATION THAT ARISE OUT OF, OR ARE IN ANY WAY RELATED TO: (1) THIS LEASE OR ANY FUTURE TENANCY; (2) THE ULTIMATE TERMINATION OF LESSEE'S TENANCY PURSUANT TO THE 1985 LEASE OR THIS AMENDED LEASE OR THE TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANCY HOWEVER CREATED; (3) THE CONVERSION OF THE PREMISES TO ANY USE OTHER THAN A MOBILEHOME USE. (4) THE DISPLACEMENT OF LESSEE' FROM HIS AND/OR HER PRIMARY RESIDENCE; (5) ANY FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL LAW, PLAN & POLICY OR RULE WHICH RELATES TO SUCH DISPLACEMENT, OR REQUIRES THE MITIGATION OF THE IMPACTS CAUSED BY DISPLACEMENT. THIS RELEASE BY LESSEE, NOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 1542 OF THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE, WHICH PROVIDES THAT: "A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED THE SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR," RELEASES ALL CLAIMS OR LOSSES, WHETHER KNOWN, UNKNOWN, FORESEEN OR UNFORESEEN, WHICH LESSEE MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY. LESSEE 0 •UNDERSTANDS AND ARNOWLEDGES THE SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSEQUENCE OF THIS RELEASE AND OF THIS SPECIFIC WAIVER OF SECTION 1542 AND ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES, LOSS OR CLAIM THAT LESSEE MAY INCUR AS A RESULT OF THE CONVERSION, TERMINATION, AND/OR DISPLACEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE. LESSEE IS FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY EXECUTING THIS AMENDED LEASE AND LESSEE, IN EXECUTING THIS RELEASE, HAS NOT RELIED UPON ANY INDUCEMENTS, PROMISES OR REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY CITY OR ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES, OTHER THAN THE COMMITMENTS AND COVENANTS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS LEASE. D. Provisions related to Consideration (1) Lessee agrees that City's right to convert the premises to a non- mobilehome use may be required if the Property is determined to be tidelands and that the City Council has the right, after due consideration of the Mobilehome Proposals, to terminate the mobilehome use after compliance with applicable law. (2) This Amended Lease constitutes notice that City reserves the right to physically convert the Premises to a non-mobilehome use on or about March 16, 2002. (3a) Upon expiration of the term of this Amended Lease, Lessee shall, within sixty (60) days, remove any mobilehome or recreational vehicle, structure, improvement, personal property or equipment located upon the Premises. Upon the expiration of this sixty (60) day period, the City shall have the right to remove and dispose of any and all property improvement structures or equipment which remain on the Premises. (3b) Notwithstanding subsection (3a) above, City agrees to assume responsibility for costs of removal and disposal of the mobilehome located on the Premises, provided that on or before January 15, 2002, Lessee provides City written notification of Lessee's desire to abandon the mobilehome and transfers all title and interest in the mobilehome clear of all liens and encumbrances to City on or before March 15, 2002. (4) If, subsequent to the expiration of this Amended Lease, Marinapark is still to be operated as a mobilehome park, the City shall be under no obligation to offer written rental agreements or leases other than as may then be required by the Mobilehome Residency Law, specifically, the provisions of Section 798.18 of the Civil Code or such laws as may be enacted subsequent to the effective date of this Amended Lease. The provisions of this Subsection shall not impair, alter or diminish any commitment or obligation undertaken by City in 5 conjiTnction with the consideration of the Mobilehome Residency Law currently twelve (12) month lease or a lesser term 5. RENT. Lessee shall pay as the term of this lease, Ailehome Proposals. The obligates the City to offer a If requested by Lessee. rent, without deduction or offset, on the 1st day of, , and on the first day of each month thereafter during the sum of The monthly rental shall be subject to adjustment as of October 1, 2000 and October 1, 2001. In no case shall the adjusted rent be less than the current rent. The adjustment shall be equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for the twelve month period (commencing May 1 and ending April 30, hereinafter the "adjustment period") prior to the date of adjustment. The rental adjustment shall be calculated by adding each monthly percentage increase during the adjustment period, subtracting any decreases and multiplying the total by the monthly rent in effect prior to the adjustment. The Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers -All Items) for the Los Angeles - Long Beach -Anaheim, California area as published and released by the Bureau of Statistics for the United States Department of Labor shall be the index utilized for calculating rental adjustments. If the Consumer Price Index, as now compiled and published, is superseded by another index, then the new index shall be used to calculate the increase in rent provided that an appropriate conversion from the old index to the new can feasibly be made. If such conversion cannot be made, or if no such index is published, then another index generally recognized as authoritative shall be substituted by agreement. Rent for any fractional part of any month between the commencement date and the first date of the first full calendar month within the Term shall be prorated, and paid by Lessees to City along with the first full month of rent due hereunder. Lessee stipulates and agrees that this Amended Lease constitutes the ninety (90) day written notice of rental increases by the Mobilehome Residency Law and Lessee acknowledges that no additional written notice need be given by City; provided, however, City may provide Lessee with ninety (90) days written notice of the precise amount of any rental increase authorized by this paragraph and City and Lessee agree that such notice shall not constitute a waiver of City's right to rely upon the adequacy of the notice provisions in this paragraph. Lessee acknowledges that this Amended Lease may create a possessory interest subject to property taxation and that Lessee may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on such interest. Lessee shall ,pay, in addition to rent and before delinquency, all taxes, assessments, license fees and other charges (Taxes) that are, during the Term, levied or assessed against Lessee's interest in the premises pursuant this Amended Lease or any personal property installed on the premises. 6. RELEVANT STATUTES AND RULES. The Mobilehome Residency Law requires this Amended Lease to contain, among other things, the rules and regulations of Marinapark and the language of the Mobilehome Residency Law. The rules and regulations of Marinapark are attached as Exhibit "B," the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law are attached as Exhibit "C," and both documents are incorporated into this Amended Lease by reference. The Marinapark rules and regulations and the Mobilehome Residency Law may be amended or modified from time to time, and these amendments and modifications shall be deemed to be incorporated into the documents attached as Exhibits "B" and "C" when effective. 7. LATE CHARGE. If the entire rent owed by Lessee is not received by City by the 10th day following its due date, then, without any requirement for notice to Lessee, Lessee shall pay to City a late charge of thirty five dollars ($35.00). The parties agree that such a late charge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs City will incur by reason of any late payment of rent. An acceptance of a late charge by City shall not constitute a waiver of Lessee's default with respect to rent, or prevent City from exercising any of the rights or remedies granted by this Amended Lease. 8. SALE OR ASSIGNMENT. Lessee may sell the mobilehome located on the premises pursuant to the rights, and subject to the obligations, of Lessee under the Mobilehome Residency Law and any other applicable statutes. If the mobilehome that is the subject of the sale or transfer, is to remain in the park, or if Lessee proposes to assign Lessee's interest in this Lease to any person or persons who is (are) to reside on the premises, Lessee and/or the proposed transferee must do the following: A. Lessee must give notice of the sale or assignment to City prior to close of escrow. B. The sale or assignment shall not be effective unless the City has given prior written approval, the transferee has executed the assignment of lease form provided by City, and the transferee has expressly agreed to be bound by the waivers and releases provided in this Amended Lease. C. Lessee agrees that occupancy of the Premises shall be limited as provided in Section 3 and Lessee agrees not to sublease or otherwise transfer any partial interest in this Amended Lease. The requirement that the Premises constitute Lessee's primary residence shall not apply to any purchaser or transferee of Lessee provided the purchase or transfer occurs on or after March 16, 2000 and the purchaser or transferee complies with the provisions of this Subsection. 7 D. City shall approve any such transfer, if the transfePee has the financial ability to pay the rent and charges and otherwise comply with the terms and conditions of this Lease, provided, however, City may withhold approval if it determines that, based upon the transferee's prior tenancies, the transferee will not comply with the Rules and Regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B"). E. City shall not approve any transfer or assignment of any interest in this Amended Lease that would permit the installation of any mobilehome or structure that exceeds twelve feet in height. F. Should Lessee, during the term of this Amended Lease, elect to sell or assign its interest in this Amended Lease, City shall have the right of first refusal to acquire the interest on such terms and conditions as may be acceptable to Lessee, and on failure of the parties to agree on terms within ten (10) days after written notice thereof from Lessee, Lessee shall be free to sell or assign Lessee's Interest in this Amended Lease, subject to the terms and conditions of this Amended Lease. G. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Amended Lease, Lessee shall have the right to assign its interest in this Amended Lease to a spouse, son and/or daughter without any requirement that City be given the right of first refusal to acquire the interest, provided, however, the premises shall be used as the primary residence of the assignee and the assignee shall be bound by all provisions of this Amended Lease, including, without limitation, the waiver of relocation assistance. 9. UTILITIES. A. The City shall not provide electricity or telephone service. Lessee shall make arrangements directly with the utilities furnishing the services and promptly pay all charges. B. The City shall provide Lessee with water and gas service. The charge to Lessee for such service shall be based on the charges paid by Lessee as of February 1, 2000. Charges for gas and water service shall be increased or decreased on the first day of October, 2000, and on the first day of October 2001. C. The charges for gas and water service shall be paid when rent is due, and is in addition to the obligation to pay rent. In the event Lessee fails to pay charges for water or gas service within ten days after the amount is due, Lessee shall pay to City a late charge of thirty five dollars ($35.00). D. In the event City provides both master meter and submeter service of utilities to Lessee, the cost of the charges for each billing period shall be separately stated and shall contain opening and closing readings of the meter. In such event, City shall post rates charged by the appropriate utility in a conspicuous place. E. City shall not be liable for any loss, damage or injury and Lessee shall not be entitled to ty abatement or reduction of rent, bpeason of City's failure to furnish any utility or service if the failure is caused by accident, breakage, repairs, maintenance, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of City. 10. CONSIDERATION OF MOBILEHOME PROPOSALS City commits to consider the Mobilehome Proposals relative to the use of the Property on the same terms and conditions, and using the same criteria, as other proposals submitted in response to the RFP. City and Lessee agree that the City Council shall have sole and complete discretion to accept any, or none, of the Proposals, including Mobilehome's Proposal, submitted pursuant to the RFP. City and Lessee also agree that the City Council has the sole and complete discretion to select portions of any proposal or combine aspects of more than one proposal in making a final decision on the ultimate use of the Property. Lessee acknowledges that a determination that the Property is tidelands will, in the absence of State legislation, require City to terminate the mobilehome use of the Property. City agrees to cooperate, in good faith, with an organization comprised of a majority of lessees of spaces on the Property to obtain a determination from the State Lands Commission that the Property is uplands. 11. MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENTS. City agrees to maintain, in good working order and conditions, the grounds, common areas, common facilities, streets, City -owned buildings, and any other publicly -owned improvements on the Marinapark property. Lessee shall, at their cost and expense, maintain, in good order and condition, any mobilehome, cabana, or other improvement located on the premises. Lessees also agree that all landscaping on the premises shall be limited to three feet (T) in height to preserve views and open space. The City may charge a reasonable fee for services relating to the maintenance of the premises upon which the mobilehome is located in the event Lessee fails to maintain the property in accordance with the provisions of this Amended Lease and the rules and regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B") after giving written notification to Lessee and Lessee's failure to comply within fourteen (14) days from the date of notice. The notice shall contain all information required by the Mobilehome Residency Law. 12. PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES. The physical improvements to be provided Lessee during the term of this Amended Lease include the nonexclusive right to use all of the common areas and common facilities located within Marinapark, such as streets, nonrestricted parking areas, laundry facilities, restrooms and showers located in the common areas and common facilities and designated for use by residents. The services to be provided by City during the term of this Amended Lease include the services to be provided by the Marinapark manager and other employees and officers of City, the utilities to be provided by City specified in 13. 14. 15. Section 9, td the maintenance of all common atas and common facilities in good condition. It is the responsibility of the management to provide and maintain physical improvements in the common facilities in good working order and condition. In the case of a sudden or unforeseeable breakdown or deterioration of these improvements (failure), the management shall have a reasonable, period of time to repair the failure after City knows or should have known of the failure. For purposes of this Section a reasonable period to repair the failure shall be as soon as possible in situations affecting a health or safety condition, and shall not exceed thirty (30) days in any other case except where exigent circumstances justify a delay. CHANGES IN MARINAPARK RULES AND REGULATIONS, PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES. The City retains the right to amend or modify the Marinapark Rules and Regulations, the terms of this Lease, and the nature of the physical improvements or services to be provided, after complying with the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law and other applicable law. The right to amend the terms of this Amended Lease, the Marinapark rules and regulations, and the physical improvements and services to be provided by City, include, without limitation, the right to reduce the size of, or eliminate, any physical improvement, common area, common facility, or equipment, provided, however, no changes shall be made to the provisions of this Amended Lease, specifying the term of the Amended Lease or the rent to be charged unless those changes or amendments are permitted by other provisions of this Amended Lease. RIGHT OF ENTRY. Lessee, subject to the right of revocation as set forth in the Mobilehome Residency Law, hereby grants written consent to City to enter the premises and Lessee's mobilehome for the purpose of improving, maintaining, repairing or replacing gas, water and sewage systems owned and maintained by City. Any damage, loss or injury to Lessee's home, property of Lessee, or the premises which results from efforts of City to maintain, repair, improve or replace the gas, water or sewage systems, shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee, and City shall not be responsible for reimbursing any cost or expense incurred by Lessee as a result of such efforts, nor shall City be responsible for repairing, replacing or otherwise restoring the mobilehome, the premises or any improvements thereon, to the state or condition immediately prior to the maintenance, replacement or repair efforts. The City also reserves the right to enter the premises for other purposes as specified In the Mobilehome Residency Law. HOLD HARMLESS. Lessee covenants to indemnify, defend and hold City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims or demands of any name or nature whatsoever arising out of, or incident to, the use and occupancy of 10 the Premis• and to indemnify City for any cost,ability, or expense caused by or arising out of any injury or death of persons or damage to property which may occur upon or about the premises or caused by or arising out of any activities or omission of Lessee, or Lessee's agents, employees, licensees and/or invitees, including, without limitation, injury or death of Lessee, or Lessee's agents, employees, licensees and invitees and damage to their property or Lessee's property, except for any damage or injury of any kind arising out of the sole negligence, fraud or willful misconduct of City, its officers, agents, or employees. Lessees, as a material part of the consideration under this Amended Lease, hereby waive all claims against City for any damage or loss from any cause arising at any time, including, but not limited to fire, theft, Acts of God, vandalism or any physical damage while the mobilehome remains on the Property, unless caused by the negligence, fraud or willful misconduct of City's agents, officers or employees. Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from and on account of any damage or injury to any person or equipment in or on the mobilehome arising from any cause or from the negligence of a Lessee, his or her family or guests. Since a substantial portion of the present value of Lessee's mobilehome or coach Is attributable to the value of the premises and the proximity of the premises to lower Newport Bay, and not the value of the structural improvement, Lessee, in addition to the other commitments specified in paragraph 4, agrees to indemnify and hold City, its officers agents, and employees harmless from any and all loss or injury of any nature whatsoever arising out of or attributable to such a change of use and the requirement that Lessee remove his/her mobilehome and other property from the Property. 16. TERMINATION. A. Lessee may terminate this Amended Lease without any further liability to City, upon sixty (60) days' written notice to City and upon condition that all persons occupying the premises terminate their tenancy within that period and remove the mobilehome and all other improvements, from the premises. B. The City may terminate this Amended Lease for the reasons specified, and according to the procedures set forth, in the Mobilehome Residency Law. C. In addition to the rights specified in subparagraph B, the City reserves the right to terminate this Amended Lease in the event: (1) a court of competent jurisdiction determines that residential use of the property is inconsistent, or in conflict, with the provisions of the public trust imposed upon those portions of the Property that constitute State tidelands, or that the residential use is inconsistent with any provision of the State constitution or State law; (2) there is a major failure in one or more of the public utilities furnished Lessee by City, and, in the opinion of City, the cost of repairing the system is excessive when viewed in light of the highest and best use of the Property. 11 D. The waivers and releases relative to relocation Vnefits or assistance shall operate to preclude recovery of same by Lessee in the event this Lease is terminated pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph. 17. ATTORNEYS' FEES. Should either City or Lessees be required to employ counsel to enforce the terms, conditions and covenants of the 1985 Lease or this Amended Lease, the prevailing party shall recover all reasonable attorneys' fees (and court fees if applicable) incurred therein whether or not court proceedings were commenced. 18. REMEDIES CUMULATIVE. The rights, powers, elections and remedies of the City contained in this Amended Lease shall be construed as cumulative and no one of them shall be considered exclusive of the other or exclusive of any rights or remedies allowed by law, and the exercise of one or more rights, powers, elections or remedies shall not impair or be deemed a waiver of City's right to exercise any other. 19. NO WAIVER. No delay or omission of the City to exercise any right or power arising from any omission, neglect or default of the Lessees shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed as a waiver of any such omission, neglect or default on the part of the Lessees or any acquiescence therein. No waiver of any breach of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this Amended Lease shall be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this Amended Lease. 20. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. Lessee covenants and agrees to comply with all rules, regulations, statutes, ordinances and laws of the State of California and the City of Newport Beach or any other governmental body or agency having lawful jurisdiction over the premises and/or the Property; and Lessee further agrees to comply with all the Rules and Regulations of Marinapark. The California Department of Justice, sheriffs departments, police departments serving jurisdictions of 200,000 or more and many other local law enforcement authorities mail for public access a date base of the locations of persons required to register pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of section 290.4 of the Penal Code. The data base is updated on a quarterly basis and a source of information about the presence of these individuals in any neighborhood. The Department of Justice maintains a Sex Offender Identification Line through which inquiries about individuals may be made. This is a "900" telephone service. Callers must have specific information about individuals they are checking. Information 12 regarding �f"eighborhoods is not available throl gh the "900" telephone service. 21. MOBILEHOME RESIDENCY LAW/ZONING AND USE PERMIT INFORMATION: A. Lessee acknowledges having received and read a copy of the 1985 Lease or this Amended Lease, the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Exhibit "C") as presently constituted, and the Marinapark Rules and Regulations (Exhibit "B"). B. The Property is currently zoned unclassified and there are no conditional use permits or other permits required to operate the Property as a mobilehome park. The City of Newport Beach owns the Property except to the extent the property is determined to be tidelands and subject to the public trust applicable to tidelands. 22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Amended Lease and the documents referred to in this Amended Lease represent the entire agreement between City and Lessee. 23. NOTICES. All notices and other communications shall be in writing, shall be sent by first class registered mail or certified United States mail, postage prepaid, and shall be deemed completed at the expiration of seventy-two (72) hours after the day of mailing addressed: A. To Lessor: City Manager City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA, 92658 With a copy to: City Clerk's Office City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA, 92658 or at such other addresses as Lessor shall have furnished to Lessee; and B. To Lessee: By delivering a copy to the Lessee personally; 13 Y C. If Lessee be absent from the mobilehome, by leaving a copy with some person of suitable age and discretion who may be occupying the mobilehome; or D, If no one can be found, then by affixing a copy of the notice in a conspicuous place on the premises or mobilehome and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the Lessee. E. All other provisions of the Lease shall remain in force and effect with their original form. 24. EFFECTIVE DATE The Parties agree that the effective date of this Amended Lease is March 15, 2000 whether executed before or after that date. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused, this Lease to be executed the day and year first above written. LESSEE in 0 IME ACKNOWLEDGE AND AWARE AWARE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS AMENDED LEASE INCLUDING THE RELEASE AND WAIVER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a municipal corporation. Homer Bludau, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robin L. Clauson Assistant City Attorney 14 �S �eaa� LEASE This Lease, entered into this day of 19_, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation and charter city (hereinafter "City") and (hereinafter "Lessee"), is made with reference to the following facts, the materiality and existence of which is stipulated and agreed by the parties: A. City is the owner, and is in possession and control, of a parcel of real property, consisting of tidelands and uplands, located northerly of Balboa Boulevard and between Fifteenth Street and Nineteenth Street in Newport Beach, commonly known as Marinapark and generally described on the plot plan attached as Exhibit "A" (hereinafter "plot plan"); B. The property within Marinapark was under lease prior to the effective date of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach and, pursuant to the provisions of Section 1402 of the City Charter, the City Council is empowered to authorize execution of this Agreement by the Mayor; C Prior to the effective date of this lease, and pursuant to a lease dated March 24, 1976, (hereinafter "1976 Lease"), the City leased 58 trailer park spaces in Marinapark as shown on the plot plan, under a standard lease which would have expired on the 30th day of September, 1985, subject to the right of the Lessee to extend the term of the lease for a five (5) year period should the City Council determine, prior to that date, Marinapark was not required for any trust, or any public purpose; D. The City Council presently intends to convert Marinapark to a public recreation area upon expiration of this lease; E. The City Council finds that it is in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach to enter into this Lease because Lessees have agreed that City has the right to convert Marinapark into a public recreation area upon the expiration of this Lease, or shortly thereafter, without payment of relocation benefits or other forms of assistance to persons displaced due to the conversion; Y` ' F. The City Council finds and declares that this Lease operates to preserve an important and unique housing resource to be occupied by permanent residents and affordable to persons of low and moderate income. As such, the lease of space within Marinapark confers a substantial benefit upon the citizens of Newport Beach and is consistent with, and furthers the objectives of, the 1984 Housing Element of the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach; G. The City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of.this Lease are not inconsistent with the provi- sions of the public trust imposed upon those portions of Marina - park which constitute tidelands in that: (1) the preservation of a significant amount of rental housing affordable to persons of low and moderate income is a matter of general state-wide interest; (2) the revenue generated by that portion of Marinapark consisting of tidelands is utilized by the City to enhance public use of tidelands in the irrmediate vicinity of Marinapark; and (3) the City has, through this lease, established its •right to convert the property to public recreational use upon expiration of this Lease without obligation to pay relocation benefits, or provide other forms of assistance, to displaced tenants; H. The City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of this Lease, as they relate to tidelands and uplands, do not constitute a violation of the gift clause of the Constitution of the State of California, in that the preservation of affordable housing stock is of significant public benefit and the revenues generated by the terms of this Lease are effectively and efficiently used to enhance the public recreational use of nearby tidelands; I. The City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of this Lease comply, and are consistent, with the Charter of the City of Newport Beach including, without limitation, the provisions of Section 200 and 1402 of the Charter; J. The City Council also finds and declares that the provisions of this Lease are consistent with the plans, policies, rules and ordinances of the City of Newport Beach and, more specifically, are consistent with the General Plan, which provides that the mobilehome park may be continued until phased out, and the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program which specifies that it is the intent of the City to preserve the mobilehome park as a means of providing a variety of housing opportunities within the City; and -2- 7. r K. The terms and conditions of this Lease are in compli- ance, and consistent, with the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Section 798, et seq. of the Civil Code) and the State Zoning and Planning Act (Sections 65863.7 and 65863.8 of the Government Code). NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The City leases, and Lessee accepts the lease of, the property described as space as shown on the plot plan, attached as Exhibit "At', (hereinafter "Premises"). 2. TERM. The tenancy created by this Lease shall commence as of the date on which the Lease is signed by Lessee and shall expire on March 15, 2000, unless earlier terminated in accordance with the terms of this Lease. 3. USE OF PREMISES. A. The Premises shall be used only for residential purposes, and no business or commercial activity shall be conduc- ted on the Premises. No persons other than Lessee, a person in addition to Lessee if Lessee is living alone, and the short term guests (a guest who does not stay with Lessee for more than a total of 20 consecutive days or a total of 30 days in any calen- dar year) of Lessee, may reside or occupy the Premises without the prior written consent of the City. B. The City has found and determined this Lease is consistent with the provisions of the 1984 Housing Element and other relevant state and local laws, policies and plans primarily because it preserves a significant amount of housing affordable to persons of low and moderate income. The finding is based on the assumption that the premises shall serve as the primary resi- dence of Lessee, not as a second, or vacation, home. Lessee agrees that the primary residence requirement is fundamental to this lease, stipulates that the residency requirement will not constitute an undue burden or hardship on Lessee in light of the time allowed for compliance, and Lessee agrees that, on or before October 1, 1990, the Premises shall be Lessee's primary residence unless this requirement is waived by the City Council due to hardship. Lessee shall provide satisfactory proof of residence to the City. -3- w 0 C. Lessee agrees to comply with the rules and regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B") and further agrees these rules and regulations may be amended as provided in the Mobilehome Residency Law or other relevant statute. 4. FUNDAMENTAL CONSIDERATION AND ESSENTIAL TERMS: A. Introduction. The City and Lessee agree that the terms and conditions of this Lease grant, to both parties, substantial and important rights and advantages, economic and personal, that each would not otherwise be entitled to receive. These economic and personal rights and benefits are the essence of, and constitute the fundamental consideration for, this Lease. The more impor- tant rights and benefits gained and given up by each party are specified in this paragraph and the parties agree that this Lease should be interpreted such that each party receives the benefits and advantages identified in this paragraph. B. Fundamental Interests of Lessee -Rights and Benefits Given Up by City. The overriding motivation for Lessee's approval of this Lease is the commitment by City to maintain the property as a mobilehome park until March 15, 2000, and the long-term nature of the tenancy created by this lease. These comnitments of City operate to insure long-term occupancy, protect the finan- cial interest and investment of Lessee in the Premises, and significantly increase the value, and transferability, of that interest or investment. The most significant rights obtained by Lessee, and given up by City, are as follows: (1) Lessee obtains the long-term right to occupy the Premises while City corrrnits to preserve the mobilehome park use until March 15, 2000 and approves a long-term tenancy instead of invoking its right to grant no more than a one year tenancy as provided by the Mobilehome Residency Law; (2) Lessee's right to occupy the Premises is subject to the payment of the moderate rent specified in this Lease and Lessee also obtains the advantage of limited rental increases in the future, while City gives up the right to charge higher rents initially and the right to impose future rental increases in excess of the cost -of -living index; and (3) The value and transferability. of Lessee's interest is preserved by the long term nature of the tenancy -4- 0 • 0 created by this lease and limitations on the amount of rent a buyer or transferee of Lessee's interest could be charged, while City gives up the right to substantially increase rent for the Premises in the event of a transfer. C. Fundamental Interest of City - Rights and Benefits Given Up by Lessee. The fundamental reason for City to enter into this Lease is the right to convert Marinapark to a public recrea- tional use upon expiration of this Lease, or shortly thereafter,. without obligation to pay relocation benefits, or provide other forms of relocation assistance. In consideration of the rights and benefits given up by City, and in addition to the obligation to pay rent and comply with the other terms and conditions of this Lease, Lessee stipulates and agrees as follows: (1) The terms and conditions of this Lease, specifically the comnitment of City to grant long-term tenancy rights and to preserve the current use of the Premises until March 15, 2000, constitute full and adequate mitigation of any adverse impact of the proposed conversion on Lessee and the extended term of the Lease gives Lessee sufficient time to secure adequate replacement space in another mobilehome park or other alternative housing; (2) The terms and conditions of the Lease, specifically the extended term of the Lease, is of far greater value to Lessee than any relocation benefits or other form of assistance could be granted to Lessee by City at or near the expiration of the Lease and the conversion of the Premises to public recreational use. The extended term of the Lease signifi- cantly increases the market value of Lessee's interest in the Premises and substantially improves the ability of Lessee to locate potential purchasers or transferees of Lessee's interest; (3) LESSEE HEREBY WAIVES, GIVES UP THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE, AND RELEASES CITY FROM ANY OBLIGATION TO PAY, RELOCATION BENEFITS, OR ANY OTHER FORM OF RELOCATION ASSISTANCE OR OTHER PAYMENT OR CONSIDERATION THAT ARISE OUT OF, OR ARE IN ANY WAY RELATED TO: (A). THIS LEASE OR ANY FUTURE TENANCY; (B) THE ULTIMATE TERMINATION OF LESSEE'S TENANCY PURSUANT TO THIS LEASE OR THE TERMINATION OF EXPIRATION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANCY HOWEVER CREATED; (C) THE CONVERSION OF THE PREMISES TO A PUBLIC RECREATION USE, (D) THE DISPLACEMENT OF LESSEE FROM HIS AND/OR HER PRIMARY RESIDENCE; (E) ANY FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL LAW, PLAN, POLICY OR RULE WHICH RELATES TO SUCH DISPLACEMENT, OR REQUIRES -5- .1; THE MITIGATION OF THE IMPACTS CAUSED BY DISPLACEMENT. THIS RELEASE BY LESSEE, NOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 1542 OF THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE, WHICH PROVIDES THAT: "A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERI- ALLY AFFECTED THE SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR," RELEASES ALL CLAIMS OR LOSSES, WHETHER KNOWN, UNKNOWN, FORESEEN OR UNFORESEN, WHICH LESSEE MAY HAVE AGAINST CITY. LESSEE UNDER- STANDS AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSEQUENCE OF THIS RELEASE AND OF THIS SPECIFIC WAIVER OF SECTION 1542 AND ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILIITY FOR ANY DAMAGES, LOSS OR CLAIM THAT LESSEE MAY INCUR AS A RESULT OF THE CONVERSION, TERMINATION, AND/OR DISPLACEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE. LESSEE IS FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY EXECUTING THIS LEASE AND LESSEE, AND IN EXECUTING THIS RELEASE, HAS NOT RELIED UPON ANY INDUCEMENTS, PROMISES OR REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY CITY OR ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES, OTHER THAN THE COMMIT- MENTS AND COVENANTS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS LEASE. (4) Lessee agrees that City's right to convert the premises to a public recreation area upon expiration of this lease, is now believed to be in the best interests of the citizens of, and visitors to, the City of Newport Beach. (5) This Lease constitutes notice that City reserves the right to convert the Premises to public recreational use on or about March 16, 2000. (6) Upon expiration of the term of this Lease, Lessee shall, within sixty (60) days, remove any mobilehome or recreational vehicle, structure, improvement, personal property or equipment located upon the Premises. Upon the expiration of this sixty (60) day period, the City shall have the right to remove and dispose of any and all property improvement structures or equipment which remain on the Premises without prior notice or judicial action. (7) If, subsequent to the expiration of this Lease, Marinapark is still to be operated as a mobilehome park, the City shall be under no obligation to offer written rental agreements or leases other than as may then be required by the Mobilehome Residency Law, specifically the provisions of Section 798.18 of the Civil Code or such laws as may' be enacted subsequent to the effective date of this Lease. The Mobilehome Residency Law currently obligates the City to offer a twelve (12) month lease or a lesser term if requested by Lessee. 5. RENT. Lessee shall pay as rent, without deduction or offset, on the 1st day of , , and on the first day of each month thereafter during the term of this lease, the sum of , provided, however, in the event this lease is signed after the 1st day of November, 1985, and prior to December 1, 1985, rent shall be , and provided further, that in the event this lease is signed after December 1, 1985, and prior to January 1, 1986, the rent shall be and in each case rent shall be subject to increase as specified in this paragraph. The monthly rental shall be subject to adjustment as of October 1, 1986 and as of October 1st of each year thereafter during the term of this Lease. In no case shall the adjusted rent be less than the current rent. The adjustment shall be equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for the twelve month period (conmencing May 1 and ending April 30, hereinafter the "adjustment period") prior to the date of adjustment. The rental adjustment shall be calculated by adding each monthly percentage increase during the adjustment period, subtracting any decreases and multiplying the total by the monthly rent in effect prior to the adjustment. The Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers -All Items) for the Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim, California area as published and released by the Bureau of Statistics for the United States Department of Labor shall be the index utilized for calculating rental adjustments. If the Consumer Price Index, as now compiled and published, is superseded by another index, then the new index shall be used to calculate the increase in rent provided that an appropriate conversion from the old index to the new can feasibly be made. If such conversion cannot be made, or if no such index is published, then another index generally recognized as authori- tative shall be substituted by agreement. Rent for any fractional part of any month between the comnencement date and the first date of the first full calendar month within the Term shall be prorated, and paid by Lessees to City along with the first full month of rent due hereunder. Lessee stipulates and agrees that this lease constitutes the sixty (60) days, written notice of rental increases required by the Mobilehome Residency Law and Lessee acknowledges that no additional written notice need be given by City; provided, -7- however, City may provide Lessee with sixty (60) days' written notice of the precise amount of any rental increase authorized by this paragraph and City and Lessee agree that such notice shall not constitute a waiver of City's right to rely upon the adequacy of the notice provisions in this paragraph. 6. RELEVANT STATUTES AND RULES. The Mobilehome Residency Law requires this Lease to contain, among other things, the rules and regulations of Marina - park and the language of the Mobilehome Residency Law. The rules and regulations of Marinapark are attached as Exhibit "B," the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law are attached as Exhibit "C," and both documents are incorporated into this Lease by reference. The Marinapark rules and regulations and the Mobilehome Residency Law may be amended or modified from time to time, and these amendments and modifications shall be deemed to be incorporated into the documents attached as Exhibits "B" and "C" when effective. 7. LATE CHARGE. If the entire rent owed by Lessee is not received by City by the loth day following its due date, then, without any requirement for notice to Lessee, Lessee shall pay to City a late charge of $35.00. The parties agree that such a late charge represents a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs City will incur by reason of any late payment of rent. An acceptance of a late charge by City shall not constitute a waiver of Lessee's default with respect to rent, nor prevent City from exercising any of the rights or remedies granted by this Lease. B. SALE OR ASSIGNMENT. Lessee may sell the mobilehome located on the premises pursuant to the rights, and subject to the obligations, of Lessee under the Mobilehome Residency Law and any other appli- cable statutes. If the mobilehome that is the subject of the sale or transfer, is to remain in the park, or if Lessee proposes to assign Lessee's interest in this Lease to any person or persons who is (are) to reside on the premises, Lessee and/or the proposed transferee must do the following: A. Lessee must give notice of the sale or assignment to City prior to close of escrow; me B. The sale or assignment shall not be effective unless the City has given prior written approval, the transferee has executed the assignment of lease form provided by City, and the transferee has expressly agreed to be bound by the waivers and releases provided in the Lease. C. Lessee, in view of the requirement that the Premises shall constitute Lessee's primary residence, agrees not to sublease or otherwise transfer any partial interest in this Lease, except to the extent that the right to sublet or transfer is specifically provided by law and, in no event to a person or persons not using the premises as a primary residence. D. City shall approve any such transfer, if the transferee has the financial ability to pay the rent and charges and otherwise comply with the terms and conditions of this Lease, provided, however, City may withhold approval if it determines that, based upon the transferee's prior tenancies, the transferee will not comply with the rules or regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B"). E. The City, in the event of a sale of a mobilehome to a third party, and in order to upgrade the quality of the park, may require that a mobilehome be removed from the park, when: (1) it is less than ten feet wide; (2) it is more than twenty (20) years old, or more than twenty-five (25) years old if manufactured after September 15, 1971, and is twenty (20) feet wide or more, and the mobilehome does not comply with the health and safety standards provided in Section 18550, 18552 and 18605 of the Health & Safety Code and the regulations established thereunder; (3) the mobilehome is more than seventeen (17) years old, or more than twenty-five (25) years old if manufactured after September 15, 1971, and is less than twenty (20) feet wide and the mobilehome does not comply with the construction safety standards under Sections 18850, 18852 and 18605 of the Health & Safety Code and the regulations established thereunder; or (4) it is in a significantly run down condition or in disrepair, as determined by the general condition of the mobilehome and its acceptability of the health and safety of the occupants and the public exclusive of its age. F. Should Lessee, during the term of this Lease, elect to sell or assign its interest in this Lease, City shall have the right of first refusal to acquire the interest on such terms and conditions as may be acceptable to Lessee, and on failure of the parties to agree on terms within ten (10) days after written notice thereof from Lessee, Lessee shall be free to sea sell or assign Lessee's interest in this Lease, subject to the terms and conditions of this Lease. G. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Lease, Lessee shall have the right to assign its interest in this Lease to a spouse, son and/or daughter without any requirement that City be given the right of first refusal to acquire the interest and without payment of the transfer fee specified in paragraph 10, provided, however, the premises shall be used as the primary residence of the assignee and the assignee shall be bound by all provisions of this Lease, including, without limitation, the waiver of relocation assistance. 9. UTILITIES. A. The City shall not provide electricity or tele- phone service. Lessee shall make arrangements directly with the utilities 'furnishing the services and promptly pay all charges; B. The City shall provide Lessee with water and gas service. The initial charge to Lessee for such service shall be based upon the expenses incurred by City for gas and water utili- zed within Marinapark, for all purposes, ("total cost") for the period commencing August 1, 1984 and ending July 31, 1985 (rating period). The initial monthly charge to Lessee shall be calcula- ted by dividing the "total cost" by twelve (monthly cost) and then dividing the monthly cost by the number of tenancies with Marinapark (total tenancies). Charges for gas and water service shall be increased or decreased on the first day of October, 1986, and on the first day of October during each subsequent year of this Lease in accordance with increases or decreases in "total cost" or "total tenancies" during the preceding rating period (August 1st through July 31st). C. The charges for gas and water service shall be paid when rent is due, and is in addition to the obligation to pay rent. In the event Lessee fails to pay charges for water or gas service within ten days after the amount is due, Lessee shall pay to City a late charge of $35.00; D. In the event City provides both master meter and submeter service of utilities to Lessee, the cost of the charges for each billing period shall be separately stated and shall contain opening and closing readings of the meter. In such event, City shall post rates charged by the appropriate utility in a conspicuous place; -10- E. City shall not be liable for any loss, damage or injury and Lessee shall not be entitled to any abatement or reduction of rent, by reason of City's failure to furnish any utility or service if the failure is caused by accident, break- age, repairs, maintenance, or any other cause beyond the reason- able control of City. 10. TRANSFER FEE. Lessee requests that City perform certain services in connection with the sale of any mobilehome to remain within the Park, and/or the sale or assignment of Lessee's interest in this Lease. The services to be performed by City, at Lessee's request, include, but are not necessarily limited to, the prepar- ation of the documents by which the leasehold interest is assigned and the inspection of the property to be transferred. The City and Lessee agree that a reasonable fee for the perfor- mance of these services is the sum of $2,500.00. 11. MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENTS. City agrees to maintain, in good working order and conditions, the grounds, common areas, common facilities, streets, City -owned buildings, and any other publicly -owned improvements on the Marinapark property. Lessee shall, at their cost and expense, maintain, in good order and condition, any mobilehome, cabana, or other improvement located on the premises. Lessees also agree that all landscaping on the premises shall be limited to three (3) feet in height to preserve views and open space. The City may charge a reasonable fee for services relating to the maintenance of the premises upon which the mobilehome is located in the event Lessee fails to maintain the property in accordance with the provisi.ons of this Lease and the rules and regulations of Marinapark (Exhibit "B") after giving written notification to Lessee and Lessee's failure to comply within fourteen (14) days from the date of notice. The notice shall contain all information required by the Mobilehome Residency Law. 12. PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES. The physical improvements to be provided Lessee during the term of this Lease include the nonexclusive right to use all of the corcmon areas and common facilities located within Marinapark, such as streets, nonrestricted parking areas, recrea- tional facilities and equipment, laundry facilities and other -11- facilities, equipment and conveniences located in the conmon areas and common facilities and designated for use by residents. The services to be provided by City during the term of this Agreement include the services to be provided by the Marinapark manager and other employees and officers of City, the utilities to be provided by City specified in Paragraph 9, and the maintenance of all common areas and common facilities in good working order and condition. 13. CHANGES IN MARINAPARK RULES AND REGULATIONS, PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES. The City retains the right to amend or modify the Marinapark rules and regulations, the terms of this Lease, and the nature of the physical improvements for services to be provi- ded, after complying with the provisions of the Mobilehome Resi- dency Law and other applicable law. The right to amend the terms of this Lease, the Marinapark rules and regulations, and the physical improvements and services to be provided by City, include, without limitation, the right to reduce the size of, or eliminate, any physical improvement, conmon area, common facility, or equipment, provided, however, no changes shall be made to the provisions of this Lease, specifying the term of the Lease or the rent to be charged unless those changes or amendments are permitted by other provisions of this Lease. 14. RIGHT OF ENTRY. Lessee, subject to the right of revocation as set forth in the Mobilehome Residency Law, hereby grants written consent to City to enter the premises and Lessee's mobilehome for the purpose of improving, maintaining, repairing or replacing gas, water and sewage systems owned and maintained by City. Any damage, loss or injury to Lessee's home, property of Lessee, or the premises which results from efforts of City to maintain, repair, improve or replace the gas, water or sewage systems, shall be the sole responsibility of Lessee, and City shall not be responsible for reimbursing any cost or expense incurred by Lessee as a result of such efforts, nor shall City be responsible for repairing, replacing or otherwise restoring the mobilehome, the premises or any improvements thereon, to the state or condition immediately prior to the maintenance, replacement or -12- 9 repair efforts. The City also reserves the right to enter the premises for other purposes as specified in the Mobilehome Residency Law. 15. HOLD HARMLESS. Lessees covenant that they will indemnify, defend and hold City, Its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims or demands of any name or nature whatsoever arising out of, or Incident to, the use and occupancy of the Premises, and to. Indemnify City for any cost, liability, or expense caused by. or arising out of any injury or death of persons or damage to. property which may occur upon or about the leased premise's or caused by or arising out of any activities or omission of Lessees, their agents, employees, licensees and/or Invitees, including, without limitation, "`•Injury or death of Lessees, their agents, employees, licensees and Invitees and damage to their property or Lessee's property, except for any damage or injury of any kind. arising out of the negligence of City, its officers, agents, or employees. Lessees, Lessees, as a material part of the consideration under this Lease, hereby waive all claims against City for any damage or loss from any cause arising at any time, including, but not limited to fire, theft, Acts of God, vandalism or any physi- cal damage while the coach remains in the mobilehome park, other than the negligence of Cityls agents, officers or employees. Lessees do hereby agree to Indemnify and hold City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from and on account of any damage or Injury to any person or equipment on the coach arising from any cause or from the negligence of a Lessee, his or her family or guests. Since a substantial portion of the present value of Lesseefs mobilehome or coach is attributable to the value of the premises and the and, the proximity of the premises to lower Newport Bay, and not the value of the structural Improvement, Lessee, In addition to the other commitment specified In paragraph 4, agrees to indemnify and hold City, its officers agents, and employees harmless from any and all loss or Injury of any nature whatsoever arising out of or attributable to such a change of use and the requiremen-t that Lessee remove his home and other property from the Marinapark. 16. TERMINATION. A. Lessee may terminate this Lease without any -13- further liability to City, upon sixty (60) days' written notice to City and upon condition that all persons occupying the premises terminate their tenancy within that period and remove the mobilehome or recreational vehicle and all other improvements, from the premises. B. The City may terminate this Lease for the reasons specified, and according to the procedures set forth, in the Mobilehome Residency Law. C. In addition to the rights specified in subpara- graph B, the City reserves the right to terminate this Lease in the event: (1) a court of competent jurisdiction determines that residential use of the property is inconsistent, or in conflict, with the provisions of the public trust imposed upon those por- tions in Marinapark that constitute state tideland, or that the residential use is inconsistent with any provision of the state constitution or state law; (2) there is a major failure in one or more of the public utilities furnished Lessee by City, and, in the opinion of City, the cost of repairing the system is exces- sive when viewed in light of the contemplated conversion to public recreation use at the expiration of this Lease. D. The waivers and releases relative to relocation benefits or assistance shall operate to preclude recovery of same by Lessee in the event this Lease is terminated pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph. 17. ATTORNEYS' FEES. Should either City or Lessees be required to employ counsel to enforce the terms, conditions and covenants of this Lease, the prevailing party shall recover all reasonable attorneys' fees (and court fees if applicable) incurred therein whether or not court proceedings were commenced. 18. REMEDIES CUMULATIVE. The rights, powers, elections and remedies of the City contained in this Lease shall be construed as cumulative and no one of them shall be considered exclusive of the other or exclusive of any rights or remedies allowed by law, and the exercise of one or more rights, powers, elections or remedies shall not impair or be deemed a waiver of City's right to exer- cise any other. -14- 19. NO WAIVER. No delay or omission of the City to exercise any right or power arising from any omission, neglect or default of the Lessees shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed as a waiver of any such omission, neglect or default on the part of the Lessees or any acquiescence therein. No waiver of any breach of any of the terms, cove- nants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this lease shall be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this lease. 20. COMPLIANCE WITII LAWS. Lessees covenant and agree to comply with all rules, regulations, statutes, ordinances and laws of the State of California and the City of Newport Beach or any other governmental body or agency having lawful jurisdiction over the leased property; and Lessee further agrees to comply with all the Rules and Regulations of Marinapark. 21. MOBILEIIOME RESIDENCY LAW/ZONING AND USE PERMIT INFORMATION: A. Lessee acknowledges having received and read a copy of this Lease, the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Exhibit 11 C 11) as presently constituted, and the Marinapark Rules and Regulations (Exhibit "B 11). B. Marinapark is currently zoned unclassified and there are no conditional use permits or other permits required to operate Marinapark as a mobilehome park. The City of Newport Beach owns the ground on which Marinapark is located except to the extent the property is subject to the public trust applicable to tidelands. 22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Lease and the documents referred to herein constitute the entire agreement between City and Lessee and terminates and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations and understandings of the parties, whether written or oral, including, without limitation, the termination of any rights of either party under the 1976 Lease. -15- 23. NOTICES. It is mutually agreed that any notice or notices provided for by this lease or by law, to be given or served by Lessees, may be given or served by mail, registered or certified, with postage prepaid, on the City of Newport Beach, addressed to the Mayor, City Manager, or City Clerk, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663, or at such other address as may be hereafter furnished to the Lessee in writing. If notice is intended to be served by City on Lessees, it may be served either: A. By delivering a copy to the Lessee personally; and B. If he be absent from the mobile home, by leaving a copy with some person of suitable age and discretion who may be occupying the mobile home; or C If no one can be found, then by affixing a copy of the notice in a conspicuous place on the premises or mobile home and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the Lessee. Such service upon the City or Lessee shall be deemed complete at the expiration of seventy-two (72) hours from and after the deposit in the United States mail of such notice, demand or communication. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Lease to be executed the day and year first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a municipal corporation M Mayor LESSEE: an Ewell I I HI LU - - — ------- w ----- — ---- — — ---- — --- ; 1. —� Il. w u OuUluuuu UL),)Uuu" -,)Uu a&w4 k�-f ur �Iujlw�tb� 10 VLzgr^cy UJIA it ur — - — - — - — - — — - — - — -- — - — — - — - — - - — - — - — 7 p2n 6 6.p,2.-rt.*t4.. u 15 A 1! uUmum IV A 1=4111a OP-4 lb 1p.' 110 ]),11!1611 Aj I 1611AIJISMAIII 12 IIIA-11 161ilAl I IIIJAI f Ill x1l P, P. JlTr •iiiilil OULU- Pk,t;L L b Awk pJi�im �l{A'�lii�� VAN e4 i ! �;IL j6;' =- -] fI HII, I 4. E r lv.:Mo mot The following Rules and Regulations are established pursuant to Paragraph 13 the Newport Marinapark Master Lease Agreement. 1. FIRES. Open fires on the beach area adjacent to Marinapark are prohibited. 2. TRAFFIC. All drivers are required to observe the traffic regulation signs posted in the Park. The maximum speed limit for any vehicle is 10 MPH. 3. PARKING. Each tenant shall park in the space assigned to him and shall have a Marinapark sticker attached to rear bumper. Two stickers will be issued to each Mobile Park Homeowner. Registered guests of the tenants shall park only as follows: (Tenants shall inform their guests of speed limits, Parking Regulations and TOW -AWAY signs). A. Registered guests' parking area; B. Tenants expecting guests shall advise the Manager in advance. C. Guest parking shall be assigned by the Manager only. D. Guests will be limited to no more than two cars on holidays and weekends. E. All guests must register, on arrival, at the office for Parking Permits. F. Failure to obtain Parking Pass, guests' cars are subject to TOW -AWAY. 4. NOISE. No unnecessary noises (loud radios, televisions, etc. between the hours of 10:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M. No disturbing noises at any time. 5. MOTORCYCLES, POWERED SCOOTERS, SKATE BOARDS, ROLLEE SKATES AND BICYCLES. No motorcycles, powered scooters, skate boards or roller skates allowed to be used within Marinapark at any time or any place. Bicycles okay on rear drive only. 6. CONSTRUCTION. Construction, either by tenants or their contractors, is prohibited on Sundays and holidays and is permitted on other days only between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. During and on completion of construction tenants shall be responsible for the following: A. Construction must meet with all uniform building codes - state, county and city. B. Removal of waste products (lumber scraps, saw dust, etc.) C. Maintaining their leased areas in•a clean and sanitary condition. D. Stopping any excessive noise caused by construction machinery--(unmuffied gasoline engines, smoke or fumes, etc.) -1- EXHIBIT B 7. LAWNS AND PATIOS. Tenants shall not leave water hoses, boats, clothing, beach toys, surfboards, bicycles, etc. on the grass or patio areas. 8. SAND. Tenants and guests are required to wash sand off their bodies and bathing suits before entering showers, rest rooms or laundry facilities. Do not use lawn hydrants to wash sand off. An outside shower is provided for this purpose and is located opposite the ladies rest room. 9. RESTROOMS AND LAUNDRY ROOM. These conveniences in Marinapark are maintained as a part of your home. Your cooperation in keeping them clean and sanitary is expected. Washing and drying hours are 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Clogged drains, defective dryers, etc., or any irregularities should immediately be reported to the Management. All facilities must be left clean after use. Clothes shall be removed from the laundry room as soon as they are dry. Responsibility for maintenance of private utilities rests with tenants. 10. CHILDREN. Children under six (6) years of age are not permitted in service rooms, toilets or showers unless accompanied by an adult; also children in this age group are prohibited from playing in and around these areas. Children, under eighteen (18) years of age, shall not be left unattended in trailer or trailer space. An adult must be in attendance at all times. 11. SHRUBS. Tenants are responsible for weed removal and maintenance of flowers and other shrubs in their own spaces. Use of the area under trailers for storage purposes is prohibited. 12. PETS. No pets are allowed in Marinapark. Instruct your guests not to bring dogs or cats with them when they visit you. 13. PHONE CALLS. Check your mailbox daily for any phone messages and packages delivered to the Marinapark Office. They will not be delivered to trailers, except in extreme emergencies. 14. TRAILERS. Trailers are to be equipped with current license plates and license stickers as required by State law. 15. GARBAGE AND TRASH. All garbage and refuse must be placed in proper containers provided by the Park for this purpose. Put trash only in the large bins. If you have fish to dispose of, put in plastic trash bags properly secured. 16. MARINAPARK BUSINESS HOURS. 8:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. and 1:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M., weekdays. Weekends and holidays our Attendant will be on duty for your convenience from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. 17. VIOLATIONS OF LAW. Violations of law will not be tolerated. Violations by a tenant, or any guest of a tenant, will be deemed a breach of the lease agreement. 18. DOMESTIC HELP. Domestic help must not remain overnight except when tenant is in occupancy. 19. COMPLAINTS. Any tenant desiring to register a complaint with the office must put the complaint in writing and sign it in order for management to act upon the complaint. 20. -GUESTS. All guests who are occupying trailers during absence of tenant must register at the office during -2- business hours. Lessee agrees that the Park Manager has the right to determine whether the park facilities can accommodate all the tenants and guests in the Park and, therefore, may at his discretion refuse a guest permission to stay. In no event will a guest be allowed to stay in the Park for an unreasonable length of time. 21. NEW CONSTRUCTION. All mobilehome, cabanas, porches, skirtings, ramadas, awnings, storage cabinets, fences, or other structures must be approved by the Park Manager before construction or installation. 22. MOBILEHOME WIDTH. No mobilehome, including cabana, shall exceed a width of twenty-four (24) feet. Landscaping located adjacent to mobilehomes shall be limited to three (3) feet in height and width and shall not obstruct another tenant's view. 23. CHILDREN AND ADULT SECTION. Marinapark is divided into an adult section and a children's section as depicted in Exhibit "A" of the Lease Agreement. Permanent residency in the adult section is limited to adults only. Children, persons under eighteen (18) years of age, are permitted in the adult section only as visitors and only on a temporary basis (not more than a few days at a time). Lessees shall not permit children to occupy the trailer or space hereby leased in the adult section except as hereinbefore specifically permitted. In the event one or more children become members of an individual Lessee's family during the term of this Lease, if Lessee is located in the adult section, then this Lease and all Lessee's rights hereunder shall terminate at the end of the month during which such event happens. 24. USE OF NAME OR ADDRESS OF PARK. This Park or its name or address shall not be used for the purpose of advertisement or sale of automobiles, trailers or merchandise, or for any other commercial purpose except with the specific written consent of the Lessor. 25. OUTSIDE APPEARANCE. Patio furniture and one storage cabinet are the only items permitted outside the trailer. No towels, bathing suits, rugs, wearing apparel or laundry of any description may be hung outside of trailers. 26. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO %4OBILEHOME PARK RESIDENCY. Pursuant to the California Civil Code Section 789.92 you are hereby notified and advised of the following Civil Code Sections: "Section 789.5(a) Termination of Tenancy or other estate at will or lease in mobilehome park; notice; manner; waiver; void. (a) No tenancy or other estate at will or lease, however created on or after the effective date of this section, in a mobilehome park may be terminated except upon the landlord's giving notice in writing to the tenant, in the manner prescribed by' Section 1162 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to remove from the premises within a period of not less than 60 days, to be specified in this notice. No lease shall contain any provision by which the tenant waives his rights under this section, and any such waiver shall be -3- deemed contrary to public policy and shall be unenforceable and void. However, any lease may provide that the tenancy may be terminated upon the landlord's giving notice in writing to the tenant, in such prescribed manner, to remove from the premises within a period of not more than 60 days, to be specified in the notice." "Section 789.6 Restriction on termination of tenancy, etc. in mobilehome park; space for purchaser of mobilehome from owner of park Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 789.5, a tenancy or other estate at will or lease in a mobilehome park may not be terminated for the purpose of making the tenant's space in the park available for a person who purchased a mobilehome from the owner of the mobilehome park or his agents." "Section 789.7 Fees The owner of a mobilehome park or his agents shall not charge any fees to tenants other than charges for rent, utilities, or incidental reasonable service charges." "Section 789.8 Mobilehome park; entry charge or transfer or selling fee; prohibition There shall. be no entry charge as a condition of tenancy in a mobilehome park, nor shall there be any transfer or selling fee as a condition of sale of a mobilehome within a mobilehome park, even if such mobilehome is to remain within the park, if the park management performs no service in the sale of the mobilehome." 27. NO SUBLETTING OF LEASED SPACES. Mobilehome owners shall not rent or sublease their mobilehomes without express written permission from the Newport Beach City Manager or Marinapark Manager. 28. RENTAL DUE. All space rents are due on the first day of each month. Rents received after the loth day of the month at the Marinapark Office, is subject to a late fee as stated in Paragraph 7 of the Lease Agreement. 29. SLEEPING IN CARS PROHIBITED. Sleeping in cars or recreational vehicles in Marinapark is prohibited. These Rules and Regulations may be revised, amended or modified by lessor from time to time during the term of this lease or conditions warrant. Any such revision, amendment or modification of these Rules and Regulations shall be effective when posted in the office of Marinapark. MARINAPARK I have read and agree to the Rules and Regulatons Signature Date -4- SC-130 SUPER19R COURT OF CALIFORNIA„ COUNTY OF ORANGE H�rj�� s I Center - Newport Beach Facility 49bt'�rde Road OIHS01429 neacn, VA `JLtlbV-GbV0 NOTICE TO ALL PLAINTIFFeAND DEFENDANTS: Your small claims case has been decided. If you lost the case, and the court ordered you to pay money, your wages, money, and property may be taken without further warning from the court. Read the back of this sheet for important information about your rights. PUINTIFFIDEMANDANTE (N". almt00M �ndfMplio w nunbwds�M�ctiJ; BENVENISTE, LEON 10128 ROSSBURY PLACE' LOS ANGELES, CA 90064 T, No,: 310-838-9222 I DD°E�F�E°NNDANnDEMANDA00 CLAUSON, ROBIN AS CITY ATTORNEY C/O CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. NEWPORT BEACH, CA 949-644-3002 Q See attached sheet for additional plaintiffs and defendants. SMALL CLAIMS CASE NO.: AVISO A TODOS LOS DEMANDANTES Y DEMANDADOS. Su coso he ado resua/to por la tort Para rodamos judicial" monoras. SI to torte be daddido an su contra y he ordanado qua usted pague dinero, /a pueden qultarsu sa/sdo, su dire% y otrss cosaa de su propiadad, sin aviso adictona/ por part do asp torte. Las e/ roverso do osto formularfo pare obtnor bNomrac►dn do lmporpncht aceres do sus derechos. PW�NnFFMEMANDANTE N I— ncccuoN I Tekpty No: NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Judgment was entered as checked below on (date): MAY 3 0 %001 1. Q Defendant (name, if more than one): shall pay plaintiff (name, if more than one): Si principal and: $ costs onplaintiff's claim. 2. Defendant does not owe plaintiff any money on plaintiffs claim. 3. Plaintiff (name, if more than one): shall pay defendant (name, if more than one): $ principal and: $ costs on defendant's claim. 4. Q Plaintiff does not owe defendant any money on defendants claim. 5. Q Possession of the following property is awarded to plaintiff (describe property): StWtAddmn. ridf *phwo number&) ): f JUN 0 5 2001 CITY H. WARREN SIEGEL 6. Q Payments are to be made at the rate of: $ per (specify pedod): , beginning on (date): and on the (specify day): day of each month thereafter until paid in full. if any payment is missed, the entire :balance may become due immediately. 7. Q 'Dismissed in court Q with prejudice Q without prejudice. 8. Q Affomey-Client fee Dispute (Attachment to Notice f EntfyofJudgment) (form SC-132) is attached. 9. ( Other (specify): A-CoT-Li--�, L� SZx i q py� .) ct4 -exp ..d . 10.Q This judgment results from a motor vehicle accident on a California highway and was caused by the judgment debtor's operation of a motor vehicle. If the judgment is not paid, the judgment creditor may apply to have the judgment debtors driver's license suspended. 11. Enforcement of the judgment is automatically postponed for 30 days or, if an appeal is filed, until the appeal is decided. 12.Q This notice was personally delivered to (insert name and date): 13. CLERK'S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING-1 certify that I am not a party to this action. This Notice of Entry of Judgment was mailed first class, postage prepaid, in a sealed envelope to the parties at the addresses shown above. The mailing and this certification occurred at the place and on the date shown below. Place of mailing: Newport Beach . California _..: Date of mailing: MAY 3 0 2001 Alan Sister, Clerk, by S. Axt0` Deputy —The county provides small claims advisor services fie of charge. Read the Information sheet on the reveres. — -130IRay. JVA y1, 2=1 F0364.2994(R12100) NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT (Small Claims) For further inlor son on the Small Claims Advisory oroorar lone (714) 571-5277 INFORMATION AFTEMUDGMENT INFORMACIONNMESPUES DEL FALLO DE LA CORTE You1 small claims one has been decided. The judgment or decision of the court appears on the front of this sheet. The court may have ordered one party to pay money to the other party. The person (or business) who' won the case and who can collect the money is called the judgment creditor. The person (or business) who lost the case and who owes the money is called the until the time or appeal ends or until the appeal is decided. This means that the or take any action until this period is over. Generally, both parties may be IF YOU LOST THE CASE . . . 1. If you lost the case on your own claim and the court did not award you any money, the courts decision onyour claim is FINAL,You may rat appeal your own claim. j 2. if you lost the case and the court ordered you to pay money, your money and property, may be taken to pay the claim unless you do one of the ollowing things: a. PAY THE JUDGMENT The law requires you to pay the amount of the judgment. You may pay the judgment creditor directly, or pay the juudtgmentttto-ttoe co�`ti�nnn additional fee. You mayy also Ask the dark or Information about�these nts you can b. APPEAL If you'disagree with the courts decison, you may appeal the decision on the other perty's claim. You may not appeal the decision on your own claim. However, if any party appeals, there will be a new trial on all the claims. if u. Yeurappeal wNi De in are super ve $' • trial and you must plfew again. Y may be roprosen* by a C. VACATE OR CANCEL THE Jt1pC�MENT If you'did not go to the trial, you may ask the court to vacate or cancel the judgment. To make this reqdest, yot must file a Motion to Vacate the Judgment (form SCG135,' and ppaay the required fee within 30 days after the date this Nbtice of Entry of Judgment was mailed. if your request is dented, you then have 10 days from the date the n9ke of denial was mailed to file an appeal. The period to file the Motion to Vacate the Judgment is 180 days if you were not properly served with the claim. The 180-day period begins on the date you found out or should have found out about the judgment against you. IF YOU WON THE CASE . . 1. if you were sued by the other party and you won the case, then the other party may not appeal the courts decision. 2. if you won the case and the court awarded you money° here are some steps you may take to collect your. money or get possession of your property: a. COLLECTING FEES AND INTEREST Sometimes fees are charrgged for Mpg court papers or for serving the j ment debtor. These extra costs and after -judgment interest can become part of your original j ment. To claim these fees and Interest, ask the cle for a Memorandum of Costs. b. VOLUNTARY PAYMENT Ask'the judgment debtor to pay the money. If your claim o return for tl)e pproropoanttoy to yy u.opeIHI E COURT ask thedWILL NOTtor COLLECT THE -MONEY OR TENFORCE THE JUDGMENT FOR YOU. c. STATEMENT OF ASSETS If the ludgment debtor does not pay the money, the law will tell you what property the judgment debtor has mat may be available to pay your claim. If the.ludgment debtor willfully fails to send you the oompf(eted•orm, you may file an AppNcation and Orderto Produce Statement of Assets and to Appear for Examination (form SC-134) and ask the court to give you your atorney'sfees and expenses and other appropnate relief, after proper notice, under Code of Civif Procedure section 708.170. d. ORDER OF EXAMINATION You may also make the debtor come to court to answer buestlons about Income and oroDerty. To do this. ask IN ism on the) ment debtor. You me als( ant di to s financial records. Ask the or e. WRIT OF EXECUTION After you find out about the judgment debtor's property, I? ma ask the court or a Writ ofExecuflon (form EJ-130) and pay the required fee. A writ of execution is a court nanar that tells a law officer to take oroDerty of the se of the kinds of property the officer may be able wages, bank account, automobile, business ,y, or rental incoms. For some kinds of pproperty, v need to file other forms. Seethe law officerfor ABSTRACT OF JUDGMENT The iudgment debtor may own land or a house or other .buildings. You may want to put a lien on the property so that you will be paid If the property is sold. You can et o lien by filing an Abstract of Judgment (form with the county recorder in the county where the property is located. The recorder will charge a fee for the Abstract of Judgment. NOTICE TO THE PARTY WHO WON: As soon as you have been paid in full, you mustfill out the form below and mail it to the court immediately or you may be fined. if an Abstract of Judgment has been recorded, you must use another form; see the clerk for the proper form. SMALL CLAIMS CASE NO.: ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT (Do not use this form if an Abstract of Judgment has been recorded.) To the Clark of the Court: I am the 0 judgment creditor assignee of record. I agree that the judgment in this action has been paid In full or otherwise satisfied. Date: • (TYPE OR PRINT NAME)• (SIGNATURE) SC•190,(Rw. hmnly+. 20001 NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT P's'c"'° (Small Claims) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH October 10, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. William Rainbolt 1300 East Highland Avenue San Bernardino, California 92404 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Rainbolt: This letter formally accepts the sale of your coach at Marinapark (Space 10-B) for the purchase price of $5,000.00. On this date, you gave me the "pink slip' for your coach and I gave you a check for $5,000.00 from the Marinapark fund (check #0407). This letter also recognizes that this transaction is payment in full for your coach and that you owe no further rent (or late fees, if any have been attributed to you) or coach removal expenses associated with your tenancy at Marinapark Please direct any questions about this matter to me at 949/644-3002. Sincerely, DAVID A. KIFF Deputy City Manager cc: Mayor and Members of the City Council Homer Bludau, City Manager Bill Mecham, Bendetti Management Company City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard • Post Office Box 1768 • Newport Beach, California 92659-1768 t 06/21/00 WED 17:26 FAX 910 282 8149 l 0 IRA B KATZ • 0 001 OP COVNSP.(. DAMM E. MeM- DATE/TIME.• ADDRESSEE: FIRM NAME. - ADDRESSEE'S FAX #: NUMBER OF .PAGES: SENDER'S NAME: FILE CODE: MESSAGE: Law Oliices Of IRA DENJAMIN KATZ A Profession( Corporation 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1900 Century City, California 90067 FAX COVER SHEET June 21, 2000 / 5:28pm Mr. Dave Kill, Asst. City Manager City Hall. 949 644-3020 5 IRA, BENJAMIN KATZ, ESQ. 6oyasgen TPUWHONE (310) 2824580 PACMU-B (310) 2824149 6�2 9.061n 1:7bl. (� n <a d J(9 IvwDlvco el b.%t v w ►^^� �-ZS Sa6w .. 2 errer to Mr. Bill Mecham dated June 21, 2000,from Ira. Benjamin Katz, Esq. > > > Please more < < < ***Please check to see if all pages were received*** *****all pages were not received or if quality is poor*** Please note us immediately at (310)282-8580*** JUN-21-2000 18:01 310 282 B149 97i um 06/21/00 WED 17:26 FAX 310 282 8149 IRA B KATZ ! • Law Offices Of DU BENJAAW KATZ A Prof'ossionw Corporation IRA ECNJAWNKATZ 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1900 1 ANIEL W `r/, o CMAgI Century City, California 90067 DAN�1. MIIiT'/„ Of Counsel June 21, 2000 Mr. Bill Mecham Bendetti Management 1176 Main Street, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 Re: Space 11E in Marinapark, Newport Beach Dear Mr. Mecham: IZ O02 PHONE (310) 282.8580 FAX 010) 282.8149 Via fax (949) 261-666o and U. S. Mail I have discussed both with Ms. Boyar and Mr - issues raised during our telephone conference earlier concerning Mr. Smokler's this month use and occupancy of Ms. Boyar's mobilehome (the "MOBILEHOME") at space 11E in Marinapark, Newport Beach, California. I have set forth below the issues you raised and their response: 1. Y/ AlthouhSmokler and children are Occupg his mother's MOBILEHOME atrspace 11E Underlthe lease between Ms.1 Boyar and the City of Newport Beach (the "CITY"), you suggested that it would be appropriate for Ms. Boyar to transfer her lease with the City to Mr. Smokler. Transferring Ms. Boyar's lease for space 11E to Mr. Smokler is certainly an option and may, in fact, occur sometime in the future. However, Ms. Boyar and Mr. Smokler would prefer not to effect the transfers at this time. Prior to her recent execution of both the original lease for space 11E (the "LEASE") and the amendment and extension of lease (the "AMENDMENT"), I discussed with Assistant City Manger Dave Kiff the options of (a) Ms. Boyar signing the LEASE and AMENDMENT and thereafter transferring them to Mr. Smokler, (b) Ms. Boyar signing the LEASE and AMENDMENT and thereafter not transferring them to Mr. Smokler, or (c) Mr. Smokler signing the LEASE and AMENDMENT directly with the CITY inasmuch as the CITY apparently had no record of Ms. Boyar previously signing a lease for space 11E with the CITY. After considering those options with Ms. Boyar, in a subsequent telephone conversation, I advised Mr. Kiff that Ms. Boyar had decided to simply sign the LEASE and AMENDMENT and maintain her status as the tenant thereunder with her son, Mr. Smokler and his family, residing in JUN-21-2000 18:02 310 282 8149 97% P.02 06/21/00 WED 17:27 FAX 310 282 8149 IRA B KATZ ZOO 1 9 r Mr. Bill Mecham June 21, 2000 Page 2 the MOBILEHOME at space 11E and, upon that basis, Ms. Boyar had executed the LEASE and AMENDMENT which I was forwarding to him. Should you believe that such transfers must be made in order for Mr. Smokler and his family to continue staying in the MOBILEHOME, please provide me with the citation to the applicable law so that we can evaluate such belief. :.5 snown in the pictures that I sent to Mr. Kiff, Mr. Smokler,s truck is neatly painted and maintained and, when parked in the space in front of the MOBILEHOME, does not extend into the drive aisle. You acknowledged that, as a matter of law, the City may not be able to prohibit Mr. Smokler from parking his truck in such space. You stated that, nevertheless, the City would prefer that he park it elsewhere as the City and the other residents of the Marinapark would prefer that commercial vehicles not be parked in Marinapark. Mr. Smokler operates a mobile air conditioning repair business outside of the Marinapark using his truck in connection with earning his livelihood. Mr. Smokier stores expensive equipment and parts in his truck and thus wants to keep it parked in front of the MOBILEHOME when he is in the Marinapark to better protect its contents from theft. Accordingly, he is unable to accommodate your request. Moreover, Mr. smokier has spoken to several of his neighbors who told him that they have no objection whatsoever to his parking his truck in front of the MOBILEHOME and furthermore it is none of their business what he parks in front of the MOBILEHOME. Amu stazea out that Mr. Smokler parks his truck, a second vehicle and a vehicle driven bhe y his fiance would have to in Marinapark and that Marinapark. arrange to park the third vehicle outside of Mr. Smokler has arranged with a neighbor to use one of the neighborps assigned parking space. Thus, all three vehicles are rking visitors parking pacerked in s. P pe umablysthispacessol solution isoacceptableand do nt OcCUYatny o the City.' 'It is my understanding that each tenant is entitled to two Placards or stickers to affix to their vehicles to indicate that the vehicle is entitled to park in reserve spaces in Marinapark as well as two placards to be used by guests to park in guest parking spaces at Marinapark. Accordingly, please provide my clients, care JUN-21-2000 18:02 310 282 8149 9?% P.03 06/21/00 WED 17:27 FAX 910 282 8149 IRA B KATZ 1 • 0 IM 004 Mr. Bill Mecham June 21, 2000 Page 3 4. You stated that contrary to the rules and regulations of Marinapark, Mr. smokler's kids leave towels and toys on the front Porch of the MOBILEHOME overnight. Mr. Smokler has asked his children not to do so in the future. Ms. Boyar and Mr. Smokler note that many of the resident's children and overnight and have done so for manuests leave items on the y porches of their mobilehome y years. You stated that Mr. Smokler has attempted to flaunt the rules and regulations of Marinapark and is not well liked by his neighbors. Mr. Smokler responds that he has good relations with most of his neighbors and has not attempted to flaunt the rules and regulations of Marinapark. However, he is extremely concerned about the continued harassment of Mr. Smokler both directly and indirectly by the City 's agents, eendetti Management Company. In addition to the direct interactions between Mr. Smokler and Mr. Joe Albano, who I understand is Bendetti Management's on -site agent, it is my understanding that both you and Mr. Albano have bad-mouthed Mr. Smokler to other tenants in Marinapark. For example, a member of the Marinapark homeowner's association board, told Mr. Smokler that he had recently been approached by you and asked to bring up at the next board meeting a complaint about Mr. Smokler's parking of his truck in the Marinapark. This board member stated that he told you that Mr. Smokler had the right to park his truck in Marinapark and he would not raise the issue at the board meeting. The board member further told Mr, smokier that at the next meeting of the.association board, another member who had apparently been spoken to by you brought up Mr. Smokler's parking of his truck in Marinapark and other issues about Mr. Smokler, but no other member of the board had any problem with Mr. Smokler's activities and, accordingly, no action was taken by the Board concerning Mr. Smokler. of the undersigned, with two of the tenant parking placards or stickers and two of the guest parking placards. Your anticipated courtesy in this regard is appreciated. JUN-21-2000 310 282 8149 97% am 08/21/00 WED 17:27 FAX 210 282 8149 IRA B EATZ • • IE005 Mr. Bill Mecham June 21, 2000 Page 4 Two other examples involve two different tenants, including Mr. Ron Gold, who recently spoke to Mr. Smokler separately telling him that Mr. Albano had told each of them that (a) he was UOW going to enfrce the rule nst tenants naces by towing their cars if1they violated athe nrule ands (baifg in guet lthey were unhappy about the rule enforcement they should complain to Alan Smokler in space 11E because he was the cause. Both of these residents also complained to Mr_ Smokler regarding what they perceived as selective enforcement of Marinapark's rules and regulations by Mr. Albano. It is my further understanding that Mr. Smokler spoke this afternoon with the President of the Marinapark homeowners' association who told Mr. Smokler that he had absolutely no Objection to Mr. Smokler parking his truck in Marinapark. This letter constitutes a formal demand that the City and its agent, Bendetti Management, cease and desist any further harassment Of Ms. Boyar and her family, including Mr. Smokler and his family ("THE FAMILY"). It is both Ms. Boyar's and Mr. Smokler's desire that THE FAMILY be able to use and enjoy the MOBILEHOME and space 11E without harassment or other problems. Should the City and its agents continue to harass Mr. Smokler and THE FAMILY, legal action will be taken. I trust that will not be necessary. Should you believe that a further dialogue would be Productive, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF IRA BENJAMIN RATZ A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION By: �{ I BENJ IN TZ cc: Ms. Sharon Boyar Mr. Alan Smokler Mr. Dave Riff, Assistant City Manger via fax and U.S. Mail JUN-21-2000 18:03 310 282 8149 97% P.05 w .v 0 MARINAPARK 1770 W. Balboa Blvd, Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723-0206 Joe Albano, Manager May 19, 2000 Sharon Boyar P.O. Box 11244 Palm Desert, CA 92555-1224 Dear Ms. Boyar, I am writing because we have a problem concerning the truck your son has been parking in the community. The truck is a commercial vehicle and is too large to fit in the normal parking space. We want the truck removed from the park. The site manager has had numerous conversations with your son to no avail. In addition, your attorney, Mr. Katz has brought the subject up with Dave Kiff, Deputy City Manager of Newport Beach. In a letter to Mr. Kiff, Mr. Katz indicated that the Deputy City Manger agreed to allow your son's buck to remain in the park. Mr. Kiff has indicated that he made no such statement and directed me to deal with the issue as I would with any other resident. A quick inspection of the park will show you that there are no other vehicles as large as your son's truck in the park. There are no other vehicles with advertising on them. The truck does not fit. Please advise your son to remove the vehicle immediately. If you or your son have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be happy to discuss the issue over the phone or meet you on site. My phone number is (949) 261-6111 extension 211. Respectfully, BILL MECHAM Agent for Owner Cc: Dave Kiff, Joe Albano, Alan Smokler r "RIPPIWIP -*r t u � -:. _. .- 1M_ Lo u y AWAIr Law Offices Of IRA BENJAMIN KATZ A Professional Corporation IRA BENJAMIN KATZ 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1900 PHONE (310) 282.8580 FRANKLIN MICHAELS, 3R. Century City, California 90067 FAX (310) 282.8149 DANIEL MUM, Of Counsel May 25, 2000 Mr. Dave Kiff, Deputy City Manager via Fax (949) 644-3020 City of Newport Beach and U.S. Mail City Hall Newport Boulevard Post Office,Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 Re: Improper Demand that Alan Smokler not park his truck at Marina Park Dear Mr. Kiff: This will acknowledge receipt of the Lease and Amendment and Extension of Lease signed by the City of Newport Beach. I note that you filled in the .blanks in paragraph 5 of the Amendment and Extension of Lease to show the commencement date as May, 2000 and the current rent as $797.28. I will seek confirmation of these insertions from Ms. Boyar. Ms. Boyar has forwarded to me a letter dated May 19, 2000 addressed to her from Bill Mecham, "Agent for Owner" wherein he wrote, among other things, as follows: "In a letter to Mr. Kiff, Mr. Katz indicated that the Deputy City Manager agreed to allow your son's truck to remain in the park. Mr. Kiff has indicated that he made no such statement and directed me to deal with the issue as I would with any other resident." As I am sure you will recall, among the things we discussed during our telephonic conference of May 12, 2000 was that Ms. Boyar's son, Mr. Smokler (a) parks his truck in his assigned parking space in front of Ms. Boyar's mobile home, (b) the vehicle has a neat appearance and has been recently painted with his business name "A1's Mobile A/C" and additional information neatly lettered on the side and (c) Mr. Smokler does not operate a business out of the mobile home, nor on the Marinapark premises. Based thereupon, you told me that you would instruct Mr. Albano that Mr. Smokler may continue to park his truck on the premises. [Thereafter, I mailed to, you the Lease and Amendment and Extension of Lease signed by Ms. Boyar.] Accordingly, I was surprised to read Mr. Mecham's letter contradicting our agreement. Mr. Dave Kiff, Deputy City Manager May 25, 2000 Page 2 For your information, I have enclosed six pictures taken this week by Mr. Smokler. The pictures show (1) that his vehicle is the size of a standard pickup truck with a trailer in place of the pickup truck body, (2) his truck is parked in front of Ms. Boyar's mobilehome in the assigned space and does not extend into the drive aisle in front of that space, (3) the lettering on the side of the truck is neat, the truck is clean and appears freshly painted, (4) the Marinapark parking lot where Mr. Smokler's vehicles are parked is largely empty and (5) Mr. Smokler's vehicle is not an eyesore. I am unaware of any -provision in the newly signed lease and lease extension which prohibits the parking of a vehicle with lettering on its side reflecting its owner's business name and type of work, such as Mr. Smokler's, in front of his mother's mobilehome in her assigned space. I am also informed that for many years an old rusty boat had been parked on the Marinapark parking lot which, although an eyesore, was allowed to stay. Frankly, I do not understand why the City of Newport Beach would attempt to force Mr. Smokler to remove his vehicle from Marinapark. Please instruct Mr. Mecham to withdraw his demand immediately. I unsuccessfully attempted to reach you via telephone to discuss this matter. Please call me upon receipt to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, LAW OFFICES OF IRA BENJAMIN KATZ A PROF SSIONAL CORPORATION By: IRA BENJAMIW KATZ cc: Ms. Sharon Boyar w/enclosures Mr.. Plan Smokler . Mr. Bill Mecham 0 Brockman, Marion From: Kiff, Dave Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 10:40 AM To: Clauson, Robin Cc: Burnham, Bob; Bludau, Homer; Brockman, Marion; Wick, Helen Subject: Marinapark FYIs Just talked with Bill Mecham of Bendetti. Here's the update: All but two folks have signed off on the Lease Extension. I'd like Council authorization to proceed with a rent increase for those two (can we get it on the Closed Session agenda for 4/25?). -- One person has now "handed over the keys" and the bill of sale (but not yet the title) to one old coach. Bill will be forwarding this info to Robin for her review. I told him that, since the coach is not inhabitable according to Bill, we'd have it taken out and disposed of -- stop me if you'd rather we didn't do this. Ordinarily, I'd probably take the coach and rent it out (or use it as an officelll). Robin and Homer, assuming you have not yet affixed your signatures to the Lease extensions, be on the lookout for one lease where the guy crossed out the BOLD language saying that we won't pay relocation costs. He needs a nice opportunity to sign a clean copy of the same lease extension again. MARINAPARK r 1770 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 723-0206 Joe Albano, Manager April 08, 2000 Stuart Proctor 72 la Cuesta Orinda, CA 94563 Hi Stuart: I decided to send the lease extension to you by Fed-X. Please return signed lease to Marinapark Office by Fed-X also. Maybe the lease was lost in the mail. As I stated to you on the phone tonight, The reason the lease extension was sent to your parent's home is because they were mailed to resident's billing addresses on or about March 18, 2000. They were to be signed and returned to the City by March 31, 2000, I will explain your reason to the City. Do you recall, September / October of 1999 you were out of the Country, we had no way of reaching you when your rent was not getting to us by the 1 OTH of the month. I called your parents in hopes of contacting you. You're mother suggested I mail your rent statement to her to avoid any late charges. She said she spoke with you regarding this situation and you agreed. I also asked for a letter requesting the billing address to be changed to her address, Letter on file. The billing statement has been mailed to your parent's home since October of 1999. I was sure you were aware they have been paying your rent all this time. If you wish to change the billing address, I have no problem with that, please send me a note, I will be glad to make the change for you. If you let me know before the 12TH' of this month I may be able to get the change in for your May billing. Just a reminder, I have not received a transfer of title / Registration of your home to your name We need for our files, please bring a copy to office when you get back in town, Best Regards, Joe Albano, Manager cc Bill Mecham, Bendetti Management Group cc: Dave Kiff, City of Newport Beach i Brockman, Marion From: JAAlbano@aol.com Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2000 6:40 AM To: mecham@bendetti.com; OKIFF@city.newport-beach.ca.us; MBROCKMAN@city.newport- beach.ca.us; HWICK@city.newport-beach.ca.us Subject: Re: Proctor lease (9-13) UK Letter to Proctor.rtf Em Stuart Proctor and I have been playing phone tag Friday and Saturday. He claims he never received the mail out from the City and making a big deal about it. His parents said they did. I decided it would be best to FedEx the extended lease package to him in Orinda, Calif. I enclosed a letter to answer all his questions (attached). I told him if he had any other questions to call you or Dave. I'm checking to see if I can get it mailed Sunday, It will go out Monday for sure. Joe@Marinapark + 1 .Y ..'•--,..1 . y'. t`r �', 4.21 :.ir'r,l i\,' v _ �„y.i1r v. .� ..1 .. . r.- ..iY i r 4, r ' �rrt !. � :,; 1'a i. 'h•}' ', '� r ..,�i ' y, .'.� .1 .'i'. rr',;, ,. .ry, a ,t_, \:•'i.L All -' - ' i+ ,rCi i. ,,4 r e -\,�- •V . it .2.., •' i('1 r'.Flo rf' h'(',�'. � i I i � - /�„ , ,,, :�f'.4.�n. ��`. VI •,; ., Il, •` , ,j rt'r�l .•' � rr , r '. 1. r „ 'ti 4'i'.' - -'i� `, � �/\L,• ! r • ! i ,i :' .11.a_[ar fe..yw:r r ..Iv, ' �' i ,. pla.'••?e Sri �i'�' : i ,, ,'il al v ,r o, ;. r ' )• � r2�r; I4 rr/i 4p` lal far �, - •,i� + 't6 1-ly'.;,••�(t'�1�'. "J,;d'd��'�'�r..d4.,;.,r.`• 't5i irr,l�l it•r r•rLi:, r: - r .': rr _ .r„ \�' -•�•i'i1 - � ,,,t- - of '•q\' )n 4{ �r �.'})��� \'.,i• •, S rlj Y.. i�l.!'ri- --rdrr-„�e•.co -;a'S�11tty - .r;; ';iC«:i ' iF,.:.:r;.;. �1:', 1�;1'�•-- ' -q.{r`.�.., f'. � .y�:�,�.�: ,1;�.,.;. i, - _ r> • •+' -4� r 1 - .., ,.r 't'rl... n+•�:a'�'.+a,..•; j•_+r;� '�,�ii4 �, -rl {�'( Y.i- .. ',.. :: .ta.n, f `MI �- rf;t, _ .'iy4;�i M1= 're, °'i • •-.r r•.1, ,'i NEWPORT MARINAPARK i�r .. •VhriOr �`\ - .r , r 'lei,. v Si ��I tr '`Y,tY::i,,l;a�•c�� _ .•.1•,i'ii •_ �`;{v ,i�+' .e. .1-., r 'i'ri".. 1 LI'.I 'r - } ,'y� :.h: l':1it'Ir rrY ,r.'9` .."�Yyt ..^� �•, 1 " .. v 1, �`I'. I `.,S.ir • _'� �f.l'. tr l•r�l- r.ji- f �: 'Y 'V 4 _y�, 1, rFlrvV, t`P r 1. ` fit,,•''✓' I v :t r'.. Orr , a) • r '` 4'lo f :, t. .'•,{ � . V„\ •' .i II ,.4 'I4i. i��+. Il,�:."i ;.;.,'Hr•k;,,�l>ro,�`,•' '1976 ,� '.,',,; r?Y•I l li �r �t r.: "� -• ,. rl, `, r r ra.�;;r ,;., . 1 `• ,,,r ,_;- "I-�,: rr .! S}., )+•ne.'�;a i'•,•S' r ,,a rJt �1 .• - ',• y{�t`.�-T Lz .��I� t:v• 1j� rS(� Y:''_ Y. ' � r�•i'.v.+�. r .Y,.- Il'•�+o .•:"C.+ - -i'� ti•• F,<.i"y. Iu .Y�•` is f .. •I�trty 'S ,1i5•.. -:. ,�; �. - '� nlr� A1:IJY v.{:r �' r,,v�l.t: �r: rr 4r _ .'a�r}�. :F r i'•rrj"'��f.,. yl �.p..'r70'4i-i:f..„ii :d�:r} 4•'r.,. ',V{�; r'br1=);. ::,'-:. d'_ ••�•1` r r `..t f'r.. 1 f:, �.'i :�,•I ✓`�4.1':. .1'., , .. I 'r 3l�lr, r',l r'lli 'r :Pi �f i' }t��,*• `f`� i , i r r .. v � a 0'r fIj'4 ,' A• ^`I J4� r ,✓, : •1- • ''d r � . .1}C.r'N^� �1'�r'�� it :': 1F`:,�. y.r tc•h�•w1 r � , rr.. ,"I: r, i.. r. - n •�a ivil` .rrf�a,dr,;, ;:.ddr' d. ,.{,a ;, .P `A.ffr�r• •1rnv..r..�1: n r p � •. i.: - rN i/.' r:, •! i:�',q . 1' iklr (: ..1. •:: • ,� ,. � �` � 1, rp r Jrl. .�' is f J .. • .ip�;.^�U Y. - � <: i _' `, 1 `i'l•ir..,'n-.'If•!l a •r -., r r r r \.`^_✓' ,;i !f`' r, `r',•''t A �1 � `s'-',1Y,� ` r. � ` -, l it � ,,I t • = � +. M1 lt � r rrt�,wi':,li: ",. ,.y •'•rh ,. ,,Ij• -mot .r. ' r 42 - �r r +cMW` � <aii ,. J' +•n.. ,' hr�. �W ♦ •,d, .. r e .z .. - L E A_S E_ NEWPORT MARINAPARK TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. MEANING OF WORDS ........................... I................. 2 2. DESCRIPTION OF LEASED PREMISES ............................... 3 3. TERM ......................................................... 5 4. MINIMUM RENTAL ............................................... 3 5. ADJUSTMENT OF MINIMUM RENTAL ................................. 4 6. EXISTING LEASE AGREEMENT ..................................... 4 7. SALE ......................................................... 5 8. ADMINISTRATIVE FEE ........................................... 5 9. ASSIGNMENT - SUBLEASE ........................................ 5 10. PUBLIC ACCESS ................................................ 6 11. BICYCLE PATH - PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY...., ...................... 6 12. USE .......................................................... 6 13. TAXES AND UTILITIES .......................................... 6 14. RELOCATION OF ENTRANCE - TENNIS COURTS ....................... 7 15. MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENTS .................. 7 16. RULES AND REGULATIONS ........................................ 8 17. INDEMNIFICATION .............................................. 8 18. NON-COMPLIANCE AND TERMINATION OF LEASE ...................... 9 - 19. ABANDONMENT OF IMPROVEMENTS .................................. 10 20. SURRENDER OF POSSESSION UPON EXPIRATION OR TERMINATION....... 10 21. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ........................................... 10 22. ATTORNEYS' FEES .............................................. 11 23. REMEDIES CUMULATIVE ........................................... 11 24. NO WAIVER .................................................... 11 25. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS ......................................... 11 0 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page 26. NOTICES ..................................................... 12 27. MISCELLANEOUS ............................................... 12 EXHIBITS: Exhibit "A" - Newport Marinapark Agreement dated June 25, 1973 Exhibit "B" - Site Plan - Civic Legion Marinapark Complex Exhibit "C" - Rules and Regulations - Newport Marinapark -2- .r II II II Iif L E A_S E_ THIS LEASE, made and entered into this ,:ti,Q day of >), 1976, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a chartered municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor", and the lessees of all or a part of fifty-eight (58) trailer park spaces in that park known as Newport Marinapark, hereinafter referred to as "Lessees", which Lessees are individually identified by trailer space number and their signature to this document. R E C I T A L S: A. Lessor holds title to and is the owner of certain harbor frontage and tidelands, together with certain uplands abutting thereon located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach and which is presently utilized as a mobilehome park commonly known as Newport Marinapark. B. Lessor and the lessees of all fifty-eight (58) trailer spaces entered into an agreement on June 25, 1973, providing that Lessor would lease to Lessees said trailer spaces until September 30, 1977, upon certain conditions and terms contained in said agreement marked Exhibit "A"•and which is incorporated herein and made a part hereof by this reference. C. On December 22, 1975, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach upon the recommendation of the "Ad Hoc Committee on Marinapark Leases" voted to extend said trailer space leases for an additional period of time as hereinafter set forth. D. It is the judgment of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that it is for the best interests and welfare of said City and the residents thereof to lease said -1- • 9 I I I I I I I 1- I I I trailer spaces hereinafter described to Lessees for the purpose hereinafter set forth and for the consideration hereinafter maintained. E. It is the judgment of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that the leasing of said trailer spaces hereinafter described, to Lessees, upon the conditions in this Lease Agreement specified, is not inconsistent with the trust purposes imposed upon such portions of the lands hereinafter described which may constitute tidelands, nor is the leasing of said adjoining uplands hereinafter described in violation of the gift clause of the Constitution of the State of California; it is further the judgment of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that this lease complies with the Charter of the City of Newport Beach, all local ordinances and the General Laws of the State of California. F. Lessor proposes to lease to Lessees the trailer spaces described hereinafter, and Lessees are willing to accept said lease on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING RECITALS AND THE MUTUAL COVENANTS set forth below, Lessor and Lessee hereby agree as follows: 1. MEANING OF WORDS a. Park Manager or management is the person or persons designated by the City Manager as being responsible for administering the terms of the lease and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. b. Marinapark, trailer park and park are used interchangeably and all refer to Newport Marinapark. c. Mobilehome and trailer are used interchangeably and for the purpose of this lease are synonymous. d. Trailer space, trailer lot, mbbilehome space, -2- t and trailer site are all used interchangeably and for the purpose of this lease all refer to the demised premises. 2. DESCRIPTION OF LEASED PREMISES Lessor hereby leases, and Lessees do hereby accept a lease of a trailer space as indicated situated in Newport ,C Marinapark as shown on the attached site plan marked Exhibit "B" 1 and made a part herein by this feference. 3. TERM The term of this lease is for a period of nine (9) years and eight (8) months, commencing on the 1st day of February, 1976, and ending on the 30th day of September, 1985. Should the City Council find and determine on or about the expiration of this lease that Newport Marinapark is not required Afor any public trust purpose or other public purpose, Lessees shall have the option to extend this lease for five (5) years ' following the expiration of the initial term, upon the same conditions herein contained. If Lessees elect to exercise this option, they shall notify Lessor in writing of their intent to so exercise said option. 4. MINIMUM RENTAL As minimum rental, Lessees covenant and agree to pay to Lessor the sum of Two Hundred and Thirty Dollars ($230.00) per month for each bayfront mobilehome space marked in Spaces ' A, B and F and One Hundred and Ninety Dollars ($190.00) per month for each inside mobilehome space located in Sections marked ' Cl D and E until June 30, 1976. Commencing July 1, 1976, as 1 minimum rental, Lessees covenant and agree to pay to Lessor the sum of Two Hundred and Forty-five Dollars ($245.00) per month for each bayfront mobilehome space located in Sections marked A, B and F and Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) per month for each rinside mobilehome space located in Sections marked C, D and E, payable on the 1st day of each month so long as this lease remains in effect. Said rental payment and any adjustment thereto -3- as hereinafter provided is deemed to be the fair market rental value for said demised mobilehome trailer spaces. 5. ADJUSTMENT OF MINIMUM RENTAL Commencing on October 1, 1977, and every year there- after so long as this lease remains in effect, the minimum monthly rental as set forth in paragraph 4 of this lease shall be subject to increase in proportion to any changes in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for the Los Angeles -Long Beach, California Area as promulgated by the Bureau of Statistics of the United States Department of Labor (CPI) in accordance with any increase of an arithmetical average of the monthly index figures for the twelve calendar months beginning July 1 and ending June 30. In any event, and regardless of the CPI, the minimum annual increase in the monthly rental shall be Fifteen Dollars ($15.00) per month for all trailer spaces. The maximum annual increase in the monthly 'rental shall be Twenty -Five Dollars ($25.00) per month for each inside mobilehome trailer space consisting of Sections C, D and E and Thirty Dollars ($30.00) per month for each bayfront mobilehome trailer spaces consisting of Sections A, B and F. If the aforementioned Consumer Price Index as now compiled and published is superseded by another index, then from and after the date on which the new index becomes available it shall be used to calculate the increase in annual percentage monthly rental as set forth above, provided that an appropriate conversion from the old index to the new index can feasibly be made. 6. EXISTING LEASE AGREEMENT The terms and conditions of the existing Lease Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the lessees of the fifty-eight (58) Newport Marinapark mobilehome trailer spaces dated June 25, 1973 (Exhibit "A"), shall remain in full force and effect and shall be,binding concurrently with the -4- terms and conditions of this Lease Agreement. However, if there is any inconsistency or conflict in the language of the two agreements, the terms and conditions of this Lease Agreement supersedes and prevails over the terms and conditions of the June 25, 1978 Lease Agreement. Those Lessees and their successors or assignees who are parties to the June 25, 1973 Lease Agreement and who elect not to sign this Lease Agreement will continue to be bound under the terms and conditions of the June 25, 1973 Agreement and will accordingly be required to peaceably vacate their respective trailer spaces on or before October 1, 1977, without contest, legal or otherwise, notwithstanding any of the provisions to the contrary contained in the June 25, 1973 Lease Agreement. 7. SALE Lessees shall not sell, assign, exchange or convey, excepting testamentary transfers, their respective mobilehomes and trailer spaces without the prior written approval of the Newport Beach City Council. 8. ADMINISTRATIVE FEE Beginning October 1, 1977, Lessees shall pay Lessor a fee equivalent to six (6) months' rental, based on the rate at date of sale, when mobilehomes are sold and trailer spaces are assigned to new tenants. Said fee is to cover certain administrative costs to Lessor such as the preparation of a new lease document and building and health and safety code inspec- tions. Said fee is considered reasonable and not in violation of Section 789.8 of the California Civil Code. 9. ASSIGNMENT - SUBLEASE Lessees may sublease any of his rights hereunder after first obtaining the written consent of the City Manager or his designated representative on forms prepared by the City Attorney and approved by the City Council, and any such subletting without Lessor's prior written consent shall be in violation of the Lease and, therefore, void. -5- 10. PUBLIC ACCESS There is hereby reserved over the lease properties ' at the east end of Newport Marinapark a public walkway of approximately ten (10) feet in width. Said walkway shall provide convenient access for the public to the beach and waters of the harbor bayward of Marinapark. Lessor shall pay for any costs associated with the construction or improvement of said public walkway. 11. BICYCLE PATH - PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY A bicycle path and pedestrian walkway twelve feet in width shall be constructed bayward of and adjacent to the existing retaining wall in front of Marinapark. Said bicycle ' path and pedestrian walkway will connect with the public walkway at the east end of the Park referred to hereinabove in paragraph 10. Lessor shall pay for any costs associated with the construc- tion and installation of said bicycle path and pedestrian walkway. 12. USE The leased premises shall be used solely for the location and storage of a mobilehome of approved size and dimension. Lessees agree to comply with all laws, regulations ' and ordinances of the City, County and State affecting the leased premises and improvements located thereon, including Lessees' Imobilehomes. 13. TAXES AND UTILITIES Lessees shall pay before delinquent any general and special taxes or assessments or other governmental charges, if any, which may be levied on the demised premises or mobilehomes located thereon, including any improvements associated therewith, or any possessory interest therein arising out of or based upon ' the leasehold interest throughout the term hereof. Satisfactory ' evidence of such payments shall be made available to Lessor upon demand therefor. Lessees shall make arrangements individually and pay for electric and telephone service directly with the utility companies furnishing the same. Lessor shall furnish water to Lessees for use on the trailer site. Should a Lessee use an abnormal amount of water or waste water or permit water to be wasted by occupants or guests of his trailer, a reasonable charge, the amount to be determined by Lessor, may be assessed to the Lessee for such water. Lessees shall each pay to Lessor ia flat rate of Ten Dollars ($10.00) per month for gas service provided to their respective trailer spaces. i14. RELOCATION OF ENTRANCE - TENNIS COURTS Lessees agree to cooperate with Lessor should Lessor wish to relocate the main entrance of Marinapark to 18th 1 Street or should Lessor desire to install additional tennis courts on the public area adjacent to Marinapark. Lessees ' further agree to cooperate with Lessor should Lessor desire to 1 install any other improvements as set forth in the Master Plan for Newport Marinapark. 15. MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENTS Lessor agrees to maintain the grounds, landscaping and all City -owned buildings, and any other improvements in existence or constructed or installed on the Marinapark property. Lessees will at their own cost and expense maintain their respective mobilehomes, cabanas, and any other improvements connected to or associated with their mobilehomes at a high ' standard of maintenance and repair. If in the judgment of Lessor such standards of maintenance and repair are not being maintained, Lessor may, at its option, after written notice thereof to the Lessees and Lessees' failure to commence in good faith to remedy the same within a reasonable period of time, to diligently ' prosecute the same to completion, elect to correct any deficiency and Lessees agree to pay to Lessor on demand any and all sums ' expended by it in correcting any such deficiency. Lessees further agree that any and all landscaping located adjacent to -7- u mobilehomes shall be limited to three feet in height in order to minimize any possible view obstruction of the Bay from the inside units. 16. RULES AND REGULATIONS Lessees agree to abide by and be bound to the attached "Rules and REgulations" marked Exhibit "C" and made a part herein by this reference. 17. INDEMNIFICATION Lessees covenant that they will hold and save Lessor, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all claims or demands of any name or nature whatsoever arising out of, or incident to, the use and occupancy of the demised premises, and to indemnify Lessor for any cost, liability, or expense caused by or arising out of any injury or death of persons or damage to property which may occur upon or about the leased premises or caused by or arising out of any activities or omission of Lessees, their agents, employees, licensees and/or invitees, including, without limitation, injury or death of Lessees, their agents, employees, licensees and invitees and damage to their property or Lessees' property; except for any damage or injury of any kind arising out of the negligence of Lessor, its agents, or employees. Lessees, as a material part of the consideration under this Lease Agreement, hereby waive all claims against Lessor for any damage or loss from any cause arising at any time, including but not limited to fire, theft, Acts of God, vandalism or any physical damage while the trailer remains in the mobile - home park, other than the negligence of Lessor's agents, officers or employees. Lessees do hereby agree to indemnify and hold Lessor harmless from and on account of any damage or injury to any person or equipment on the trailer arising from any cause or from the negligence of a Lessee, his family or guests. �� 18. NON-COMPLIANCE AND TERMINATION OF LEASE Time and each of the terms, covenants and conditions hereof are expressly made the essence of this lease. If Lessees shall fail to comply with any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this lease, including the payment of rental herein reserved, at the time and in the amount herein required, and shall fail to remedy such default within sixty (60) days after service of a written notice from Lessor so to do if the default may be cured by the payment of money, or to commence in good faith to remedy any other default within sixty (60) days and thereafter diligently prosecute the same to completion, or if a Lessee shall abandon or vacate the leased premises, Lessor may, at its option, and without further notice or demand, terminate this lease and enter upon the leased premises and take possession thereof, and remove any and all persons therefrom with or without process of law. Lessor may elect to terminate this Lease for any event of default or breach hereof or of the park Rules and Regulations. Should Lessor elect to terminate, it may recover from Lessees 1 all damages incurred by Lessor by reason of such breach, including, without limitation, the cost of recovering the premises, and the worth at the time of such termination of the excess, if any, of the amount of unpaid rent and unpaid charges reserved under this Lease over the amount of the rental loss which Lessees prove could be reasonably avoided, for the remainder of the 1 term of this lease. Such amount shall be immediately due and payable from Lessees to Lessor, together with interest at the 1 rate of ten percent (10%) per annum from the date owing until paid. The remedies of Lessor specified herein are in addition ito and cumulative of any remedies provided Lessor by statute, including the remedies provided in California Civil Code Sections 1951.2. et seq. -9- 19. ABANDONMENT OF IMPROVEMENTS Any and all improvements, including mobilehomes and cabanas, left remaining on said trailer space at the expiration or termination of this lease shall belong to and be the property of the Lessor. Lessor shall have the absolute right to demolish, or otherwise remove, any such trailers and/or appurtenances without further notice or compensation of any kind to Lessees. 20. SURRENDER OF POSSESSION UPON EXPIRATION OR TERMINATION Upon the expiration or termination of this Lease, Lessees agree to peaceably deliver possession of the leased trailer spaces to Lessor and unconditionally agree to vacate the premises without contest, legal or otherwise. Lessees further expressly agree to waive any and all legal rights they may have to contest vacating the premises and further agree to release Lessor from any and all claims they may have of whatever nature. Lessees further agree to waive any relocation assistance or any other assistance from Lessor resulting from vacating the leased premises. 21. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Failure of Lessees to vacate the leased premises upon expiration or termination of this lease will result in damages being sustained by Lessor. Such damages are, and will continue to be, impracticable and extremely difficult to determine. Those individual Lessees who fail to vacate said premises will pay Lessor One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) each for every day those individual Lessees fail to vacate said premises. It is agreed that the One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per day per each individual Lessee refusing to vacate said premises is the minimum value of the actual damage caused by said failure to vacate, that such sum is to be considered liquidated damages and shall not be construed as a penalty. -10- 22. ATTORNEYS' FEES Should either Lessor or Lessees be required to employ counsel to enforce the terms, conditions and covenants of this Lease Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover all reasonable attorneys' fees (and court fees if applicable) incurred therein whether or not court proceedings were commenced. 23. REMEDIES CUMULATIVE The rights, powers, elections and remedies of the Lessor contained in this lease shall be construed as cumulative and no one of them shall be considered exclusive of the other or exclusive of any rights or remedies allowed by law, and the exercise of one or more rights, powers, elections or remedies shall not impair or be deemed a waiver of Lessor's right to exercise any other. 24. NO WAIVER No delay or omission of the Lessor to exercise any right or power arising from any omission, neglect or default of the Lessees shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed as a waiver of any such omission, neglect or default on the part of the Lessees or any acquiescence therein. No waiver of any breach of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this lease shall be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or of any of the terms, covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this lease. 25. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS Lessees covenant and agree to comply with all rules, regulations, statutes, ordinances and laws of the State of California, County of Orange, the City of Newport Beach or any other governmental body or agency having lawful jurisdiction over the leased property. -11- 26. NOTICES It is mutually agreed that any notice or notices provided for by this lease or by law, to be given or served by Lessees, may be given or served by mail, registered or certified, with postage prepaid, on the City of Newport Beach addressed to the Mayor, City Manager, or City Clerk, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663, or at such other address as may be hereafter furnished to the Lessee in writing. If notice is intended to be served by Lessor on Lessees, it may be served either: 1. By delivering a copy to the Lessee personally; and 2. If he be absent from the mobilehome, by leaving a copy with some person of suitable age and discretion who may be occupying the mobilehome; or 3. If no one can be found, then by affixing a copy of the notice in a conspicuous place on the trailer space or mobilehome and also sending a copy through the mail addressed to the Lessee. Such service upon the Lessor or Lessee shall be deemed complete at the expiration of forty-eight (48) hours from and after the deposit in the United States mail of such notice, demand or communication. 27. MISCELLANEOUS A. Inurement Each and all of the covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained shall, in accordance with the context, inure to the benefit of Lessor and apply to and bind Lessees, their respective heirs, legatees, devisees, executors, administrators, successors, assigns, licensees, permittees, or any person who may come into possession or occupancy of said premises or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way alter the provisions herein contained against assignment or subletting. -12- B. Captions The captions of paragraphs and subparagraphs of this lease are for convenience only and do not in any way limit or amplify the terms and provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written. ATTEST: City Clerk ` APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney , CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By:��+C���a-- Mayor -13- i i NAME SPACE NO 1: • �„ �'�i'Gy LS 1 v1 1A CLAYTON L. BALDWIN, JR. L'. J. PADDOCK Wife NAME SPACE NO. 11.CC�_'t'�Z71i 3A ESTA M. WYNE � n 1B 12, l�l , v 3B O ISE A. SENGER 3C 4 1D 14 CSC- G�esa 3D ACK J. CHWEITZER / `DR HIIRRY C--PATTERSON '� Wife Wife 7 1E 15. ` \OJvI 3E CHARLES STETSON nNAT L. �G jRMAN ' �iu„y�u�.3 � •-�" i--/�GLE'C�I.,LTi✓'�i� i(t 6a/t�".'t�u1 Wife WX e ' RGE L. HOLLOW i 6 • 2A 16 . CSh7tiYr� �j r / 4A ' ra. aF':,NiriIONALSANK EMMA C. WRIGHT Xs [^xodoTU2 �%n pc RTHc G)iti O.c - c7Ao- ®Sdeuv641. Wife e/ e D I p W 8.iA 2C HENRY L PARKER Wife 9. ""4L,-L 2D DR. MARVIN BLU J Wife m w � 1111 2� 20/zo.0 ? 4E /ROBERT D. S ON wiv G I I 1 I I 1 I I 0 I I 1 li NAME 21. _ FREE' B. PALMER SPACE NO. 5A W., 5C 5D C__�rnz 5E (IONE PETERMAN ( (25. ( �"°.• 5E (MRS . 4AftEE 266A MARSHALL'GOLDBERG� � e1xGk Wife r 27. 6B ELI ELMAN Wife ' 28 . !/� c o plc Q, 6C 'TA C. PICIiEL t� Wife / BERNARD FE DMAN n � Wife l -2- NAME SPACE NO. MALCOLM L. NADLER Wife P 7A DR. RICHARD KRATZ to L r 8B /DAVID WILLIAMS Alt ,e Wife 36.,6 1d1 BERNARD L. SAXON Wife OOD 8C mm i 8E r NAME SPACE NO. NAME SPACE NO. C' 39. ram? I� 9A AWRENCE E. GANAHL Wife M EWI Wife 1 41.J �(7 is �.A71, ' 9C ROBERT FEI Wife 7 42. ' �` 9D BETTY ERT ' I \ 43. / � - 9E RL P. S ULDING Wi 44 . aza DR. BERNAR J. WPINFURTHER Wife tl 4 10B W LIAM M. RAINBOLT Wife l ' 46. loc DR. OHN P. STrERG, TT Wife PAUL R. N R U' Wife/` � \ Wife l 11D ( AUL SCOTT ( ( r 11D (�OHN TREDICKn 532n 11E -3- ife 56. ` JACK HOROWITZ Wife NAME SPACE NO. 57. 12D JOSEPH MUSLIN . fe GENE C. TSEN Wi e i i - i i i i -4- t AV- _J/- oa �����r.� / f FREE 03 A G R E E M E N T """S' J RECOROED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA / Min. P.M. JUL 9 1973 b Past J.1YYL1E CARLYLE, County 2ccordW S Go 7494 THIS AGREEMENT, made this 25 V/day of JU1/L- , 1973, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessor" and the lessees of 58 trailer park spaces in that park known as Newport Marinapark, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessees," which Lessees are individually identified by their signatures to this document. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach is the owner of that certain real property located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach presently utilized as a trailer park and known as Newport Marinapark; and WHEREAS, the City has leased 58 trailer park spaces to certain Lessees under separate standard form rental agree- ments; and WHEREAS, although said leases by their terms will expire on June 30, 1974, various alleged representations have been made concerning extension of said leases and a dispute has arisen between Lessor and Lessees concerning the termina- tion date of said leases; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 1972, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach voted to accept the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Committee to convert Newport Marinapark into a public recreation area at the termination of said leases; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach wishes to terminate the Marinapark leases on a date certain; and -1- EXHIBIT "A" ' WHEREAS, pursuant to Newport Beach Resolution No. � 7976, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" co . of and made a part herein by this reference, Lessor and Lessees 42*+ are desirous of agreeing to a transitional period to resolve their differences concerning when said leases shall terminate; and III WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessees are desirous of other- wise modifying said leases. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach as Lessor and the Lessees of Newport Marinapark hereby agree as follows: 1. A transitional period shall be established whereby leases for all 58 trailer park spaces shall be extended to and including September 30, 1977. 2. Any time after September 30, 1977? City may give ninety (90) days written notice to vacate said premises to ' all Lessees of Newport Marinapark. Said notice shall not be given by City until City has allocated necessary funds, approved necessary plans, and obtained all necessary govern- mental approvals, including environmental requirements, zoning requirements and any other requirements to achieve the conver- sion of Newport Marinapark into a public recreational area. Until said written notice to vacate is given, all Lessees shall remain on a month -to -month tenancy subject to the same terms and conditions as their leases shall provide as herein modified. 3. Upon the expiration of the ninety (90) days pursuant to written notice to vacate as described in paragraph 2, all 58 Newport Marinapark Lessees unconditionally agree to vacate the premises without contest, legal or otherwise. Said Newport Marinapark Lessees expressly agree to waive any and -2- all legal rights they may have to contest said vacation of the premises and agree to release said city from any and all t4 to extend C-0 claims they may have of whatever nature otherwise said lease period. Lessees further agree to waive any relo- r. cation assistance or any other assistance from Lessor resulting TP4i from vacating the premises. 4. At the end of said ninety (90) days written notice to vacate.period Lessees agree that any remaining trailers and/or appurtenances in Newport Marinapark shall be deemed property of Lessor and Lessor shall have the absolute right to demolish, or otherwise remove, any such trailers and/or appurtenances without further notice or compensation kind to Lessees. of any 5. Failure of the Lessees to vacate said premises as provided in paragraphs 2 and 3 will result in damages being sustained by Lessor. Such damages are, and will con- tinue to be, impracticable and extremely difficult to deter- mine. Those individual Lessees who fail to vacate said premises in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3'will pay Lessor One Hundred Dollars ($100) each for every day those individual Lessees fail to vacate said premises. It is agreed that the' One Hundred Dollars ($100) per day per each individual lessee refusing to vacate said premises is the minimum value of the actual damage caused by said failure to vacate, that such sum is to be considered liquidated damages and shall not be con- strued as a penalty. 6. Lessees agree to notify any purchaser or assignee of their interest in a trailer or tenancy in Newport Marinapark of this agreement and secure'any such purchaser or assignee's express consent to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. -3- t • • t • Y r, 7. All Newport Marinapark Lessees agree to a rental increase in accordance with the following schedule, effective U July 1, 1973: .- 1972-73 1973-74 1974-15 1975-76 1976-77 Front Trailers (24) per month $170 $200 $215 $230 $245 Rear Trailers (34) per month 145 170 180 190 200 8. All Newport Marinapark Lessees shall cooperate with Lessor in the installation of wider pathway access to the public beach at the east end of Newport Marinapark. 9. Lessees shall also cooperate with City should City desire to install additional tennis courts on the public area. 10. The provisions of the existing Rental Agreements and Regulations between Lessor and Lessees shall remain in ef- fect through the periods herein specified except as otherwise modified by this Agreement. 11. Should Lessor be required to bring suit in court to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, Lessees agree to pay Lessor its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. 12. This Agreement will be deemed null and void unless executed by each and every one of the 58 Lessees on or before November 7, 1973. 13. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Lessees' heirs, successors and assigns and shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Orange County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written. -4- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation I !0 \ ATTEST: / 1 City' Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Eit ttorney ' Space LESSEES � No. J� ,3 P AY LESSEES -5- Space No. �•?�/tTpP�/T� • zhc-�G I e 57 D ' �13 Space Space LESSEES LESSEES No,. �No. A r r• -6- s , A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 0' THE CITY OF _•.'EWPORT BEACH 'EXPRESSID1G ITS REAFc IR"ATI0:1 OF THE LEASE TER�I_INATION ARID ITS INTE_.TIO-N TO PEPU•IIT A TRANSITION PERIOD FOR NEWPORT !'U\PIkTAPAIK AT TILE TEM41N-7'?1OV OF THE TRAILER SPACE RENTAL AGREFME& S It I! I A Il r 1070.1 .-;%E'a HTIEREA3, the City of Newport Beach is the owner of that certain real propart_y located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach presently utilized as a trailer park and known as NEWP0RT L• AR1'NAPARK; and WHEREAS, the City has leased fifty-eight (58) trailer park spaces to certain lessees under a standard form rental agreement; and WHEREAS, all of said leases will expire'on June.30, 1974; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 1972, the City Council voted .to accept the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission to convert Marinapark into a public recreation area at the termination of the agreement; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to reaffirm its decision to terminate the 24arir_apark leases when they expire; and WHEREAS, certain residents of Marinapark have requested that the City Council consider permitting a transitional period at the expiration of the leases; and WHEREAS, the Citv Council has considered the proposal for a transitional period and finds that to grant such a period would be in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach. N0W, THEYWORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of.Nec•;port Beach hereby agrees to permit a transition period for the residents of Marinapark under the following terns and conditions: 11977. 1. 'The transition period will'extend to September 30, -1- EXHIBIT "A" I • written. notices to vacate to all residents of- Marinapark. 3. All 58 Marinapark residents will sign appropriate Cl� waivers and releases guaranteeing that they will. unconditionally r and without contest vacate the premises at the expiration of the period specified in the vacation notice referred to in Paragraph 2 above. The form and substance of said waivers and releases will be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. 4. Said waivers and releases must be executed by all 58 Marinapark residents within six (6) months of the date of the adoption of this Resolution or the transitional period, as.granted under this Resolution will be deemed null and void and of no further force and effect. 5. The Marinapark residents shall agree to a rental 'increase according to the following schedule: 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Front Trailers (24) $170 $200 $215 $230 $245 per month Rear Trailers (34) 145 17.0 180 190 200 • per month G. The Marinapark residents shall cooperate with the City in the installation of a wider pathway access to the public beach at'the East end of the Marinapark site. 7. The City shall install as soon as possible add!- •tional tennis courts. ADOPTED this 7th day of May , 1973 ATTEST: GX: City Clerk Q2GGG�G( Mayor CVPTIPILD,A9'A TIUr ANDD C� ,•,cCT COPY CIF! CEEB Of N.' C.Ti G. 1; •.. _ eN PA(RI ....�...mJri.,.. �..'�.............19(3..............«..__..... 8 0 H BID. 1079.1 FALE438 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On June 25, 1973, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared HOWARD ROGERS, known to me to be the Mayor Pro Tempore, and LAURA LAGIOS, known to me to be the City Clerk of the municipal corporation that executed the within Instrument, known to me to be the persons who executed the within Instrument on behalf of the cor- poration therein named, and acknowledged to me that such corpora- tion executed the, within Instrument pursuant to a resolution of its City Council. WITNESS my hand and official seal. n 11 11 U II II II 11 II DOPOT; IY L.PALcN NOTARY PUBLICCA,:FC•',MIA (1 �5 tisi PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN ORANGE COUNTY biy_Cammission Ezp_ros Fob. 9• 19771 Notary Public in and for said State' 0 AFFIDAVIT E s:101 F-- 439. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) } ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) We, the undersigned being first duly sworn, state according to our best information and belief the fol- lowing: a. Each signature appearing hereinabove on this agreement is the genuine sig- nature of the person whose name it purports to be, and each person is one of the 58 master lessees of the trailer spaces at Marinapark. b. The undersigned affiants personally ob- served each signer placing on the here- inabove section of the said agreement his or her signature and his or her space number in Newport Marinapark. DATED: UUU ? 9 1973 o 1973. Subscribed and sworn to before me iva 2 9 1973 , 1973. Notary Public in an4/for the County of Orange, State of California t RBERT WILt,IAMS - = WITNESS <��/ LlGl�7t Lam` PAUL HENDERSON - WITNESS .............................................. SEAL LA' LA�!O5 y �� .� .• ...•C.:LIfURilllt +•••' • 0!LIN TY M.7 car•+.^.:ssica P•;,i:cs t p;it 3, 1975 ................. . ............. I ...................... f � f V wee { Fy?EE I A G R E E M E N T `1— RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CAUFOP.NIA LfI Min. P.M. JUL 9 1S73 . Past i J. YIYLIE CARLYLE, County 'MOTOW I?A6 Go 7d94- THIS AGREEMENT, made this z5*Tt/day of JUI+/C , 3.973, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessor" and the lessees of 58 trailer park spaces in that park known as Newport Marinapark, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessees," which Lessees are individually identified by their signatures to this document. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach is the owner of that certain real property located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach presently utilized as a trailer park and known as Newport Marinapark; and WHEREAS, the City has leased 58 trailer park spaces to certain Lessees under separate standard form rental agree- ments; and WHEREAS, although said leases by their terms will. expire on June 30, 1974, various alleged representations have been made concerning extension of said leases and a dispute has arisen between Lessor and Lessees concerning the termina- tion date of said leases; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 1972, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach voted to accept the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation.Committee to convert Newport Marinapark into a public recreation area at the termination of said leases; and WHEREAS! the City Council of the City of Newport Beach wishes to terminate the Marinapark leases on a date certain; and -1- EXHIBIT "A" T WHEREAS, pursuant to Newport Beach Resolution No. C 7976, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" c and made a part herein by this reference, Lessor and Lessees f-� are desirous of agreeing to a transitional period to resolve their differences concerning when said leases shall terminate; and WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessees are desirous of other- wise modifying said leases. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach as Lessor and the Lessees of Newport Marinapark hereby agree as follows: 1. A transitional period shall be established whereby leases for all 58'trailer park spaces shall be extended to and including September 30, 1977. 2. Any time after September 30, 1977, City may give ninety (90) days written notice to vacate said premises to all Lessees of Newport Marinapark_ Said notice shall not be given by City until City has allocated necessary funds, approved necessary plans, and obtained all necessary govern- mental approvals, including environmental requirements, zoning requirements and any other requirements to achieve the conver- sion of Newport Marinapark into a public.recreational area. Until said written notice to vacate is given, all Lessees shall remain on a month -to -month tenancy subject to the same terms and conditions as their leases shall provide as herein modified. 3. Upon the expiration of the ninety (90) days pursuant to written notice to vacate as described in paragraph 2, all 58 Newport Marinapark Lessees unconditionally agree to vacate the premises without contest, legal or otherwise. Said Newport Marinapark Lessees expressly agree to waive any and -2- all legal rights they may have to contest said vacation of T the premises and agree to release said City from any and all CD 4 . C claims they may have of whatever nature to otherwise extend said lease period. Lessees further agree to waive any relo- cation assistance or any other assistance from Lessor resulting from vacating the premises. 4. At the end of said ninety (90) days written notice to vacate period Lessees agree that any remaining trailers and/or appurtenances in Newport Marinapark shall be deemed property of Lessor and Lessor shall have the absolute right to demolish,'or otherwise remove, any such trailers and/or appurtenances without further notice or compensation of any kind to Lessees. 5. Failure of the Lessees to vacate said premises as provided in paragraphs 2 and'3 will result in damages being sustained by Lessor. Such damages are, and will con- tinue to be, impracticable and extremely difficult to deter-. mine. Those individual Lessees who fail to vacate said premises in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3*will pay Lessor One Hundred Dollars ($100) each for every day those individual Lessees fail to vacate said premises. It is agreed that the' One Hundred Dollars ($100) per day per each individual lessee refusing to vacate said premises is the minimum value of the actual damage caused by said failure to vacate, that such sum is to be considered liquidated damages and shall not be con- strued as a penalty. 6. Lessees agree to notify any purchaser or assignee of their interest in a trailer or tenancy in Newport Marinapark of this agreement and secure'any such purchaser or assignee's express consent to the terms and provisions of this Agreement, -3- 3 7. All Newport Marinapark Lessees agree to a rental increase in accordance with the following schedule, effective July 1, 1973: 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 (- Front Trailers (24) per month $170 $200 $215 $230 $245 Rear Trailers (34) per month 145 170 180 190 200 8. All Newport Marinapark Lessees shall cooperate with Lessor in the installation of wider pathway access to the public beach at the east end of Newport Marinapark. 9. Lessees shall also cooperate with City should City desire to install additional tennis courts on the public area. 10. The provisions of the existing Rental Agreements and Regulations between Lessor and Lessee$ shall remain in ef- fect through •the periods herein specified except as otherwise modified by this Agreement. 11. Should Lessor be required to bring suit in court to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, Lessees agree to pay Lessor its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. 12. This Agreement will be deemed null and void unless executed by each and every one of the 58 Lessees on or before November 7, 1973. 13. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Lessees' heirs, successors and assigns and shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Orange County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written. -4- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation ATTEST: City' Clerk j APPROVED AS TO FORM: eit ttorney I f Space n; LESSEES i No. LESSEES r Space No. �L[-lii 4.Gc �Cj 5 —� < ter•- R,U L � T L Space LESSEES No. LESSEES — �'JA C ' -r ��� �`/ter' • � �� _ Z4- BEZL � -6- Space No. 1 A RrSOMITION OF TIIE C17t( COUINTCTL 0? THE CIT`.*R i•.'0,7PORT TiL 10El 'r.',:cPR'r.'SSW ITS P,EAU'i� ll".1TIO:I OF TIII:, LEASE TGP 1INl't'IO`T AND ITS TO PEW-1IT A TRANSITION PERIOD FOR I ES7PORT .VfflMNTAPAR:( AT ME TEP.i,1l'1\11V''ION OF THE T'IUAILEP. SPACE RENTAL AGREE,,MEi7TS IMEREAS, the City of DTewport Beach is the owner of that certain real property located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach presently utilized as a trailer park and known as NEI^iPORT MARINAPARK; and WHEREAS, the City has leased fifty—eight (58) trailer park spaces to certain lessees under a standard form rental agreement; and MUMS, all of said leases will expire'on June.30, 1974; and WMEREAS, on October 10, 1972, the City Council voted to accept the reco.-Lmendation of the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission to convert IMarinapark into a public recreation area a-t the termination of the agreement; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to reaffirm its decision to terminate the Marinapark leases when they expire; and 111-fEREAS, certain residents of Marinapark have requested that the City Council consider permitting a transitional period . at the expiration of the leases; and TINIERDAS, the Citv Council has considered the proposal for a transitional period and finds that to grant such a period would be in the best interests of the City of Nevw-port Beach. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council ^ of. she City of,Newport Beach hereby agrees to permit a transition period for the residents of ilarinapark'under the following terms and conditions: I, The transition period will extend to September 30, 977. 33 11DIT "A" j written. noti L to vacate to all residents of karinapark. 3. 01.1 58 Marinapark residen# will sign appropriate CC - waivers and releases guaranteeing that they will. unconditi.or_ally and without contest vacate the premises at the expiration of the period specified in the vacation notice referred to in Paragraph 2 above. The'form and substance of said waivers and releases will be subject to the approval of the city Attorney. 4. Said, waivers and releases must be executed by all 58 Marinapark residents within sip: (6) months of the date of the adoption of this Resolution or the transitional period as -granted under this Resolution will be deemed null and void and of no further force and effect. 5. The Marinapark residents shall agree to a rental increase according to the following schedule: 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Front Trailers (24) $170 $200, $215 $230 $245 per month Rear Trailers (34) 145 170 180 190 200 .per month F. The Marinapark residents shall cooperate with the City in the installation of a wider pathway access to the public beach at the East end of the Marinapark site. 7. The City shall install as soon as possible addi- - tional tennis courts. ATTEST: City Clerk ADOPTED this 7th day of Mav , 1973 ,lam "'GLILG�Gt Gf• ���%iIG� Mayor JU^+ , 61973 ....................___ • 46 1079.1 FAv438. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF ORANGE On June 25, 1973, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared HOWARD ROGERS, known to me to be the Mayor Pro Tempore, and LAURA LAGIOS, known to me to be the City Clerk of the municipal corporation that executed the within Instrument, known to me to be the persons who executed the within Instrument on behalf of the cor- poration therein named, and acknowledged to me that such corpora- tion executed the within, Instrument pursuant to a resolution.of its City Council. WITNESS my hand and official seal, Do,?OTHY L. PAL�N !•„Ts:'If]p-`. It^i/CRY Fc� C.',:' ,. '�41�pn0•�� ..�14_ .fl'61IIA �y•"'^�1 Pf.irvC;FA! O.FICE IN >> ;'✓' ORA1•tEE COUrliY `TY Commission Expires Feb. 9, 1977 Ja•.Yc F.i't.�.Ci .:.� rCJ tl:•yJ Notary Public in and for said State' 0 AFFIDAVIT 0 E, .1 ON 1 P�,z43 . STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ss We, the undersigned being first duly sworn, state according to our best information and belief the fol- lowing: a. Each signature appearing hereinabove on this agreement is the genuine sig- nature of the person whose name it purports to be, and each person is one of the 58 master lessees of the ' trailer spaces at Marinapark. b. The undersigned affiants personally ob- served each signer placing on the here- inabove section of the said agreement his or her signature and his or her space number in Newport Marinapark. DATED: SUN'' `' 9 "' 3 , 1973. Subscribed and sworn to before me Itl� 2 9 1973 , 1973. Mutary Public in ancj'for the County of Orange, State of California RBERT WILLIAMS - WITNESS PAUJL HENDERSON - WITNESS ...............................'....., S. .. L �'. a:RUPITY dyCo-�m�<:E;^F=�•i•c5t?-ii�, i475 .................... -- 1 U3 9 I i LEIIrn. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss On June 29, 1973, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Herbert Williams and Paul Henderson, personally known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within Instrument, as Witnesses -thereto, who being by me duly sworn, depose and say: That they reside in Newport Beach, County of Orange, California, and that they were present and saw Herbert Williams, Joe Muslin, Allen D. Jacobs, Al Goodman, David C. Williams, Charles Stetson, Paul M. Henderson, G. W. O'Brien, Roy E. Whitehead, James C. Pichel, Marcella Emerson, Charles A. Raport, Fred B. Palmer, Harry J. Crawford, Charles F. Schoenherr, Nile Running, H. Globenfelt, Ione Peterman, P. M. Passy, •Frank T. Turnbull, Mrs. B: J. V7einfurtner, Harry C. Patterson, L. J. Paddock, Jerry M. Lewis, Martin L. Meltzner, Leon Benveniste, Malcolm Leo, Robert Clifford, Mae Bisgeier, Eli Elman, Milton Werner, Robert Wolman, Lee Brenner, H. Paul Romeis, Wayne Collins, Stanley R. Charlston, Budd L. Charlston, David Brownell, John Westergart, James Loudon, Elizabeth E. Kraetsch, C•. M. Hawke, Carl P. Spaulding, Ruth J. Nordquist, Florence Miller Fortner, Robert D. Spurgeon, Mark Stawisky, C. L. Rachford, J. D. Jones, Kenneth V. Todd, J. H. Johnson, Gerschen L. Schaeffer, Richard P. Kratz, Ethelyne E. McCarty, H. Brian Proctor, George Konheim, Marian J. Anderson and Louise A. Senger, personally known to them to be the same persons described in and whose names are subscribed to the within and annexed Instrument as lessees of trailer park spaces. Parties thereto, execute and deliver the same, and they acknow— ledged to said affiants that they executed the same7 and that said affiants subscribed their names thereto as Witnesses. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ......................... I ...... I................... . >.\ OFF 1^iA1- SEAL p. LAURRA 1AG105 C'AitG: COUNTY &pires April 3, 1975 ............................ I ........ I ........ .... Notary Public inland for said State 1770 West Balboa Boulevard, more particularly described as a portion of Lot =4, Section 33, Township 6 South, Range 10 West, City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of ,I California. 0 OU V O. C L EGRO M ll -11QRllllllApARK Co t11J LE,\A, f s, --' - 1 ^"3: - ! W* S � ram` it ., {�! - - � i - _ � � `* - r �— 'c'. yi } • ^,af t _.._ _ v� _ � � � S ♦'� � Y • j;£w.t'� . i „'ae3 - ''..5 " :4 1..:3 �-i ',} _ =`•`tea $ M y J '.*'' •.t, a '' ` - - --� + -7 _ 'rG-, .- t - < ^ y, FTI t z�� �✓ v' GDl� if'/t/ T r 77 .:.6"•',�9��tsE`. .Y KJ-,'pk Y` t q - , to Y • �� ® "'T'ry `!'. ..1 -s ' .III III �'r•� '� -� •9 s t•,• I i"• � � 1 vf' a c t" S L 's3 " y., x 1 Y >ti d 0.s a a' J 9 >• '- - 'a> 'S ; _ _.:V`" Y"`2>-Y�,dj'Y I� .i t'-Y w.:r - '+"=i Ir +a .z Y k 4 p 1�Y li } I'. I y it ,F W tjjt y vif } r,. , .b ¢ xr Fr ; I ..J^ ..� Asa •, - fi t . , i , 4 �'i xi •hI . _. .-. ..- -. ... > ..s. _ ..-.>,. ".<., ,.:' .:; ,..'. -,_.. ..'- ,f `zit. ?•+.�, s- +� `t ry- : ._ ..... . . , _-a". .. .s a „ a .,x _.; -. tx. r_a - . •YF- x .. 5 iv Y". ., ,i _. +Y W .. i :• : _ _ ' ,1 �.i iS �-. ,i- .Y. # y 1 • '4 : - y P , ' :� s� --<:«' _ -��`.. '..L_. .._ 1' _.�,�..,� -.. - - ,..-_.,. �. .r `xu.-ww.��:.r. _. Xa:.;�E.._v�:..�_-..i�ni�sa'xc:;:�.a�,._ _, �_.a't'a=s..,..��`.e�a`:a..e,;. �'�"_-.�_ �.���-'`"•._6� ..� ,'`�.aX ,_ .�a � .,. ., ,.r. �,�_ >n� �. _. _ ,�a.;x}r...� - - _ f..._ _w. ,,,.*.;: K• ea .Y 5 s 2 y,.h ,V.s.Y___ ._ ♦-:,iY:ia_ _� �l.t.`>�r i. .. .�-i , __ ___ „ , v'.. , Y #" .iu . Y • .. �j�sy .,. _ L .. r+'.X,Aa ._ S� ! � -.. a' llix+ �9'�+,Yr %a'£r.6„ +u.M $P"' . U..?:•'Tu-S �1,.. . 1>siV�9 �u aya t F - - .. e ,..-oa�+rv. _ ...- >.:.N. .." .^Y. .. ,. ..r. ;..-.,.r-+s,•.....: ..�+-» ._-i_.+,:.a.4 .. .. , .. w ,AYr'.,... , v v _ <_ lamp IWAKWN Yw _ . r _.- . }xi + ¢ 11 a: ., S .-.. ) _ o.. --- , ..- .. :. .._ _ .wry+ _.,.. _.- e _. _ -� _.a.9-s .✓w - a, --, ..•-+9F++_.___ „> .. . +[+..v, ..Y. F. - __ r, .. m, . 'n:F" .. .. ._. v. ..+e. . ...,_ ,. rn 2 4. X ^f_`. _ _. _ _ ,.. ...�. a ..Maf "h•. r I " ... , a _ c s�. ff��G`u. - ;. IF," yetµ , 'vec<wa r. �t �•' .a. _ i tin zz li •I { ....:. Y5-„...., : ' a,.. n],. + w: -- - 'L•>.'-' _, ., �, .. _ ,�. i-S'..: i �.. .`a a _%4:. __ l ' r ; ` t ... _ 4:'tx?a%. 4... .PX '^'. 1 yt... _. - .`.r :` ... o• ._: :> c _ 3 0..; a .-- T...y, •= r..:5 t' - S '�. Y } i I ,u a� I , I ' I ;Ir �1 e i s a- �yg r!� i -ryurYiY4a v r _ ,-> .. !' , `e. I'�`v, e.> r C v. . • .. .. - ;r. v .�. ,* a. _, > _ >� .. , .... . _ _ ._.- . - _: :.: _ - : � .v�c3IDuW'aRi.-^^:YStM1°.. _- '<p• a.' ,. .. .. a ._ ..... _. :.c a"bv,,, -._�..�..�,,..,+ucs,.�'.�a„•a.ati'....,�_.: _ _ _s .c.-L rz. m`, .., ,., ,-::•,. .x-:. ,. '>':«„ ... e•.ax. _.,, , -. r. .«rfi` .-.,F:. xf%...e.", .,,. '''.__"_ .�..�..�,_ � C.l Op(Rp DIYI CITY PARK V OQD DO O1t REZONES OTS 11TO17 H TO R-3 , ,17 . W,,,E5 WtM.EA.YAR(IDTR b YI03 TpE LNE LYpu 4S W C1Y (Pii\1 OPo aft I3 ,RL) [.3.0 IOTL ).L,E, 3, 1•f�f \LIIC[ 31[ oEG ui{ o0 (AL E. io.l WR 1}.E'Ef It, RLII W, IV APC. Ts. Aa. DD fYfl [ � Lb RO i f' L.Y.YA(p• ) (RC 'JAt RJU.E To RE (A-IM 1. IOR L[6.E` SSNL qp IEEj RSWE C-1 W *A (i-EK vE m[[ant) 19a-lE Gib aa[fVm�n[mw-SGPwllmfits, 4.T 6[a. 11P Sit SCALE OF FEET Ln \Ay q `L Ne /P/Q BAY L 8 ti'I n-� fi tsr 'S. R'9 �taoA 2 R-3 9 g � R-9 R-4 ,kEST 'f- R-4 �eAN R-1 y BAy R 1 R-Z 1 9 c. "SVE C"1 �uL Et''a40 5 R'3 .lo A'4 �' 2 C DISTRICTING MAP NEWPORT BEACH — CALIFORNIA -- AGRICULTURAL RES16CNTIA! R-4 MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL D-I 4GHT COMMERCIAL E DUPLE RESIDENTIAL C-Q GENFRAL COMMERCIAL -� RE STb. MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL rM�, WWUFACTURING ORD. NCI. Gig �0 COMBINING DISTRICTS U� UNCLASSIFIED Dom, T;, IggO It Y, d Oe Pth 1q Feet Shown TIVlt: -_ MAP MD.* f; L�- C. SRENT SWANSON THOMAS M. GIESER ROSERT 0. WILLIAMSON..IR. ELAINE S. ALSTON SWANSON AND GIESER ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 4 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE SUITE ZOO SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707-5770 TELEPHONE(714) 7SS•SSO0 FACSIMILE(714)7S0-SSOD August 11, 1997 CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED VIA FAX (714) 644-3139 AND U.S. MAIL Mr. Robert H. Burnham, Esq. City Attorney City of Newport Beach Post Office Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 9AN DIEGO 430 CAMINO DELRIO SOUTH SUITE 101 SANDIEGO, CALIFORNIA92106 TELEPHONE (619) 636.6100 FACSIM14M(6IS)636-610S Santa Ana REPLY TO 1058.004 OUR FILE NO. RECEIVED AUG 121997 C.•-I nI?ORNEY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Re: Draft of Opinion Letter re Relocation Benefits - Marinapark Dear Bob: What follows -is a draft of the substantive paragraphs I recommend you include in the "opinion letter" requested for the City Council meeting on August 25, 1997. As explained in my letter to you of September 17, 1996 and subsequently discussed between the two of us, relocation benefit issues are never clear-cut. Thus, what follows is my best "guesstimate", not an "opinion" as to this subject. Please note: I have an early A.M. flight tomorrow to Northern California and will not return to the office until approximately 11:00 A.M. on Wednesday. I will, however, be available by phone from approximately 1:00 - 5:00 tomorrow at the motel in Scotts Valley. Therefore, if you have questions, please feel free to contact me. The phone number for the Best Western Inn in Scotts Valley is (408) 438-6666 and the fax number is (408) 439-8752. Alternatively, you may leave a message for me at my office. The following are the paragraphs I suggest you use. (Remember: You will look at the Mello Act issues.) For the reasons outlined below, I do not believe the City is obligated to pay relocation benefits to Marinapark "residents. 1 Robert H. Burnham, Esq. August 11, 1997 Page 2 Government Code §65863.7 is the key statutory provision regarding. change of use relocation benefits requirements. This statute requires the City to consider providing relocation benefits to mitigate any adverse impact of the change of use on the ability of the residents to find adequate housing in another mobilehome park. However, this statute also gives the City discretion to determine that no mitigation measures, including relocation payments, are required. In any event, the statute also provides that the mitigation measures "... shall not exceed the reasonable costs of relocation." As the Council is aware, in 1985, the City and all of the Marinapark residents entered into a lease which provides that Marinapark may cease operating as a mobilehome park on or after March 15, 2000. The lease further provides that in exchange for the City agreeing to: maintain the property as a mobilehome park until that date, only charging a below -market, moderate rent with limited rent increases and other consideration, the City would not be required to pay any relocation benefits. Although I understand certain residents are now claiming the lease is not enforceable, I disagree. Further, even if the residents' lease commitments are not enforceable, the City is not required to make relocation payments. This results because of the above -referenced Government Code section which gives the City discretion to provide or withhold mitigation measures and to determine what those measures are. In exercising this discretion, the City may find that since the residents actually received the lease's benefits, this is sufficient. In sum, since the City actually bestowed substantial benefits, on the residents, it does not matter whether the residents' lease commitments are contractually enforceable. Even though not required, the City may wish to consider providing residents at the appropriate time with information which will assist them in relocating their mobilehomes. Although the above is fully supported by existing law, since Marinapark will not change its use until on or after March 15, 2000, there is always a possibility new ,statutes or appellate decisions may affect these opinions. LI Robert H. Burnham, Esq. August 11, 1997 Page 3 ' As always, thank you for allowing UR C. CBS:ame Enclosures 001058\004\b=nh=.1tr the opportunity to assist. SWANSON AND GIESER SAN DIEGO C. BRENT SWAN90N 438 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH THOMAS M. GIESER ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE101 APROFEESIONALCORPORATION SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92108 ROBERT G. WILLIAMSON. JR. TELEPHONE (619)686.6100 ELAINE S.ALSTON 4 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE FACSIMILE(619)686.6105 SUITE 200 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707-5770 REPLY TO c;I.,+a Ana TELEPHONE (714)755-3500 �y FACSIMILE (714)755-3505 R E' V OUR FILE N0.__---1-Q4 $ . SEP 18 1996 September 17,, 1996 CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ATTORNEY -CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES Mr. Robert H. Burnham, Esq. City Attorney City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Re: Change of Use Issues - Marina Park Dear Bob: The enclosed has been prepared at the request of Peggy Ducey. Because of its very sensitive nature, I am forwarding it to you alone so that you may distribute it to Peggy and others you deem appropriate within the City with the appropriate "attorney client" and "attorney work product" privileged notations to protect its confidentiality. With regard to the enclosed, also please note the following. This document should be treated with the utmost sensitivity. It summarizes the legal and practical issues I anticipate the City will encounter in changing the use at Marina Park. In many instances, it discusses issues which, in my experience, the residents and their attorneys are unaware of and will likely never "figure out". Because of its sensitivity, the enclosed is obviously not suitable to just be handed -to anyone in the City. If it is, significant damage to the City and others will occur. (If you believe some portions of the enclosed are too sensitive, please let me know and I will edit them out.) As it will be necessary for you to provide the non -sensitive information to certain staff, I have also enclosed a word processing disk for you to more readily "edit out" these portions for distribution. Because of 'the substantial risk litigation will result, I have taken a reasonably conservative approach throughout this letter. Be assured, however, that my conservatism has been well -thought out and is based on our firm's practical experience in the on -going Treasure Island change of use and other changes of use we have managed for other clients. If you wish to take a more aggressive position on one or more of these issues, please advise and I will provide you with additional alternatives. I Robeft H. Burnham September 17, 1996 Page 2 Note: This has been the proverbial "bear of a project" and has consumed twice, the time I estimated; time I have written off as I want to maintain excellent relations with you and Peggy Ducey. I also strongly urge that consideration be given to retaining our firm on an on -going basis to assist you and the City. Even with all of the detailed information I have provided, there remains literally dozens of legal and practical issues and nuances which will inevitably have to be dealt with during the course of the change of use. Resolving them to the City's advantage without our firm's expertise is, in my opinion, most unlikely. (Had the owner of Treasure Island consulted us at the outset, I believe their now "six -figure" legal bill would have been substantially reduced and they would have avoided many of the practical problems they have experienced.) Before closing, please keep one other thing in mind. The basic reason I have used a non -legalese formatting approach and spent a substantial amount of time discussing both legal and practical issues is I assume much of the day- to-day work will not be performed or supervised by you, but by others in the City with little or no experience. Therefore, I have tried to write much of this letter for that audience, much the same as I would if I were discussing these issues with one of our park owner clients. Realistically, if the two of us can spend an hour or two sorting out the basic, threshold legal issues, then have someone like Peggy Ducey assist in preparing a basic plan, the process will be far simpler than might appear at first blush from the length of this letter. As I know you will have questions, I'd suggest that once you have had the time to quickly read through this letter and focus on the essential issues, the two of us should get together for breakfast or lunch and preliminarily discuss the -next -step. To assist you, I particularly recommend that you focus on my discussion of the first issue under the title "MOBILEHOME RESIDENCY LAW NOTICE REQUIREMENTS" re: the threshold requirements relating to the notices which are required. The other se ion of primary importance is the one under the heading "GOVERIRIENT CODE WOCATION BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS". C. CBS:lal 001058\b=nh=.1tr GIESER N 6 C. BRENT SWANSON THOMAS M. GIESER ROBERT G. W ILLIAMSON. JR. ELAINE S. ALSTON SWANSON AND GIESER ATTORNEYS AT LAW A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 4 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE SUITE 200 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707.5770 TELEPHONE (714)755-3500 FACSIMILE 1714) 755-3505 SAN DIEGO 436 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH SUITE 101 SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA92109 TELEPHONE (619)686.6100 FACSIMILE (619)666.6103 REPLY TO OUR FILE NO CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ATTORNEY -CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGED 0 VAJr r A r CHANGE OF USE > TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SUMMARY OF ASSIGNMENT REGARDING BASIC ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO BASIC ISSUES . . . . . . . 1 BASIC CHANGE OF USE CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 2 BASIC FACTS FAVORING THE CITY'S POSITION . • . . . . . 3 SUMMARY OF BASIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CHANGE OF USE PLAN •USE•OF 4 ISSUE:DEFINING THE NEW THE PROPERTY. 4 ISSUE:AN EARLY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS• IMPOSED• ON THE CITY TO EFFECT THE CHANGE OF USE IS CRITICAL. . . 4 ISSUE:IF THE EXISTING USE OF THE PROPERTY IS IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW, THE LEGAL AND PRACTICAL RAMIFICATIONS SHOULD BE DETERMINED NOW. 4 ISSUE:DEFINING THE CITY'S POSITION AS TO RELATED "NON -LEGAL", PRACTICAL ISSUES AT THE EARLIEST•POSSIBLE DATE IS ALSO CRITICAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ISSUE:DEFINING HOW AND WHO IS TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE RESIDENTS IS EQUALLY CRITICAL. . . . • 5 ISSUE: PROTECTING THE COUNCIL AND STAFF FROM UNNECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF TIME AND*INVOLVEMENT. . . . . . . . . . 5 THE LIMITATIONS OF THIS LETTER AND ITS RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . 5 STATUTORY CHANGE OF USE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . 6 MOBILEHOME RESIDENCY LAW NOTICE REQUIREMENTS 6 ISSUE:THE NEW USE OF THE PROPERTY IS THE THRESHOLD ISSUE WHICH WILL DETERMINE WHICH OF THE -NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF MRL 5798.56(g) APPLY TO MARINA PARR. . . . . . . . . 6 ISSUE:WHEN IS THE 15 DAY NOTICE REQUIRED? • 9 ISSUE:WHEN DO THE 12 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY?DOES• THE LEASE SATISFY THE 12 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS? 10 ISSUE:WHEN DO THE 6 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY? • 10 ISSUE:WHEN DO THE "PROPOSED HOMEOWNER" NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ISSUE:WHEN DOES THE TERMINATION OF TENANCY NOTICE REQUIRED BY MRL 5798.56(g)(4) HAVE TO BE GIVEN? 12 GOVERNMENT CODE RELOCATION BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . 13 ISSUE:DOES GC 565863.7 APPLY TO THE CITY? • 13 ISSUE:ARE THE RELOCATION BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THE LEASE SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS? •. . 13 ISSUE:IS THE CITY REQUIRED TO PREPARE AND CONSIDER THE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED BY GC 565863.7? •• 15 ISSUE:ISSUES AS TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE LEASE BECAUSE THE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORT WAS NOT PREPARED WHEN THE LEASE WAS SIGNED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 ISSUE:SHOULD THE CITY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RELOCATION BENEFITS IN THE FORM OF INFORMATION AND OTHER ASSISTANCE? . . 17 ISSUE:MAY THE COUNCIL DELEGATE ANY OF ITS DUTIES REGARDING THE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORT? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING NOTICES . . . . 18 PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS . . . • . . . . . . • . . • •THE 18 i�SSUE:HOW ARE THE REQUIREDNOTICES TO BESERVED ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESIDENTS? . . 18 ISSUE:SERVICE OF OTHER REQUIRED NOTICES ON THIRD PARTIES. 20 ISSUE:WHO SHOULD PREPARE THE NOTICES? . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 ISSUE:AS TO OTICES WHICH MAY OR ARE REOIRED TO BE MAILED, SHOULD REGULAR, FIRST-CLASS, CERTIFIED OR REGISTERED MAIL BE USED? . . 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ISSUE:WHICH ADDRESSES FOR THE RESIDENTS SHOULD THE CITY USE WHEN MAILING NOTICES? ••. . . . . . . . . • 21 ISSUE:HOW ARE RECORDS OF THE SERVICEOF MAILED NOTICES TO BE KEPT? . . . 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ISSUE:HOW ARE RECORDS OF THE SERVICE OF NOTICES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE SERVED PER PARAGRAPH 23 OF THE LEASE AND CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1162 TO BE KEPT? . . . . 22 GENERAL COMMUNICATION ISSUES ••. . . . . 22 ISSUE:SHOULD NOTICES BE GIVEN EVEN WHEN NOT CLEARLY REQUIRED BY STATUTE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 SUPPLEMENTAL MEMOS AND COMMUNICATIONS. WITH RESIDENTS . 23 ISSUE:SHOULD A SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO BE GIVEN TO THE RESIDENTS IN THE NEAR FUTURE REMINDING THEM OF THE CHANGE IN USE? . 23 ISSUE: ADDITIONAL MEMO TO PROSPECTIVE BUYERS AND NEW• RESIDENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 ISSUE:SHOULD THE CITY MEET WITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSOCIATION?' . . 24 ISSUE:THE AUTHORITY OF THE RESIDENTS' BOARD OF DIRECTORS. • 24 ISSUE: PROCEDURES FOR MEETINGS WITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE RESIDENTS AS A WHOLE SHOULD BR ESTABLISHED WELL IN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ADVANCE. . . . . . . 25 ISSUE:AUDIO AND VIDEO TAPE RECORDINGS OF MEETINGS. . . . 25 ISSUE:THE RESIDENTS AND THE NEWS MEDIA. . 26 ISSUE:OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND NEWS MEDIA EXECUTIVES SHOULD BE BRIEFED IN ADVANCE AND KEPT INFORMED BY THE CITY OF ITSPLANS. • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 ISSUE:MASS MEETINGS WITHRESIDENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 ISSUE:GENERAL RESIDENT COMMUNICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . 27 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES . . . • •PARK •MANAGER• •THE 27 ISSUE:TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD THE AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY BE UTILIZED IN THE CHANGE OF USE PROCESS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 ISSUE:A PLAN NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED FOR THE PHYSICAL REMOVAL OF MOBILEHOMES FROM MARINA PARK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM OTHER CHANGES OF USE . . . 28 ISSUE:COMMON CLAIM BY RESIDENTS: SINCE THE CITY IS•MONTHS OR YEARS AWAY FROM ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING THE NEW USE OF THE PROPERTY, RESIDENTS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO STAY UNTIL IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR THEM TO VACATE. • 28 ISSUE: ESTABLISHING A CLEAR AND CONCISE TIMELINE AS TO ALL ACTIONS THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO TAKE IS ALSO CRITICAL. 29 ISSUE:THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE MOBILEHOMES 29 ISSUE:THE CITY SHOULD ANTICIPATE THE RESIDENTS WILL•PROPOSE THEY BE ALLOWED TO PURCHASE MARINA PARK. • 29 ISSUE:THE CITY SHOULD ALSO ANTICIPATE THE RESIDENTS WILL PROPOSE THAT THE PRESENT LEASE BE EXTENDED. 30 ISSUE:THE PRESENT "NO SUBLETTING" PROHIBITION SHOULD BE RE- EVALUATED TO DETERMINE IF ALLOWING SUBLETTING WILL \. ENHANCE THE CITY'S POSITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 NON-BINDIN6,MEDIATION AND OTHER PREVENTATIVE LAW MEASURES . . . . . 31 ISSUE: PROTRACTED AND EXPENSIVE LITIGATION TYPICALLY RESULTS FROM CHANGE OF USE BECAUSE THE RESIDENTS BELIEVE THEY HAVE A MERITORIOUS LAWSUIT AND THEY ARE NOT DISCOURAGED BY OBJECTIVE ADVICE FROM THEIR ATTORNEYS. . . . . . . 31 CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 u C. BRENT SWANSON THOMAS M. GIESER ROSERT G. W ILLIAMSON, JR. ELAINE S. ALSTON SWANSON AND GIESER ATTORNEYS AT LAW APROF SIONALCORPORATON 4 HUTTON CENTRE DRIVE SUITE 200 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92707-5770 TELEPHONE (714)755.3500 FACSIMILE (714) 755.3505 September 17, 1996 CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED SAN DIEGO 438 CAMINO DEL RIO SOUTH SUITE 101 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA92208 TELEPHONE (619)686.6100 FACSIMILE(619)866-6105 REPLY TO —Santa �a1a OUR FILE NO. i0r)O . ATTORNEY -CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGED Mr. Robert H. Burnham, Esq. City Attorney City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Re: Change of Use Issues - Marina Park Dear Mr. Burnham: INTRODUCTION SUMMARY OF ASSIGNMENT REGARDING BASIC ISSUES As requested by Mrs. Ducey of the City Manager's office, this letter addresses the following issues regarding the change of use of Marina Park: 1. Does the Lease between the City and the residents of Marina Park satisfy the Mobilehome Residency Law notice requirements for a change of use? 2. In the Lease, the residents agree that the benefits they are receiving from the•Lease are the only relocation benefits the City is required to provide. Are these provisions enforceable? Or, is the City required to provide additional relocation benefits or take other action? 3. if the answers to either of the above questions require additional action by the City, what is the City required to do to meet its legal obligations to the residents? 4. Our recommendations as to additional actions the City should take to ensure the successful change of use of Marina Park. \1 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO BASIC ISSUES Our responses to the first two basic issues are: 1. The change of use notifications in the Lease do not satisfy the notice requirements of the Mobilehome Residency Law. Therefore, the City is required to give additional notices to the residents. Robert H. Burnham, Esq* September 17, 1996 Page 2 2. Similarly, the relocation benefits provided by the Lease are adequate, and additional benefits are not required, the City is required to prepare the report and hold the hearing required by Government Code Section 65863.7. BASIC CHANGE OF USE CONSIDERATIONS This letter is based on our firm's 21 years of experience in specializing in representing mobilehome park owners and operators throughout Califor- nia. It draws on our current experience in representing the owner of the Treasure Island Mobilehome Park in Laguna Beach, a similar property to Marina Park which is now undergoing a change of use, and our experience in representing other clients in effecting the closures of their parks. Based on these experiences, the following considerations should be kept in mind when reading the balance of this letter. 1. Although paying strict attention to legal issues is essential, other, "practical issues" play an equal or greater role in determining the successful outcome of a change of use. It is for this reason that this letter places emphasis on both types of issues. 2. As the change of use involves the termination of tenancy of the residents of Marina Park, the law requires that notices and other actions comply with very technical legal requirements. If they do not, the entire change of use process will be more time consuming and expensive and, perhaps, even ultimately defeated. 3. The applicable notice requirements of the Mobilehome Residency Law are ambiguous in certain respects. Therefore, to avoid inadvertently creating a• lega-1 defect which could defeat the change of use, it is preferable to err on the side of conservatism in preparing and giving these notices. 4. Judges and juries often resolve ambiguities in the law and facts in favor of mobilehome residents, particularly where their tenancies are being terminated under the change of use statutes or relocation benefits are in issue. 5. To counter the above factors, the City must exercise extreme care both in terms of complying with the law and in demonstrating that the change -of use is in the best interests of the public as a whole. 6. The Marina Park residents are, in general, well-educated, sophisticated and financially well-off. Therefore, like the residents in the Treasure Island Mobilehome Park, they can be expected to offer substantial resistance to the change of use. 7. The quality of the legal advice residents typically receive in these situations is mediocre to poor. This is a reflection of the quality of the attorneys mobilehome residents typically retain. Therefore, the risks of litigation are increased.. (Litigation and related costs to the City have\ the potential of being several hundreds of thousands of dollars.) 8. It is inevitable that the residents will attempt to prevent the change of use by applying significant political pressure on the City. Robert H. Burnham, Esq* • September 17, 1996 Page 3 9. There is also a very high probability the residents will pursue litigation in an attempt to delay or prevent the change use. Even if the residents do not believe they can actually prevent the change of use, their goal is often to delay it for several years as they view this result to be in and of itself a "victory". 10. In my experience, the sooner the residents are persuaded that the change of use is inevitable and will occur when scheduled, the higher the probability they will accept it and not file a lawsuit. If delayed until 12 to 18 months before the March 15, 2000 deadline, the risks of litigation and other problems increase dramatically. The basic reasons are: A. If persuaded now, while there are still several years left for them to enjoy their mobilehomes, the residents may psychological- ly accommodate themselves to the inevitability of the change of use. B. At least some, perhaps a significant number of residents, will sell their mobilehomes while there is still time to realize some substantial resale value. Others may actually relocate. ' C.' Additionally, with several years left on the Lease, there will be less psychological and, therefore, less financial support among residents for litigation. Accordingly, statutes of limitation and other legal defenses available to the City are enhanced. D. The City has the opportunity to reinforce this acceptance of inevitability among the residents. BASIC FACTS FAVORING THE CITY'S POSITION The following are significant facts which, if used properly by the City, will not only support the change of use, but may also be used to discourage and, perhaps, prevent litigation: 1. Unlike many mobilehome parks where the resident demographics present a very sympathetic picture, I understand that the residents of Marina Park typically are well-educated, sophisticated and financially well-off. Contrary to the Lease requirements, many of them use Marina Park as a weekend, vacation home, not as their primary residence. 2. During the 15 year term of the Lease, the residents are charged below market rents have been charged for one of the finest residential communities in the entire United States. These below market rents have been provided by the City specifically in exchange for the residents' agreements to, both the March 15, 2000, change of use date and the City not being required to provide additional relocation benefits. 3. `. The Lease itself is very clear as to the agreements between the City and �he residents re: the date of the change of use and there being no requirement for additional relocation benefits. 4. The Lease also provides the residents 15 years in which to plan for the change of use and the relocation of themselves and their mobilehomes. Robeit H. Burnham, Esg0 September 17, 1996 Page 4 5. The new use of the property will be for the benefit for the public as a whole. 6. It has been my consistent advice and experience over the years that it is imperative for our clients to begin to plan and address the change'of use issues noted in this letter at the earliest possible date. If this is done, the probability that the residents will accept the inevitability of the change of use and litigation will be avoided increase substantially. By developing and implementing a detailed change of use plan now, not in a year or two, the City will realize significant benefits, and may also avoid hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation and other expenses. SUMMARY OF BASIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CHANGE OF USE PLAN If a well thought out change of use plan is developed now, before the Council or the City's staff begins, even on a preliminary basis, to deal with these issues and the residents, the odds of success increase very significantly. Therefore, and also to assist you and others in the City in an understanding of the details of this letter, the following summarizes my basic recommendations for the development by the City of a plan to effect the change of use. ISSUE: DEFINING THE NEW USE OF THE PROPERTY. RECOMMENDATIONS: Defining the specific new use of the property at the earliest possible date will also define other required actions. Even if a precise definition of the new use cannot be made immediately, defining it to the maximum extent possible now will be extremely helpful. ISSUE: AN EARLY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED ON THE CITY TO EFFECT THE CHANGE OF USE IS CRITICAL. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is my understanding that the City staff and Council plan in the very near future to begin to discuss basic issues regarding the change of use. Even if these discussions are not initiated by the City, it is clear the residents themselves will attempt to force the City to face these issues in the next few months. Even in the City's preliminary discussions, it is very easy for the Council or staff to make mistakes which will potentially create signifi- cant legal and practical problems. Therefore, it is imperative to use the guidance provided by this letter to define the legal requirements the City is obligated to meet so that the Council and staff may be fully informed. ISSUE: IF THE EXISTING USE OF THE PROPERTY IS IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW, THE LEGAL,AND PRACTICAL RAMIFICATIONS SHOULD BE DETERMINED NOW. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is my understanding that, because of inadvertence, the City may not have realized that for a number of years, existing law may have prohibited the City from using the property as a mobilehome park. If true, the effects, if any, on the change of use need to be determined immediately. Additionally, if true, it may be that this prohibited use of a Robert B. Burnham, Esq* September 17, 1996 Page 5 the property may be used as a decisive reason why the change of use must proceed'as scheduled. ISSUE: DEFINING THE CITY'S POSITION AS TO RELATED "NON -LEGAL", PRACTICAL ISSUES AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE IS ALSO CRITICAL. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is a certainty the residents will almost immediately begin to raise a number of peripheral issues. If these issues are not anticipated and well -reasoned responses developed now, there are substantial risks that legal problems may ultimately result. Even if this does not occur, the practical ramifications for the City, particularly the Council, are significant. For example, it is probable that the residents -will ask to negotiate an extension to the Lease or propose purchasing Marina Park. Or, they will want to discuss issues such as: the City purchasing their mobilehomes at or near their fair market values, their need for additional relocation benefits, it is "not fair" to make them move until the proverbial "bulldozers" are "ready to roll", etc. The residents will also begin questioning the Council and staff about issues which have not been defined and raise questions as to the legal validity of the change of use. In all probability, implicit or explicit threats of litigation will be made. The news media will also be contacted in an attempt to sway public opinion and exert political pressure on the Council. If anticipated and acted on now, all of these issues can be defined and responses developed which, in my experience, significantly benefit the City. ISSUE: DEFINING -HOW AND WHO IS TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE RESIDENTS IS EQUALLY CRITICAL. RECOMMENDATIONS: As a practical matter, it is impossible for the City to avoid substantial communications with the residents and the Board of Directors of their Association. Defining who in the City is to be responsible for these communications, what their authority is in terms of providing information and making commitments and other related issues is essential. Otherwise, substantial legal and practical issues and problems will develop. ISSUE: -PROTECTING THE COUNCIL AND STAFF FROM UNNECESSARY EXPENDITURES OF TIME AND INVOLVEMENT. RECOMMENDATIONS: I believe that if my recommendations are implemented, the amount of time and effort the Council in particular, and the staff in general, will expend on these issues will be substantially reduced. THE LIMITATIONS OF THIS LETTER AND ITS_ RECOMMENDATIONS Although\`there are a variety of other statutory requirements and considerations which will ultimately have a bearing on the change of use of Marina Park, I have limited my comments and recommendations in this letter to change of use issues found in the Mobilehome Residency Law and Government Code Section 65863.7. This- has been done for three basic reasons. First, these limitations are consistent with the assignment I -Robeit H. Burnham, Esq® • September 17, 1996 Page 6 received. Second, to avoid duplicating information already in your possession. Third, and most importantly, the applicability of other statutory requirements will, in many instances, depend on whether the present use of the property is statutorily permitted and will further be affected by the nature of the new use of the property after Marina Park is closed: STATUTORY CHANGE OF USE REQUIREMENTS The statutory requirements applicable to the change of use of any mobilehome park are found in the Mobilehome Residency Law (Civil Code sections 798, et. seq.) and the Government Code sections attached as Appendixes 1 and 2. A discussion of the applicability of these statutes to Marina Park follows. For ease of reference purposes, references to the Mobilehome Residency Law are noted "MRL" and as "GC" for references to the Government Code. MOBILEHOME RESIDENCY LAW NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MRL §5798.56(g) and (h) contain the specific change of use notice requirements the City is required to follow. For the reasons explained below, as the Lease does not satisfy these requirements, additional notices must be given to the residents. ISSUE: THE NEW USE OF THE PROPERTY IS THE THRESHOLD ISSUE WHICH WILL DETERMINE WHICH OF THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF MRL 5798.56(g) APPLY TO MARINA PARK. DISCUSSION• 1. To determine which of the various notice requirements of MRL 5798.56(g) apply, the threshold issues which must be determined is whether the new use of the property will require the City or another local governmental entity to issue any permits for the change of use. There is also the possibility that permits from the state or federal government are also required as a prerequisite to the permit to be issued by the City or another local governmental entity. 2-. There are three types of permits which may be required: First Type of Permit: If the City still has in effect the mobilehome park change of use/closure ordinance it enacted a number of years ago, all permits, approvals and other actions it requires must be complied with by the City. Unlike the other two types of permits discussed below, this must occur regardless of the new use the property is to be utilized for after Marina Park closes. \,Second Type of Permit: The second type of permit is typically the \most difficult for someone without a substantial amount of experience with the Mobilehome Residency Law to understand. It relates only to discretionary - not ministerial - permits which either the City or another local governmental entity may be required to issue as a prerequisite to the new the property is to be utilized for after Marina Park closes. (Permits required to be issued by the Robert H. Burnham, Esq# September 17, 1996 Page 7 State of California or the federal government do not affect the second type of permit except as discussed in paragraph C below. This is true because MRL §§798.56(g)(1) and (2) relate only to "local governmental permits". If, and I doubt this is true, such discre- tionary permits or permissions are also required by the County of Orange or another local governmental entity, then they too fall within the requirement of this second type of permit.) To aid in an understanding of this concept, which is essential to an understanding of the types of notices required, several examples are provided below. Example No. 1: If the new use of the property is, for example, to be simply a grassy or sand area which is an extension of the existing beach, I would assume that no discretionary permits or permissions would be required. Even if playground equipment, picnic tables and chairs, restroom facilities and the like were to be included, it would seem, at the most, that only a "ministerial" permit for their installation would be required. Such a use would be the least complicated and, therefore, the easiest for the City to implement and would require the less stringent notice requirements. Example No. 2: Let's assume, however, that the City plans to sell or lease the property for development as apartments, condomini- ums, or for a commercial use. If the planned project was, for example, an apartment complex, normally the developer would request the City to grant variances such as additionally density, less than the normal required number of parking places, etc. Therefore, the development plan would have to be submitted to the City and the necessary discretionary permits and permissions issued. Consequent- ly, the more rigorous notice requirements of the Mobilehome Residency Law would be applicable. A similar example to the last would be if a property were required to be re -zoned, .or a General Plan Amendment issued in order to permit the new use. Example No. 3: What does the City do if it is uncertain as to the new use the property will be utilized for after Marina Park is closed? In other words, the City says to the residents, in effect, that the City intends to allow the property to "lie fallow" and unused until it has sufficient time to sort out its various planning decisions and decide on the best ultimate use of the property. In such event, the less stringent notice requirements of the Mobilehome Residency Law apply. Unless the City can point to -very substantial reasons why the "lie fallow" approach is essential, I believe it presents substantial practical problems to proceeding with the change of use. For example, in both the Treasure Island Mobilehome Park and the Crystal Covh closures, the residents have argued that there is no practical reason why they should be required to vacate until there is an actual need.`to begin either the construction of the new project, or, in the case of the first example where the property is to be used for a "beach", until the property is actually put to the new use. Although seemingly these "practical" arguments should have no effect on a judge or jury, or otherwise affect other legal issues, I believe it .Robert H. Burnham, EsqV September 17, 1996 Page 8 is unrealistic to think they will not. Third Type of Permit: The third type of permit is one which must be granted by the County of Orange, another local governmental entity, the State of California or federal government as a necessary prerequisite to the closure of Marina Park and the new use the property is to be utilized for after Marina Park closes. Examples of permits of this type which may be required follow. Example No. 1: If the new use of the property were to be for apartments, condominiums, or commercial development, I would assume that Coastal Commission approval would be a necessary prerequisite before the City could issue its own discretionary permits. Example No. 2: As you are well aware, Government Code Sections 65590 requires, under certain circumstances that the conversion or demolition of existing residential dwelling units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income must be replaced by one means or another. Assuming that this statute applies to Marina Park, this would be another example of a non -local governmental permit which could be a prerequisite to the utilization of the property for another use. Note: Because the City of Laguna Beach enacted a very specific ordinance relating to the closure of the Treasure Island Mobilehome Park, the above permit requirements, were not applicable to that mobilehome park's closure. 3. As discussed in more detail below, as all of the actions, even the preliminary discussions of the City in conjunction with the change of use, are affected by the determination of the types of permits or permission which are required, it is essential that these issues be determined at the outset. 4. Until it is possible for the City to define the actual use the property will be utilized for after Marina Park is closed, I believe the City should initially proceed on the assumption that the more stringent 15 day and 6 months' notice requirements of MRL 9§798.56(g)(1) and (2) apply. 5. If no discretionary permits are required, only the 12 months' notice -required by the second paragraph of MRL 5798.56(g)(2) is clearly required. Nonetheless, as explained below, even if no discretionary permits are required, I recommend that the notices required by MRL SS 798.56(g)(1) and (3) also be given to avoid potential legal challenges. 6. If discretionary permits are required, then the 12 month notice in MRL 9798.56(g)(2) is not required. Instead, the required notices are: A. The 15 day notices required.by MRL §798.56(g)(1); and \\B. The 6 months' notice required by MRL §798.56(g)(2). This 6 months' notice may not be given until all of the discretionary permits required for a change of use have been issued. 7. Regardless of which of the notices noted above are required, I believe that in all instances the notice to proposed homeowner and the -�2obert H. Burnham, Esg1 September 17, 1996 Page 9 termination of tenancy notice required by MRL 9§798.56(g)(3) and (4) are required. (Although arguably the notice required by subsection (g)(4) is only required where the 15 day and 6 months' notices apply, and it is not applicable when only the 12 months' notice is required to be given, my recommendation is to err on the side of conservatism.) 8. The applicability of the notice required by in MRL 5798.56(h) will be discussed later in this letter in conjunction with GC §65863.7. RECOMMENDATIONS: I believe the City should initially proceed on the assumption that the more stringent 15 day and 6 months' notice require- ments apply. Therefore, I recommend giving all of the following notices: A. The 15 day notices; B. The 12 months' notice; C. The 6 months' notice if later events indicate that discretionary permits are required; D. The notice to proposed homeowners; and E. The termination of tenancy notice after the proposed change actually occurs. A discussion of each of the above notices follows. ISSUE: WHEN IS THE 15 DAY NOTICE REQUIRED? RECOMMENDATIONS •- 1. As the City is the local governmental body referred to in the applicable Mobilehome Residency Law and Government Code sections, I believe there is a risk that any actions or discussions by the City in a public meeting will be interpreted as potentially falling within the 15 day notice requirements. In fact, based on prior experience, I can almost guarantee the residents and their attorneys will take this position. Therefore, I would give a 15 day notice each and every time there is any public meeting by the Council or any other City agency to discuss anything having to do with the change of use. 2. Note: As discussed below, the report required by GC 965863.7 is required to be given to residents at the same time they are given the first required notice. Therefore, if a 15 day notice is required, the report must arguably be prepared prior to the City holding any public meeting in which the change of use is discussed. The difficulty, of course, in preparing the report may be this: If the initial public meeting(s) of the Council or other agencies of the City is to discuss and sort out the "discretionary permits" issues discussed above, it may well be that 'there are substantive reasons why the report cannot be prepared and deliv6red with the 15 day notice for that meeting(s). Therefore, it may be appropriate to make a notation to this effect in the 15 day notice or otherwise establish the substantiating facts in the public record at the time the preliminary meeting(s) are held. ' .ltobert H. Burnham, EsqW September 17, 1996 Page 10 ISSUE: WHEN DO THE 12 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY? DOES THE LEASE SATISFY THE 12 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS? 1: The Lease provides that the change of use is to occur on or about March 16, 2000. Therefore, the 12 months' notice must be given a minimum of 12 months before that date. 2. Does the Lease satisfy the 12 months' notice requirements? As discussed later in this letter in the section regarding the Government Code requirements, MRL 5798.56(h) requires that the report required by the Government Code be given to the residents at the same time they are given the first of the notices required by MRL 5798.56(g). Therefore, as this report has not yet been prepared, the Lease cannot satisfy the 12 months' notice requirements. Further, the second paragraph of MRL 5798.56(g)(2) requires that the 12 months' notice " disclose and describe in detail the nature of the change of use."; something which the Lease does not do. (Remember: MRL §9798.19 and 798.77 prohibit existing or new residents from waiving their rights to any of the Mobilehome Residency Law's requirements.) RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. For the reasons discussed later in this letter, a memo, not a formal notice, should be given immediately to the residents confirming the City's intention to close Marina Park. 2. If it is determined that discretionary permits are not required, a 12 months' notice should be given at the earliest possible date. In other words, I would not wait until just 12 months before March 16, 2000. Instead, the earlier the notice is given, the better position I believe the City will be in. ISSUE: WHEN DO THE 6 MONTHS' NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY? DISCUSSION• 1. As noted, the 6 months' notice is only required to be given where discretionary permits or permission approving the new use of the property are required to be given by a local governmental entity. If a 6 months' notice is required, the following issues may affect the timing of these discretionary permits. 2. Although there is nothing in the Mobilehome Residency Law in general or GC §65863.7, which prohibits the City's issuance of discretion- ary permits or the determination of relocation benefits well in advance of the Lease deadline of March 16, 2000, it is conceivable the attorneys for the residents will argue that a determination of the new use of the property\in the next 6 to 12 months would be premature because the City would not\have sufficient information on which to base its decision. 3. Because of the above, these and other similar issues need to be anticipated in defining the new use of the property and documented accordingly in the City's records. 'Robert H. Burnham, EsCAWY at September 17, 1996 Page 11 4. The practical considerations are whether the City benefits more from delaying the issuance of any discretionary permits. One possible advantage to delay is that in the intervening years, the City could follow a program whereby the residents would be persuaded that the change of use was inevitable. Therefore, if the actual issuance of the discretionary permits is delayed, the residents may be less likely to sue. On the other hand, if the City is serious about closing Marina Park on or about March 16, 2000, the prompt issuance of any required discre- tionary permits is, in my opinion, of substantial advantage. This is because of three factors. The residents may not realize the import of the issuance of the permits so they do not timely file a legal challenge. Or, because several years still remain before closure, the residents, for psychological reasons, may not pursue litigation at all. Finally, as any litigation will likely take several years to resolve, there is an advantage to having it begin as early as possible. RECOMMENDATIONS: Assuming that the new use of the property is to be for the general purpose of public recreation and there are not substantial arguments that the planning and permit issuance process should be delayed, I recommend proceeding promptly because: 1. The longer the process is delayed, the more likely litigation and other problems are to occur. 2. In my experience litigation risks are diminished if, after issuance of discretionary permits, residents still have several years left on their leases. ISSUE: WHEN DO THE "PROPOSED HOMEOWNER" NOTICE REQUIREMENTS APPLY? DISCUSSION: MRL §798.56(g)(3) requires the City to give "proposed homeowners (e.g. prospective buyers and other new residents) notice prior to the beginning of their tenancy that the City is proceeding to issue any required discretionary permits for the new use of the property. Additionally, if all of those discretionary permits have been given and the change of use approved, notice must also be given. Note: The report required by GC 565863.7 must, at least arguably, also be given to proposed homeowners at the same time as they are given the first of these notices. RECOMMENDATIONS: The following notices should be given to all prospective buyers and new residents: - 1. Although the City is not, presently required to give these "prospective homeowner" notices because it has not started the discretion- ary permit process contemplated by this notice requirement I believe that a memo, not a formal notice, should be promptly developed and given to all prospective homeowners. This memo should not only identify the March 16, 2000 closure date; it should also. specifically address the issue of the di.minishbd values of the mobilehomes they are buying, the absence of relocation benefits and other basic consequences of the change of use. The memo should also include an acknowledgment of their understanding and agreement to all of the items in the memo. 2. The other new memo applicable to existing residents, which is discussed in detail later in this letter, should also be promptly given to ;Robert H. Burnham, Es* •� September 17, 1996 Page 12 all existing residents. 3. Prospective homeowners should also be given a copy of all of the 15 day notices which have been issued as of the date they first make an application or even indicate an interest in applying for tenancy. As often there is a period of several weeks or months between the initial contact with a prospective homeowner and their actually closing escrow on the purchase of a mobilehome, they too should be given notice of any subsequent 15 day notices which are issued during this intervening period of time. Further, once the discretionary permit process in completed and the change of use approved, notice of this fact as well must be given to all prospective homeowners, including those who are just waiting for their escrows to close. 4. As I readily recognize how difficult it is to keep track of prospective homeowners and provide them with the required notices, I recommend that large signs advising prospective homeowners of the change of use be promptly prepared and prominently displayed in the following locations at Marina Park: at all entrances and exits, both inside and outside of the Park Manager's office and at other locations where one would logically expect to see such a notice if one wanted to be certain that prospective homeowners were advised of this information. 5. There is the additional practical problem of assisting the Park Manager so that he or she knows which notices he is to give to prospective homeowners and how records are to be kept to prove that this has been accomplished. This is true because these issues can be confusing and they are often the subject of a legal challenge. Therefore, appropriate procedures and assistance to the Park Manager should be developed immediately. - ISSUE: WHEN DOES THE TERMINATION OF TENANCY NOTICE REQUIRED BY MRL S798.56(g)(4) HAVE TO BE GIVEN? DISCUSSION• 1. The ambiguity of MRL 9798.56(g)(4) is that it is unclear what is meant by " ..if the proposed change actually occurs." For example, the notice requirement of MRL 9798.56(g)(4) may be interpreted as only applying when a 6 months' notice is required. I believe, however, an argument can be made that it is also required when a 12 months' notice is given. Therefore, I would give this notice even if only a 12 months', not a 6 months', notice is given to the residents. 2. Because the normal termination of tenancy notice period in the Mobilehome Residency Law is 60 days, I believe this is the minimum time period applicable to this notice. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. \Regardless of whether a 6 months' or 12 months' notice is required, \I would also give this additional notice. 2. To err on the side of conservatism, I would also give a minimum of 6 months, not just 60 days notice. :Robekt H. Burnham, EsgW •' September 17, 1996 Page 13 GOVERNMENT CODE RELOCATION BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS GC §65863.7 generally requires that when a mobilehome park change of use occurs, consideration must be given to providing residents with relocation benefits. The Lease provides that the residents have agreed to waive all rights'to relocation benefits in return for various benefits given to them by the Lease. ISSUE: DOES GC S65863.7 APPLY TO THE CITY? DISCUSSION: Yes. Under the broadly worded provision of GC 565863.7(i). ISSUE: ARE THE RELOCATION BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THE LEASE SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS? DISCUSSION: Although the residents will inevitably make the argument that the relocation benefits of the Lease are inadequate and do not satisfy the statutory requirements, for the following reasons I believe the City has, by far, the stronger position: 1. GC §65863.7(e) provides: "The legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, shall review the report prior to any change of use, and may require as a condition of the change, the person or the entity to take steps to mitigate any adverse impact of the conversion, closure or cessation of use on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park. The steps required to be taken to mitigate shall not to exceed the reasonable cost of relocation." [Emphasis added.] 2. GC §65863.7(i) provides that when, as here, the City is the one responsible for the closure, the City: "...is required to take steps to mitigate the adverse impact of the change as may be required in subdivi- sion (e)." [Emphasis added.] 3-. GC §§65863.7(e) and (i) are both discretionary in that they do not absolutely require the City to actually provide for mitigation measures or the payment of relocation benefits. But, GC 665863.7(a) does 4. \Although GC §65863.7(e) limits the mitigation measures to "the reasonable\.cost of relocation", this is the subject which is always in substantial dispute when a mobilehome park is closed. Essentially park owners argue that "reasonable costs of relocation" are limited to the tear -down, transportation and set-up of the mobilehome in a new location, payment of the residents' living expenses for a period of 2-4 days while .Robert H. Burnham, EsgO_ September 17, 1996 Page 14 their mobilehome is being relocated and installed at the new site, transportation expense for the residents, personal household belongings which cannot be transported inside of the mobilehome and the cost of permits or other expenses related to the installation of the mobilehome at the new site. Residents argue that "reasonable costs of relocation" encompass a much broader, more expensive spectrum. In the typical case, particularly involving a park such as Marina Park, the residents will argue that since their mobilehomes cannot be moved to comparable sites and, therefore, the value of their mobilehomes diminish dramatically, the City is obligated to pay the differential between the "on -site" value of the mobilehomes and the substantially diminished value those mobilehomes will have when they are located in another park or sold to a buyer to be moved out of Marina Park. 5. The legislative history re: the definition of "reasonable cost of relocation" is of little or no assistance to either park owners or residents. 6. It is quite common for ordinances passed by other cities and counties to .require relocation benefits substantially in excess of the above limitations park owners argue are the maximum amount required. A variety of mitigation measures designated to assist residents find new housing or sites for their mobilehomes are also typically included. These facts will also be used by the residents to argue for additional assistance from the City. 7. If the residents sue the City challenging the change of use, it is inevitable that they will challenge the adequacy of the relocation benefits. These challenges will range the whole gamut of human imagina- tion including such things as the following: A. The relocation benefits do not comply with the statutory requirement. B. Unfair Lease provisions were forced on the residents by the City. RECOM)ONDATIONS: As explained below, I believe the City is required to prepare the relocation impact report required by the statute. The City is also required to consider the adequacy of the relocation benefits provided by the Lease. Therefore, the following information must be promptly prepared so it may be included in the report: 1. A study should be done quantifying the benefits the residents have received from the below market rents provided by the Lease. Normally, this is accomplished by identifying rental rates charged by comparable parks during each of the years the Lease has been in effect and comparin4' them to rents charged Marina Park residents. Often an appraiser or other Expert experienced in mobilehome parks is required to be utilized in order �o establish "comparability" and also to gather the necessary data to substantiate the differences in rent between Marina Park and the other comparable parks selected for the study. 'Robert H. Burnham, Esq•. • September 17, 1996 Page 15 2. Depending on what the initial comparable rent study shows, it may also be advisable to have an expert "capitalize" or otherwise translate the rent savings into an additional value which residents realized from the sales of their mobilehomes because of the below market rents. 3. There are also other theories on which the benefits of the Lease can be translated by an expert into values which may be used to demon- strate that the City has more than satisfied any conceivable requirement for relocation benefits. 4. Mitigation measures to assist residents in finding new sites for their mobilehome and other housing also need to be included in the report. 5. The costs of relocation, the availability of other mobilehome spaces to relocate to and other similar information must also be developed. Note: As I have had substantial experience in working with rent studies and in the preparation of relocation impact reports, I recommend consideration be given to utilizing our firm to supervise the preparation of the above information and the report. ISSUE: IS THE CITY REQUIRED TO PREPARE AND CONSIDER THE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED BY GC §65863.7? DISCUSSION: Yes, for the following reasons: 1. As noted above, GC §65863.7(i) places the responsibility for the preparation of the report on the City. 2. GC 565863.7(a) provides: "...the person or entity proposing the change in use shall file a report on the impact of the conversion.... the report shall address the availability of adequate replacement housing in mobilehome parks and relocation costs." [Emphasis added.] 3. Although the provisions of GC §65863.7(b) seem to imply by the use of the words "...if any,...." that a hearing on the relocation impact report is not required, I believe that a common sense interpretation of the statue as a whole requires the conclusion that the City is required to hold a -public hearing to consider the adequacy of the relocation benefits. 4. For example, GC §65863.7(b) provides that: "...a park resident may request and shall have the right to a hearing before the legislative body on the sufficiency of the report." Further, GC §65863.7(e) provides: "The legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, shall review the report, prior to any change of use...." [Emphasis added.] 5. More importantly, I cannot conceive of a Court not 'holding that the City`•., is required to both prepare the relocation impact report and consider it at a public hearing where the residents are allowed to argue as to the `inadequacy of the findings and the relocation benefits. 'Robert H. Burnham, EsgW. September 17, 1996 Page 16 ISSUE: ISSUES AS TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE LEASE BECAUSE THE IMPACT REPORT WAS NOT PREPARED WHEN THE LEASE WAS SIGNED. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 1: MRL §798.56(h) provides: "The report required pursuant to subdivision (b) and (i) of Section 65863.7 of the Government Code shall be (Emphasis added.] 2. The above reference to subdivision (g) is to letter. In other words, subsection (g) encompasses the 15 day notice, 12 months' notice, 6 months' notice and the notice to proposed homeowners. Therefore, the above subsection (h) makes it clear that the City is required to prepare the relocation impact report and deliver it to all existing and prospective residents. This raises the following issues: A. Since the relocation impact report has not been prepared, it cannot be argued that the Lease provides the required 12 months' change of use notice discussed earlier in this letter. If the Lease were that notice, then it is defective because the relocation impact report was not given to the residents at the time they signed the Lease. B. A hearing on the relocation i before either the 12 months' or 6 months Mobilehome Residency Law may be given. 565863.4(b) and MRL §798.56(g)(1), a 15 before the Council hearing to consider the The report must either be attached to that to the residents in advance of the 15 day mpact report is required notices required by the As required by both GC day notice must be given relocation impact report. 15 day notice or delivered notice. C. If more than one Council hearing on the relocation impact report occurs, a common event, then the 15 day notice must be given in each instance. If the report is modified, it too must be given to the residents either with the new 15 day notice or in advance of the new 15 day notice which notifies residents of the additional Council hearing. 3-. Because of the above, it is probable the residents' attorneys will argue that the absence of proper notice to the residents as required by the Mobilehome Residency Law and the relocation impact report required by the Government Code renders the residents' contractual commitments in the Lease void or voidable. If these issues are raised, I recommend they be addressed as follows: A. That the notice requirements of the Mobilehome Residency Law were not applicable at the time the Lease was signed because the closure date is not until March 15, 2000. 1 `B. The City can also argue that by its now preparing the report and holding the hearings required by the Government Code, it is still satisfying all statutory requirements. Therefore, even if the residents are correct and the Lease provisions re: relocation benefits are not enforceable, -there have been sufficient findings to Robert H. Burnham, Esc1' •! September 17, 1996 (� Page 17 demonstrate that adequate relocation benefits have been provided by the City. Coupled with this argument would be normal contract and equitable arguments in favor of the City for enforcement of the provisions of the Lease. 4: Note: If, at the time the Lease was negotiated, the City did not have evidence that the rents charged by the Lease were "below market" or otherwise beneficial to the residents, it is not unlikely the residents' attorneys will argue that the absence of any objective evidence results in the residents' commitment to accept the benefits of the Lease in lieu of other relocation benefits is void or voidable. If these arguments are made, they may be addressed as follows: A. The same answer as noted in paragraph 3.B immediately above is certainly appropriate. B. As the Lease only allows rent increases based on the Consumer Price Index, this too may be used as a substantial argument that rent increases were very minimal compared to those typically required by other mobilehome parks. C. The City's file should also be examined as it is not unlikely that there is information in it to indicate why the rents at the beginning of the Lease were considered low to moderate. It is also likely there is a evidence in that file that these issues were thoroughly discussed and negotiated with the residents at the time the Lease was signed. ISSUE: SHOULD THE CITY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RELOCATION BENEFITS IN THk FORM OF INFORMATION AND OTHER -ASSISTANCE? RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. Although GC §65863.7 makes the providing of these types of relocation benefits optional, the practical problem the City will ultimately face is that it cannot leave the residents to their own devices in terms of how they are to physically relocate their mobilehomes. Instead the City will have to provide reasonable information and assistance. 2-. Because the recession has created an abnormally high vacancy rate in Southern California parks, it may be that in the near term there will be an interest by some residents to relocate their mobilehomes to take advantage of this unusual phenomenon. In fact, this is something the City should consider urging on the residents as an option which they should immediately begin to examine. Again, if left to their own devices, the residents will likely not pursue this option unless the City provides them with the necessary information. ISSUE: MAY THE COUNCIL DELEGATE ANY OF ITS DUTIES REGARDING THE RELOCATION IMPACT REPORT? DISCUSSION: Although GC §65863.7(d) mandates that residents may have a hearing before the Council on the sufficiency of the. report, GC §65863.7(e) allows the Council to delegate the review of the report to an advisory agency. ;Robert H. Burnham, Esq• September 17, 1996 Page 18 RECOMMENDATIONS: As the adequacy of the relocation impact report and relocation benefits is a complex and emotional issue, consideration should be given to the appointment of an advisory, "Blue Ribbon Committee" to perform these functions and provide recommendations to the Council. For example, an advisory committee similar to the "Base Closure Commission" used by, the federal government for determining the closure of armed forces bases could be utilized to good effect for the following reasons: 1. An impartial advisory committee would have adequate time to deliberate and make an objective evaluation. 2. By the Council acting on the recommendations of its advisory committee, potential legal issues could at least be mitigated and, perhaps, avoided entirely. 3. Demands on the Council's time and resources would be minimized. 4. The "negative" to the above would be charges by the residents that the Council was evading its responsibilities. Further, if these duties are delegated, there is a greater risk a new legal issue will be created and asserted in any litigation which may occur. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING NOTICES Discussed below are a variety of other legal requirements and practical considerations regarding the notices the City is required to give the residents. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS A common, fruitful area for litigation concerns procedural requirements regarding the notices the City is required to give the residents. As it is very easy to make mistakes which can be extremely costly and may be used to defeat or delay the change of use, the following are important considerations: ISSUE: HOW ARE THE REQUIRED NOTICES TO BE SERVED ON THE RESIDENTS? 1. Although the applicable Mobilehome Residency Law and Government Code sections allow many of the required notices to be served by regular, first class mail, paragraph 23 "NOTICES" of the Lease provides that notices required by the Lease or by the Mobilehome Residency Law and the Government Code be served by the City on -the residents by the same procedures required by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1162. This statute and the Lease require that: The City first attempt to personally serve the residents at their mobilehomes. If the residents are not at home, the notice may be left with a person of suitable age and discretion who is occupyingA,the mobilehome. If no one can be found, then the notice is to be posted\on the mobilehome in a conspicuous place and a duplicate copy mailed to the residents. Therefore the Lease imposes notice requirements "Robert H. Burnham, Es# •� September 17, 1996 Page 19 2. Paragraph 13 of the Lease, "CHANGES IN MARINA PARK RULES AND REGULATIONS, PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES", provides that the City may amend or modify certain provisions of the Lease. As the notice requirements in paragraph 23 of the Lease are substantially more burdensome than those allowed by MRL §798.14 which permits at least some of the'required notices to be mailed, consideration should be given to exercising the City's rights under paragraph 13. Although there is a danger that residents may successfully argue that such an amendment to the Lease was invalid, substituting notice provisions permitted by the Mobilehome Residency Law would seem, on balance, to overcome such an argument. The real issue, however, is whether the potential cost of RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. If the City determines not to amend the existing notice requirement of paragraph 23 of the Lease, then all notices should, of course, be served in accordance with those requirements. 2. If the Lease is to be amended, I believe the amendment should be limited to only those notices which the Mobilehome Residency Law and Government Code allow to be mailed. A broader amendment would be damaging to the City because of the argument that since so many of the residents do not make Marina Park their primary residence, service of the notices would have to be made at the residents' primary residences, not their mobilehomes. The effect of this would be to substantially increase the City's cost of serving notices per the procedures of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1162 and paragraph 23 of the Lease. 3. If the City does amend paragraph 23 of the Lease to allow certain notices to be mailed only, then the notices required by the Mobilehome Residency Law and the Government Code should be served as followed: . A. The following notices may, at the City's sole option, be served either by personal delivery or first class mail: The 15 day notice, the notice to be given to proposed homeowners per MRL §798.56(g)(3) and the notices required by the Government Code, including delivery of the relocation impact report. B. The following notices must be served by following the procedures in paragraph 23 of the Lease which are identical to those found in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1162: The 6 months' notice and the notice of termination of tenancy required by MRL 9798.56(g)(4). Note: The 12 months' notice can be argued to be the equivalent of the 6 months' notice and, therefore, also arguably required to be served in accordance with paragraph 23 of the Lease. Given this ambiguity, I recommend the more formal service procedures required by the Lease be followed with respect to the 12 months' notice. *Robert H. Burnham, Este �l September 17, 1996 Page 20 ISSUE: SERVICE OF OTHER REQUIRED NOTICES ON THIRD PARTIES. 1. MRL §798.55(b) requires that the termination of tenancy notices required by MRL §798.56(g)(4) also be served on the following third parties who appear on the record title to the mobilehome: The legal owner, all junior lien holders and all registered owners if other than the resident. 2. Service on these third parties may be effected by sending the notice by either regular, certified or registered mail, with a return receipt requested, at the option of the City. These notices must be mailed within 10 days of the date the notice is given to the residents. Therefore, the following is applicable: A. Since the more rigorous service requirements of paragraph 23 of the Lease apply only to notices to be given to the residents, the normal statutory mailing procedures may be used for these third parties and no Lease amendment is required. B. The following notices must be served on these third parties: The 6 months' notice, the 12 months' notice and the termination of tenancy notice required by MRL §798.56(g)(4). C. To determine the identity -and addresses of these third parties, a title search must be made on each of the mobilehomes with the California Department of Housing and Community Development. A new title search must also be made within a few days preceding the date each of the required notices is to be served. D. For a relatively nominal fee, the City may contract with the California Department of Housing and Community Development to obtain these title searches by fax and mail. . E. Failure to give notice to the third parties will result in a substantial legal defect which may invalidate the notices required to be given to the residents. ISSUE: WHO SHOULD PREPARE THE NOTICES? RECOMMENDATIONS: Because the notices are highly technical and require experience in our specialized area of the law, I recommend that our firm prepare the form notices which may then be used by the City's staff. ISSUE: AS TO NOTICES WHICH MAY OR ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAILED, SHOULD REGULAR, FIRST-CLASS, CERTIFIED OR REGISTERED MAIL BE USED? RECOMMENDATIONS: With the exception of the "third -party" notices discussed above, neither the Lease nor the statutes require that certified or registered mail be used. I would not utilize either of these methods as too often, particularly with residents, a certified or registered letter is refused or not timely delivered by the post office. .Robert H. Burnham, Este September 17, 1996 Page 21 ISSUE: WHICH ADDRESSES FOR THE RESIDENTS SHOULD THE CITY USE WHEN MAILING NOTICES? RECOMMENDATIONS: Although arguably paragraph 23 of the Lease and the statute permits notices to be mailed to the residents' mobilehomes only, I would not limit the mailing to just those addresses. Instead, because so many of the residents utilize Marina Park as a second home, I would mail all notices to both their mobilehomes and the other residential or business addresses the residents have given Marina Park. If this is not done, I believe the City is open to a substantial legal challenge. ISSUE: HOW ARE RECORDS OF THE SERVICE OF MAILED NOTICES TO BE KEPT? RECOMMENDATIONS: Because it is absolutely essential to maintain well - organized, complete records of all of the notices mailed to the residents and the third parties required to receive certain notices, the following procedures should be implemented: 1. A lawsuit against the City raising notice issues will frequently require that the City produce for deposition and trial the person(s) responsible for serving the notices, either by mail or in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 23 of the Lease. Therefore, to insure their availability, it is essential that great care be exercised in designating the person(s) responsible for these activities. 2. Notices which are served only by mail and without first attempting the procedure in paragraph 23 of the Lease can be handled by the City's staff. (Although use of the City's staff may result in a challenge by the residents' attorneys that the staff is biased and, therefore, cannot have been relied upon to properly serve notices, it is my reaction that this argument will be disregarded by a Court unless there is substantial evidence to support it.) Notices served only by mail should be done per the following: A. If the person designated is not in the City Attorney's Office, then they should be in a responsible position, not just a clerk who may or may not be reliable and may or may not be available or cooperative at the time their testimony is needed. They should be supervised by a Deputy City Attorney or senior staff person. B. A standardized proof of service by mail form should be developed and utilized to have proof of the mailings. C. Files containing a copy of the notices with the applicable proofs of service, titles searches to determine third parties and other critical documents must be adequately maintained. D. I do not believe the notices themselves have to be individually addressed to each of the residents or third parties. Instead, a form notice is permissible so that only the individual addressing of envelopes and proof of service mailing lists will be required. E. I also do not believe that a copy of the proof of service of mailing has to be included with each of the notices to the "Robert H. Burnham, Esc,# September 17, 1996 Page 22 residents; a file copy for the City is sufficient. F. To ensure that the addresses for the residents are correct and up-to-date, I would have both the initial and all subsequent mailing lists checked and confirmed against Park records by the Management Company the City employs to operate Marina Park. G. To also help avoid claims by residents that the City did not send the notices to the correct addresses, I would have the billing company which prepares the monthly rent statements to the residents include a computerized notation on the statements reminding the residents that they are obligated to keep the City advised of their current addresses. ISSUE: HOW ARE RECORDS OF THE SERVICE OF NOTICES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE SERVED PER PARAGRAPH 23 OF THE LEASE AND CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1162 TO BE KEPT? RECOMMENDATIONS: Where notices are required to be served per paragraph 23 of the Lease and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1162, different procedures are required. The following are, therefore, recommended: 1. The mechanics of serving notices as required by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1162 and paragraph 23 of the Lease are critical, particularly because they are often a fruitful area for the residents to attack. Commonly what is called into issue is the credibility of the "process server" who served the notices. This is particularly true if process servers employed by "attorneys services" are used because these individuals are often poorly paid and, therefore, make inadequate witnesses if their testimony is needed at trial. They are also often unavailable to testify. 2. Because park manager's or other park employees credibility is challenged for bias, it is also preferable not to use these individuals to serve these notices. 3. The best choice by far would be to contract with the Marshall's Office, the City's police department, or another police agency to serve these notices. Although on the surface this may seem expensive and time consuming, I believe the City would find they could make prior arrange- ments -with such an agency to have an officer serve the notices at an agreed upon time without it being particularly burdensome or expensive. Even when an independent police agency is used, however, I recommend that they be carefully instructed and supervised by the City Attorney's Office to ensure that they follow clear, accurate procedures and document the service appropriately. GENERAL COMMUNICATION ISSUES Both in mk experience in working with our clients and city councils and boards\of supervisors who are supportive of our clients' change of use plans, I have seen time and time again the detrimental results of mishandling communications with residents and the news media. Therefore, I recommend substantial attention be paid to the following. 'Robert H. Burnham, EsgO) September 17, 1996 Page 23 ISSUE: SHOULD NOTICES BE GIVEN EVEN WHEN NOT CLEARLY REQUIRED BY STATUTE? RECOMMENDATIONS: "Over -noticing." is by far the best, lease expensive approach for the following reasons: 1: As the adequacy of notices is a common legal issue, the savings in attorney's fees far outweighs the additional staff time required to give even notices which may not be required. 2. Attorneys for the residents may be discouraged from pursuing litigation if they see a well -documented "Notice File". 3. "Over noticing" helps avoid mistakes. 4. "Over noticing" will likely persuade the Court the City has "substantially complied" with the law even if the City has made a mistake and not given a certain notice. 5. "Over noticing" often persuades at least some, perhaps many, residents that the change of use is inevitable so they do not support other residents in proposed or actual litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL MEMOS AND COMMUNICATIONS WITH RESIDENTS ISSUE: SHOULD A SUPPLEMENTAL MEMO BE GIVEN TO THE RESIDENTS IN THE NEAR FUTURE REMINDING THEM OF THE CHANGE IN USE? RECOMMENDATIONS: For the following reasons I believe there is substantial merit in giving such a memo now and following it up with additional memos in the future: 1. When I toured Marina Park in August with Mr. Mecham of the Management Company, the two of us were approached by a resident who identified himself as either the new President or a member of the Board of Directors of the residents' Homeowners' Association. In this gentlemen's discussions with Mr. Mecham, it was obvious the Association is already planning to bring political pressure on the Council to oppose the change in use. This gentlemen's comments included the possibility of the Association hiring a lobbyist, obtaining legal advice and holding meetings on this subject with the residents and the Council. 2. As noted in the introductory portions of this letter, in my experience, it is typically preferable to promptly address the change of use issues with the residents and their association. If this is not done, misinformation, false hopes and promises by the Association that the residents can delay or prevent the change of use typically create much larger, more difficult problems. 3. \.One significant advantage to the memos I recommend, is that these memos may be worded to create a favorable impression with a judge and jury.\ The idea is that the City establishes a record of reminding residents well in advance df the closure date of the inevitability of the change of use. These memos may also be written to answer common questions and suggest options available to the residents. The net effect is to establish that the City behaved reasonably. Robert H. Burnham, Esq. �3 September 17, 1996 Page 24 4. Another advantage of these memos is they give the City an opportunity to communicate with the Board of Directors of the Association in a positive way. If the Board behaves unreasonably, these repeated contacts will help document that fact and be of substantial assistance to the City. ISSUE: ADDITIONAL MEMO TO PROSPECTIVE BUYERS AND NEW RESIDENTS. RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. Although I touched on the issue of a memo to prospective buyers and new residents earlier under my discussion of required notices, I cannot stress -too much its importance. 2. In addition to the required notices, I believe a memo disclosing the practical ramifications of the change of use to prospective buyers and new residents is essential. Although this will have a negative effect on the residents' sales of their mobilehomes, I believe it is a lawful, appropriate communication which the City, in fact, has an obligation to make. 3. I also believe the residents should be informed in advance of the disclosures which will be made to prospective buyers and new residents (e.g. give them a copy of the memo the City intends to use). If this is not done and they learn of this memo after the fact, they will react very unfavorably. 4. Real estate brokers and mobilehome dealers should also be similarly informed. One reason is they often inadvertently, sometimes deliberately, - misrepresent the facts in order to make a sale. Copying them with the memo helps discourage this. ISSUE: SHOULD THE CITY MEET WITH THE BOARD OF TION? OF THE ASSOCIA- RECOMMENDATIONS: For the following reasons I believe it is essential for the City to meet with the Board of Directors: 1. As noted above, the Board is already meeting and discussing plans to attempt to defeat the change of use. At this juncture, they have no information as to what the City intends and, in all probability, a great deal of misinformation. 2. Although I would not expect the members of the Board to be particularly receptive to the inevitability to the change of use, the fact is they will be the ones who provide information to the other residents and significantly influence critical decisions. Therefore, actively attempting to communicate with them and the residents as a whole is essential from the City's perspective. ISSUE: THk AUTHORITY OF THE RESIDENTS' BOARD OF DIRECTORS. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Since the residents' Board of Directors cannot legally act on behalf of the residents, this fact needs to be communicated, albeit in a Robert H. Burnham, Esq• September 17, 1996 Page 25 positive fashion, early on to the Board. This is important because of the following: A. In practice, the Board of Directors cannot realistically negotiate and make commitments on behalf of the residents. They know this and it is typical to hear from a representative body such as this at the end of hours and hours of negotiations that they cannot commit for anyone and must go back to their members and obtain their approval. B. Because of the above, the City has to be very selective in terms of its discussions with the'Board of Directors. For example, it may well be that the City takes the position at the outset that it will not negotiate any issue with the Board of Directors. Instead, it will only use the Board as a resource to gather information and assist in communications with the residents. In fact, this is the approach I recommend. 2. The City must also realize that in these situations the residents often fragment into two or more camps with substantially different opinions as to what should or should not be done. Often this is to the substantial advantage of the City in preventing litigation. Therefore, the City wants to encourage, not discourage, this fragmenta- tion. If the City recognizes the Board of Directors as speaking for all of the residents, it may, therefore, be working contrary to its own interests. ISSUE: PROCEDURES FOR MEETINGS WITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE RESIDENTS AS A WHOLE SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED WELL IN ADVANCE. RECOMMENDATIONS: In my experience it is essential to establish the following ground rules as to the conduct of meetings and other communica- tions with the Board and the residents: ISSUE: AUDIO AND VIDEO TAPE RECORDINGS OF MEETINGS. RECOMMENDATIONS: Inevitably a member of the Board or one of the residents will want to tape record or video tape meetings with the City. Although there are pros and cons regarding the recording of meetings, on balance I recommend against it. The basic reasons I give to residents for not recording are: 1. Recordings by residents are typically of poor quality because of their equipment. 2. Recording can be altered. 3. If both parties record the meeting, there will inevitably be a dispute.as to which of their "poor" recordings are accurate. 4. \The recording of meetings only encourages certain residents to be argumentative and emotional and, thereby, disrupt the meetings. 5. Most importantly, the City wants to take the position that the only method by which it will make commitments to the residents is in writing (e.g. meetings are only for the purpose of exchanging ideas and Robeit H. Burnham, Esq•- • September 17, 1996 Page 26 gathering information). ISSUE: THE RESIDENTS AND THE NEWS MEDIA. RECOMMENDATIONS: The City can count on the residents going to the news media throughout this process in an attempt to influence the Council. Therefore, the following is recommended: 1. The City should attempt to obtain the Board's agreement not to contact the press immediately to discuss meetings the City has with the Board, or otherwise publicize the Board's or City's position with regard to the change of use. The City's argument should be that the purpose,of meeting with the Board is to communicate and resolve issues; therefore, injecting the news media into this process in contrary to the best interests of all concerned. 2. The City needs to implement: procedures to handle the news media. For example, the City should anticipate the residents "going public" and be prepared to brief the press, have its own press releases and otherwise be prepared to counter the allegations and misinformation residents typically provide to reporters. A staff person should be designated as the point of contact for the City, particularly because this helps protect Council members from unwanted contacts and interviews. ISSUE: OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND NEWS MEDIA EXECUTIVES SHOULD BE BRIEFED IN ADVANCE AND KEPT INFORMED BY THE CITY OF ITS PLANS. RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. it is also quite likely that residents will seek the assistance of other elected representatives in an effort to thwart the change of use. In my experience, if these individuals have not been fully briefed in advance by the City, they are apt to mistakenly make commitments or comments to the news media, the residents or others which they would not have made if they had been briefed in advance by the City. 2. It has also been my consistent experience that the typical reporter for major newspapers and radio and television stations will not report the facts accurately. Instead, the slant on the news story is typically in favor of the residents. One way to attempt to avoid this is to meet in advance with responsible executives of the news media to fully inform them of the facts and the City's position. ISSUE: MASS MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS. 1. Because of highly charged emotions, mass meetings with the residents are rarely productive and are typically counter -productive. It is far bra ter to communicate with them in writing. 2. `Where mass meetings cannot be avoided, and inevitably the City will probably have to have two or three such meetings, they need to be well -planned for in advance in terms of what is to be said and the person or persons who are to be present to speak on behalf of the City. 'Robert H. Burnham, EsgV September 17, 1996 Page 27 ISSUE: GENERAL RESIDENT COMMUNICATIONS. RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. Although the Board may be used as a resource by the City to determine what the other residents' concerns and questions are, it is also important to publicize to the residents the name and address of the City's staff contact person. This helps encourage accurate communications. 2. As residents and their attorneys often claim that various written communications from the residents created legal issues or obligations on the part of the City, careful records must be maintained of all written communications received from the residents and their Board of Directors. MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES The following discussions cover miscellaneous issues which are often overlooked and, consequently, create problems. ISSUE: TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD THE PARK MANAGER AND THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY BE UTILIZED IN THE CHANGE OF USE PROCESS? RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. To maintain the effectiveness of your Park Manager, I would attempt to-entir-rely divorce him from the change of use activities. For example, I would not have him sign memos or notices, serve notices on the residents or otherwise be involved in any of these activities. The only exception is notices to be given to prospective residents (e.g. the Park Manager is the only one available to perform this function). 2. - I would also instruct the Park Manager, both orally and in writing, that, except for giving notices to prospective residents, he is not to communicate with anyone, particularly the residents, regarding the change of use. If this is not done, then inevitably the residents and their attorneys will claim that the Park Manager made statements or commitments on which they relied to the City's detriment. 3. For'the same reasons, I would also notify all residents by a friendly, positive memo that the Park Manager will not be involved in the change of use process. This not only helps insulate the Park Manager, it also allows the City to state in writing that he is not authorized to make any commitments for the City. _ 4., As you know, Mr. Mecham of your Management Company, not only has substantial management experience and expertise, but is also a former city council m6mber. Therefore, he represents a substantial resource the City may utilize. My recommendations with respect to him and your Management Company are: One of the decisions the City has to make is whether it wants to divorce the Management Company entirely from the emotionalism of the change of use process on the theory that involving them will adversely affect their ability to manage. An argument to the contrary is that the 'Robe'rt H. Burnham, Esge •� September 17, 1996 Page 28 Management Company is the best resource available to the City to use for these purposes, particularly as the City does not have staff members with either the time or experience to be involved in the time-consuming, day- to-day issues and communications which will be required. Therefore, it may be more desirable to simply designate a key member of the City staff to supervise and communicate with the Management Company. In any event, it is important for the City to define, at the outset, the Management Company's responsibilities and authority. ISSUE: A PLAN NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED FOR THE PHYSICAL REMOVAL OF MOBILEHOMES FROM MARINA PARK. 1. From my personal observations and discussions with Mr. Mecham, it is apparent that some substantial planning needs to go into the question of how mobilehomes are to be physically removed from Marina Park. For example, the only mobilehomes which can readily be removed at a typical cost are those in the "back row" next to the street. Mobilehomes in the "center row" may only be removed by either a crane, or by first removing one or more mobilehomes in the back or front rows. Because the "front row" of mobilehomes abuts a narrow sidewalk and the beach, removing them by traditional methods is also impossible. 2. One key reason this issue will shortly become extremely important is this: One of the things the City may want to begin saying to the residents is they should take advantage of the high vacancy rate in other parks in Orange County to relocate their mobilehomes. The residents logical answer is "How am I going to do this at a reasonable cost if my mobilehome-is located in the center or front row?" If the City does not have a "cost efficient" answer, this issue should be avoided. 3. The residents will also use the difficulty of physically removing their mobilehomes to argue that the Lease's relocation benefits are too low. . 4. This is also a legal issue for the City. It will have to be addressed in the relocation impact report. It will also be an inevitable question the City staff and Council members will be asked by residents. If litigation occurs, it will also be an issue. LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM OTHER CHANGES OF USE Based on our experience and the experience of others, there are a number of important lessons to be learned from the experiences of others when changing the use of their property. ISSUE: COMMON CLAIM BY RESIDENTS: SINCE THE CITY IS MONTHS OR YEARS AWAY FROM ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING THE NEW USE OF THE PROPERTY, RESIDENTS SHOULD BE ALLOWEb TO STAY UNTIL IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR THEM TO VACATE. 1. This is often a very persuasive argument with elected officials. A recent example is seen in the State of California's Crystal Cove Robert H. Burnham, Esgw September 17, 1996 Page 29 development in South Orange County where the residents have been successful in extending one deadline after another, in part for this reason. 2. Although I am not aware of a Court actually delaying a change of use for this reason, I can see this possibility. For example, as is now occurring in the Treasure Island Mobilehome Park, the residents are refusing to move even though all of the notice and procedural requirements have been met. This is one of the arguments they are using. Although I do not believe a Court should accept this argument as persuasive, I have seen far stranger things happen, particularly where mobilehome residents are involved. 3. I also believe that if the City is not ready to actually begin the physical work necessary to effect the new use of the property, the residents and their attorneys are encouraged to pursue litigation as a delaying device. If, however, the proverbial "bulldozers are ready to roll", I believe the City's legal and practical position is substantially improved. 4. Therefore, one of the many "things to do" which needs to be added to the City's list is to have the actual plans and specifications for the new use of the property prepared and contracts signed sufficiently in advance of the March 16, 2000, deadline so there is evidence the City is ready to proceed with the work to effect the new use of the property. ISSUE: ESTABLISHING A CLEAR AND CONCISE TIMELINE AS TO ALL ACTIONS THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO TAKE IS ALSO CRITICAL. RECOMMENDATIONS•- 1. To ensure that the City complies with its notice and other obligations, a clear and concise timeline which identifies all the actions the City must take is essential. 2. - This timeline may also be used to keep residents informed. 3. The absence of the timeline may become a legal issue. ISSUE: THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS: As noted earlier, the residents will inevitably argue that the Government Code requires the City to pay as relocation benefits the on -site fair market value of their mobilehomes. For obvious reasons, the City must do everything possible from the very beginning to discourage residents from believing this is even a remote possibility. As, however, the fair market value concept is not commonly well understood by others, the Council and staff should be alerted to its existence and educated as to how to handle it. ISSUE: THE CITY SHOULD ANTICIPATE THE RESIDENTS WILL PROPOSE THEY BE ALLOWED Ta,PURCHASE MARINA PARK. 1. I am assuming a sale of Marina Park to the residents is either Robert H. Burnham, Esq. September 17, 1996 Page 30 not contemplated for business or other reasons, or is legally impossible or impractical. This point needs to be established and made clear to the residents very early in this process. Even if the residents themselves do not initially raise it, the City should. Otherwise, the residents will start down this path on their own and contact conversion consultants who will encourage the residents to believe a purchase is possible. 2. Again, the Council and staff should also be educated as to these issues so the City present a uniform front. 3. If the above is not done, then I guarantee you the City will spend countless hours discussing this issue with the residents and their Board of Directors. This process will only result in false hopes and significant miscommunications and could be a major factor in encouraging the residents to sue. In fact, this was a primary reason the residents of Treasure Island sued. 4. The City should also expect the residents will be encouraged in their hopes by those in the mobilehome industry, who specialize in converting mobilehome parks to resident ownership. Many of these individuals are, to put it bluntly, less than ethical. In our experience, they often encourage the residents to file lawsuits, engage in "rent strikes" or take other illegal action. Therefore, as these "conversion experts" will inevitably contact the City, they too need to be dealt with promptly and decisively so their hopes of earning a huge converter's fee are discouraged and they look elsewhere for a more probable conversion candidate. ISSUE: THE CITY SHOULD ALSO ANTICIPATE THE RESIDENTS WILL PROPOSE THAT THE PRESENT LEASE BE -EXTENDED. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. It is my understanding that the City has determined it cannot or will not extend the present Lease or offer a new lease. Assuming this to be correct, this issue should be handled the same as the preceding issue re: the residents' proposal to purchase Marina Park. If it is not dealt with clearly and decisively at the beginning, and the residents persuaded there is no hope of this occurring, the whole change of use process will become substantially more difficult. 2. If my understanding is incorrect, and there is a possibility of a new lease being offered, I believe the City's recent experience with the residents clearly indicates the only way a new lease can be negotiated is for the City to apply extraordinary pressures. In my opinion, this can probably only be accomplished by the City proceeding with its change of use plans so the residents become convinced they have no other alternative except to negotiate now and sign a new lease. ISSUE: THE PRESENT "NO SUBLETTING" PROHIBITION SHOULD BE RE-EVALUATED TO DETERMINE IF ALLOWING SUBLETTING WILL ENHANCE THE CITY'S POSITION. RECOMMENDATIONS• 1. If the City were to change its present "no subletting" prohibition, it could use this to argue it was conferring an additional ,Robert H. Burnham, Esq. September 17, 1996 Page 31 relocation benefit on the residents by allowing them to earn additional income from the rental of their mobilehomes. 2. Although I well understand from my experiences with our other mobilehome park clients that subletting is generally regarded as a negative for a park owner, particularly in beach -front oriented parks where sublessees and their guests often create substantial disturbances, the issue is whether subletting will assist the City in its change of use plans. For example, in addition to conferring the above economic benefits on the residents, having numerous rowdy sublessees and their guests around may well encourage more residents to decide they do not want to fight the change of use and remain in Marina Park. 3. An issue which recommends against allowing subletting is it may change the inherent nature of Marina Park so that legal arguments favoring the City's change of use are diminished. 4. Note: Although paragraph B.C. of the Lease prohibits sublet- ting, I believe paragraph 13 of the Lease allows the City to eliminate this prohibition. NON -BINDING MEDIATION AND OTHER PREVENTATIVE LAW MEASURES ISSUE: PROTRACTED AND EXPENSIVE LITIGATION TYPICALLY RESULTS FROM CHANGE OF USE BECAUSE THE RESIDENTS BELIEVE THEY HAVE A MERITORIOUS LAWSUIT AND THEY ARE NOT DISCOURAGED BY OBJECTIVE ADVICE FROM THEIR ATTORNEYS. DISCUSSION• 1. It's inevitable the residents will conclude on their own and without any legal advice that the City either cannot legally close Marina Park or can be persuaded by political pressures or the filing of a lawsuit to delay the r_hnnae of nse for an extended period or provide additional relocation benefits. 2. In my encourage these hope is to file experience, attitudes and a lawsuit. the attorneys the residents consult often persuade residents that their best or only 3-. Although the following recommendations identify possible solutions to the above'problems, whether to use them at all and when to use them is a difficult decision. For example, used prematurely, they may create more problems and increase the inevitability of a lawsuit. In practice, the use of these procedures and the timing of their use has to be constantly re-evaluated based on the City's,reading of the residents' attitudes. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. \\The City consider hiring an objective, experienced mediator such as a retired Superior Court judge to mediate the residents' concerns with the City and make recommendations for their resolution. An alternative, but similar approach would, be to hire an objective, experienced attorney to advise the residents of their legal positions. "Robert H. Burnham, Esq�'� September 17, 1996 Page 32 2. To give the mediator or attorney credibility with the residents, the City should provide the residents with a list of several names, including their qualifications, for the residents to select from. 3. Although the City would pay the mediator or attorney, there would be a written contract providing, in effect, that the mediator or attorney was to be totally objective. Again, this is in order to satisfy the residents, concerns. 4. I have utilized procedures similar to the above in other disputes and found them to be very effective in many instances. CONCLUSIONS Although the legal and practical issues and considerations involved in a change of use are complex and time-consuming, much of the work can be simplified if, at the outset, the threshold legal issues are identified and an overall plan established. To accomplish this, I recommend that once you and other key staff personnel have had sufficient time to absorb the key issues outlined in this letter, we meet so that I may questions and provide other CBS:lal 1058\burnhwa.1tr answer your May 1, 1987 TO: FROM: 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT Robert L. Wynn, City Manager Bob Lenard, Advance Planning Administrator -� SUBJECT: Coastal Commission Action on AARINAPARK Following is a discussion of the City council's various actions with respect to Marinapark, as well as the recent Coastal Commission action. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT HISTORY The General Plan Land Use Map designates Marinapark for "Recreation and Environmental Open Space" uses, and the text indicates: "Marinapark shall continue as a mobile home park until such time as that use is phased out, at which time the property shall be rezoned to the OS - Open Space - District." The Land Use Element has not been amended with respect to Marinapark since it's adoption in May of 1973. RECREATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL OPEN SPACE ELEMENT HISTORY The General Plan Recreation and Environmental Open Space Element adopted in December of 1973 indicated: "...a major park is proposed within this area. The expansion of the existing Las Arenas Park to a marine -oriented park has been approved in concept by the City Council. This park will provide for public use and enjoyment of this unique publicly owned 10.9 acre bay -front site." The Recreation and Environmental Open Space Element underwent major revisions and was approved by the City Council in February of 1985. The Element now designates Marinapark for a proposed Neighborhood Park and indicates: "The recommendations of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission Marinapark study -group in their July 1983 report to the City Council should be implemented,, including aquatic facilities and Mr. Robert L. Wynn May 1, 1987 Page 2 expanded beach, parking and recreation. The R/UDAT recommendation relating only to aquatic facilities should be considered for incorporation into this program.1' LCP LAND USE PLAN HISTORY The LCP Land Use Plan approved by the City Council and certified by the State Coastal Commission in May of 1982 designated Marinapark for "Recreation and Environmental Open Space" uses and indicated: "Existing uses include a large public beach and boat launching area, buildings used by the Girl Scouts, Voluntary Action Center, and American Legion, public tennis courts, and a mobile home park. It is the intent of the City to preserve the mobile home park use as a means of providing a variety of housing opportunities within the City. The City shall maintain and improve, wherever practical, public access to the site bayward of the Marinapark mobile homes." LCP Amendment No. 6 (Resolution No. 85-7) which was processed concurrently with GPA 81-2(F), the major Recreation and Environmental Open Space Element review, indicated that the LCP Land Use Plan was to be amended as follows: "Delete wording proposing preservation of mobile home uses at Marinapark." This LCP amendment was approved by the City Council in February of 1985 (a copy of City Council Resolution 85-7 is attached). Recently the Planning staff submitted several LCP Land Use Plan amendments which included 9 specific changes resulting from LCP amendment No. 6. On April 24, 1987 the Coastal Commission approved all of the City proposed amend- ments, with the exception of the Hoag Hospital (Cal Trans East) changes which were continued for a period of one year. The specific action with respect to Marinapark was to delete the following sentence from the Marinapark provisions quoted above: "It is the intent of the City to preserve the mobile home park as a means of providing a variety of housing opportunities within the City." The Coastal Commission will be transmitting a copy of their final action to the City in the near future. 1 Mr. Robert L. Wynn May 1, 1987 Page 3 MARINAPARK LEASE EXTENSION The Marinapark lease was extended in October of 1985, 8 months after the City Council's approval of GPA 81-2(F) and LCP Amendment No. 6. Prior to the Coastal Commission hearing a resident of Marinapark came to the Planning Department requesting information relative to the proposed LCP changes. Because of this inquiry, I reviewed the provisions of the lease prior to the Coastal Commission hearing just to make sure there wasn't any potential conflict. The provisions of the lease indicate in several places that it is the City's intent to convert Marinapark to a public recreation area upon termination of the lease (the year 2000). The lease states: "D. The City Council presently intends to convert Marinapark to a public recreation area upon expiration of this lease; "E. The City Council finds that it is in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach to enter into this Lease because Lessees have agreed that City has the right to convert Marinapark into a public recreation area upon the expiration of this Lease, or shortly thereafter, without payment of relocation benefits or other forms of assistance to persons displaced due to the conversion;" There is also considerable reference to the advantages, in terms of providing a variety of housing opportunities, of extending the lease to the year 2000. Because of the long-range nature of the General Plan and LCP Land Use Plan, I do not see any inconsistency between the provisions of the lease and the LCP Land Use Plan with the most recent revision. A� ►I Y , =(_1 /_I BOB•D RPL\MARINPRK.MEM Attachment 0Attachment No. 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE LAND USE, AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN AND TO THE NEWPORT BEACH LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, AND ACCEPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS AMEND- MENT (GPA 81-2(f), LCP AMENDMENT NO. 6) WHEREAS, Recreation and Open Space, Land Use, and Circulation Elements have been adopted as part of the development and implementation of the City of Newport Beach General Plant and WHEREAS, a Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan has also been adopted by the City of Newport Beachr and WHEREAS, a comprehensive study of open space needs and opportunities in the city's planning area has been conducted; and WHEREAS, proposed revisions to the Recreation and Open Space Element have been prepared; and WHEREAS; proposed Recreation and Open Space Element recommendations differ in'some cases from recommendations in the existing Land Use Element, ; J Circulation Element, d Local Coastal Program; 6d WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach considers consis- tency among the City's various planning programs to be desirable; and WHEREAS, such consistency may be achieved by concurrent amendment of the Recreation and Open Space, Land Use, and Circulation Elements of the General Plan and of the Local Coastal Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach has read, reviewed and considered the environmental documentation, including public comments received during the public hearing, consisting of an initial Study and Ne- gation Declaration, copies of which are on file in the office of the Planning Director of the City of Newport Beach, prepared in conjunction with these proposed amendments, has determined that the environmental documentation satisfies all of the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines (GUIDELINES) promulgated pursuant to CEQA, City Policy K-31 and that the environmental documentation was considered in the decisions reflected in this resolutions and /O M WHEREAS, the City Council of Newport Beach has held a duly noticed public hearing to consider these amendments to the Newport Reach General Plan and to the Local Coastal Program. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that the proposed amendments to the Recreation and Open Space, Land Use, and Circulation Elements of the General Plan and to the Local Coastal Program are hereby adopted as set forth in Exhibit "A" and revised by Exhibit "B." Regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach on the _ day of , 1985, by the following vote, to wit: AYES NOES ABSENT Mayor City Clerk , �O Exhibit A 7. Recreation and Open Space Element Amendment (GPA81-2(f)) This consists of the document titled "Newport Beach General Plan Recreation and Open Space Element: Plan" dated Octo- ber, 1984. II. Land Use Element Amendments (GPA81-2(f)) 1. Designate the currently undesignated City -owned proper- ty adjacent to the Santa Ana River as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. 2. Designate a four acre site north of Newport Crest as Recreational and Environmental Open Space rather than a mixture of General Industry; Administrative, Profes- sional and Financial Commercial; and Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities. Amend language in the Land Use Flement to allow development of this park prior to, rather than concurrent with, construction of adjacent residences. 3. Designate the public beach at Tenth Street for Recre- ational and Environmental Open Space use. 4. Delete the Recreational and Environmental Open Space designation from all .but a portion of CalTrans East, designating that remainder of the site for Govern- mental, Educational and Institutional Facilities. 5. Designate the currently undesignated sites of the Sea Scout Base and Orange Coast College facility as Govern- mental, Educational and Institutional Facilities. 6. Extend and increase the area designated Recreational and Environmental Open Space on the Castaways site. 7. Delete the primary use designation of Recreational and Environmental Open Space for the bulk of the Bayview/Peters site. 8. Designate additional Recreational and Environmental Open Space on the Newporter North site. 9. Designate Newport Village for a mixture of Recreational and Environmental Open Space and currently proposed uses. 10. Delete alternate residential use on the Buck Gully site. )3 4 i :46 4 11. Delete alternate residential use on the Oasis site. III. Circulation Element Amendments (GPA81-2(f)) The Master Plan of Bikeways is to be incorporated into the Circulation Element of the General Plan. IV. Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 6 1. Map Beek Park on Agate Avenue as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. 2. Designate a portion of the former Corona del Mar School site as Recreational and environmental Open Space. 3. Designate only a portion of CalTrans East as Recre- ational and Environmental Open Space, with the remain- der of the site designated Governmental, Educational and Institutional Facilities. Although this will entail revision of Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan mapping, it is consistent with language in the LCP which provides for expansion of Hoag Hospital or a parking facility on the site. 4. DesignatF the easterly Rort�on of the Castaways site as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. 5. Add Recreational and Environmental Open Space striping to the residential portion of the Westbay site. 6. Designate the open space area at Hampden Road in Cameo Shores as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. 7. Designate the small area immediately adjacent to the northeasterly corner of the Jamboree Road/Coast Highway intersection as Recreational and Environmental Open Space rather than Retail and Service Commercial as at present. 8. Add Recreational and Environmental Open Space desig- nation to additional areas on Newporter North site. 9. Designate a four acre parcel north of Newport Crest as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. 10. Delete wording proposing preservation of mobile home uses at Marinapark. 0 % Exhibit B Revisions to Draft Newport Beach General Plan Recreation and Open Space Element Plan, dated October, 1984 1. Program 1.3.5, Page 30. The Open Space District should be referred to as the Open Space Zoning District. 2. Program 1.3.1, Page 31, should read "Adopt and implement the recommendations of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Marinapark Study Committee." 3. Program 3.3.1, Page 35. Add the following wording: "This program is not intended to prohibit development on any site." 4. Under heading 6, Recreation and Open Space Plan Service Area 1, Page 43, West Newport -- Item 9 will be identified as "West Newport Park.." 5. Service Area 2 - Balboa Peninsula, Marinapark, Page 43, should refer to the Marinapark study group as the Parks, 1 Beaches and Recreation Commission Marinapark Study Group. 6. Service Area 5, Page 45, should refer to the proposed recreation facility as "Pacific Coast Highway Boat Ramp" rather than "Mini Park." 7. Service Area 9, Item 1, Page 45, should read "Bayview Landing Mini Park." S. Service Area 11, Item 2, Page 46, should state that "Total area will be consistent with current development and master plan studies now being done for this public area." 9. Service Area 11, Item 4, Page 46, should state that "Total area will be consistent with current master plan studies now being conducted for the site." 10. Service Area 11, Harbor View, Item 5, Page 46, should be referred to as "Jasmine Creek Open Space." 11. Intensification Projects, Number 1 - North Star Beach, Page 47, should read "The beach is proposed to be upgraded in quality. Existing sensitive resources should be taken into consideration in any site improvement effort. Development 1 of an Aquatic Center should be permitted on this site consistent with the expressed desires of the Newport Beach 5- 1�` 0 electorate as voting in November of 1982- No additional development is proposed for this site." 12. Item 2, Page 47, should be referred to as "Santa Ana River Park" for identification and clarification purposes. 13. Item 4, Page 47, Peninsula Park, should read "Alternate recreational uses or reconfiguration of the sports field area at this park is proposed for further study. Options are installing updated field improvements changing to a different recreational use." 14. Exhibit 5, Master Plan of Bikeways, will be revised to show a Secondary Bikeway extending between Superior Ave. and the future Bluff Road. 15. Service Area 3, Castaways, Page 43, should read "A special view park of approximately 10 acres is proposed for the property." 16'. Service Area 3, Castaways, Page 44, should state that ... adequate parking is recommended as well as an optional scenic drive between the view park and proposed development. An option shall be exercised at the discretion of the City." 17. Service Area ill, Buck Gully, Page 46, should state "The removal of the Alternate Residential Use and application of t the Open Space Overlay Zoning District would be appropriate in exchange for increased densities on other parcels." /b COUNCIL AGENDA NO.7 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Mel OFFICE OF THEICITY MANAGER September 9, 1985 BY THE CITY COUNCHI. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SEP 91985 FROM: Marinapark Mobilehome Ad Hoc Committee rda a3 y SUBJECT: MARINA MOBILEHOME PARK ALTERNATE USES- _I INTRODUCTION• On January 23, 1984, the Newport Beach City Council received a request from the President of the Marinapark Homeowners Association to create a City Council Ad Hoc Committee to study the future uses at the Marina Mobilehome Park. If the future use is to include a mobilehome park, the owners requested permission to negotiate with the Committee the extension of the current leases. On Febru- ary 28, 1984, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 84-15 creat- ing a Marinapark Mobilehome Ad Hoc Committee and charged this Committee with the responsibility of meeting with the representa- tives of the Marinapark Homeowners Association to review and make recommendations back to the City Council on the future use of the mobilehome park area. The Committee was to also interview representa- tives of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and other groups as necessary to complete the Committee's assignment. The Resolution appointed the Manager's Office as staff to the Committee. The Committee has met fourteen times since February, 1984 and has received presentations by representatives of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, by the Marinapark Mobile Home representa- tives, and by other interested groups and individual residents. On November 26, 1984, the Committee submitted a status report to the City Council and reviewed all of the alternatives studied by the Committee. The alternatives were 1) maintain the area substantial- ly as currently developed with Marinapark rents being fixed by a new and current appraisal; 2) Eliminate the Marinapark Mobile Homes and replace with public picnic areas, viewing facilities, and public parking facilities; and 3) redevelop the site with hotels, restaur- ants and other improvements to return maximum revenue to the City. The City Council, on a 5 to 2 vote, authorized the Committee to explore in greater detail the alternate that would maintain the use of the Marinapark "with a view to using the bowling green area on 15th Street for a community center, and making the walkway between the American Legion and the Marinapark wider. In addition, that the Committee report back as to rent increases and that there bean absolute maximum on the lease renewal of 15 years." 1 h • • F K� To: Mayor and City Council -2- Following the Council action, the Committee concentrated on the negotiations for the Marinapark area. The area encompassing the former lawn bowling green, the former P, B & R Department facilities, and the Girl Scout House requires additional study and review. The balance of this report will pertain to the Marinapark lease renewal only. HISTORY: The City acquired the nucleus of the Marinapark property between 15th and 18th Streets from the Pacific Electric Land Company on July 7, 1919, for $1.00. The parcel was originally utilized as a City -operated, short-term visit campground until 1944. On March 6, 1944, a one-year lease was granted o the South Coast Company for the purpose of installing wharfs for boat berthing and repairing. On December 26, 1945, the City Council approved a plan for the camp ground to be converted and operated as a travel trailer park. On May 9, 1955, the City Council adopted a revised plan providing for a further redevelopment of the travel trailer park as a mobilehome park and also a public beach between 16th and 19th Streets. From 1955 to the present, various improvements, such as public sidewalks adjacent to the public beach area, tennis courts, tot lot, and parking facilities have been provided. In 1972, a study was com- pleted by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission recommend- ing that the parcel be converted to public usage and that the mobile - home park be eliminated. On June 25, 1973, the City Council, after considering the Commission's report and other information, granted a lease extension to the tenants of the mobilehome park to September'30, 1977. With this lease extension, a greater public access was provided between the Marina Mobilehome Park and the American Legion property and addition- al tennis court facilities were provided between the mobilehome park and Balboa Boulevard. On January 26, 1976, the Newport Beach City Council granted an additional extension to the tenants of the park until September 30, 1985. The terms of the agreement required a minimum rental with said rent being adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index (all items) for the Los Angeles/Long Beach, - California area. Currently the monthly rent is $412 for the spaces adjacent to the beach, and $347 for the interior spaces. There are 25 spaces fronting on the beach and 33 interior spaces, for a total of 58 mobilehome spaces. There are 26 full-time tenants and 32 "second -home" tenants. The park is producing gross revenues of $288,400±, with expenditures running $57,000 annually, for a net revenue to the City of $231,400. This revenue is used by the City's General Fund and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Fund. The lease also provided that "Should the City Council find and determine on or before the expiration of this lease the Newport Marinapark is not required for any public trust purposes or other public purpose, lessees shall have the option to extend this lease for five years following the expiration of the term upon the same conditions herein contained." Finally, the lease provided that the To: Mayor and City Council -3- City "may give 90 days written notice to vacate said premises to all lessees of Marinapark. Said notice shall not be given by City until City has allocated necessary funds, approved necessary plans, and obtained all necessary governmental approvals, including en- vironmental requirements, zoning requirements, and any other re- quirements to achieve the conversion of the Marinapark into a public recreation area." LEGAL REQUIREMENTS IF CONVERSION OCCURS: The Committee reviewed the legal requirements for land use con- version, and determined that state statutes for conversion of mobilehome parks exist in the Civil Code, primarily addressing tenant/landlord relations, and in the Government Code, primarily addressing the responsibilities of the governing body to ensure that certain actions are taken. In this case, the City fulfills both the role of landlord and that of'the governing body. It must, therefore, meet the responsibilities of both. Under Section 798.56 of the Civil Code a mobilehome park owner must provide homeowners in the park with a notice of change of use as follows: 1. The management gives the homeowners at least 15•days written notice that the management will be appearing before a local governmental board, commission or body to request permits for a change of use of the mobilehome park.' 2. After all required permits requesting a change of use have been approved by the local governmental board, commission, or body, the management shall give the homeowners six months or more written notice of termination of tenancy. If the change of use requires no local governmental permits, then notice shall be given 12 months or more prior to the management's'determination that a change of use will occur. The management in the notice shall disclose and describe in detail the nature of the change of use. 3. The management gives each proposed homeowner written'notice thereof prior to the inception of his tenancy that the management is requesting a change of use before local govern- mental bodies or that a change of use request has been granted. Under Section 65863.7 of the Government Code, prior to converting a'mobilehome park to another use', the project proponent must file a report describing the impact conversion will have on the residents of the park. The report is to address the availability of adequate replacement space in mobilehome parks. In addition, as stated in the statute: "The person proposing such change in use shall make a copy of the report available to each resident of the mobile - home park at least 15 days prior to the hearing on the impact report by the advisory agency, or if there is no advisory agency, by the legislative body. 0 ' J To: Mayor and City Council -4- The legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, shall review such report, prior to any change of use, and may require, as a condition of such change, the person or entity to take steps to mitigate any adverse impact of the conversion on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park. Thus, the City must prepare a "resident impact report", circulate the report to the park residents, and consider the report in reaching its ultimate decision regarding conversion. Additional requirements pertain if'the conversion involves the filing of a tentative or parcel map. Section 65590 of the Government Code regulates the removal of housing units in the Coastal Zone. The Marinapark is in the Coastal Zone, but, because the P, B & R Commission's proposed use is considered coastal dependent, portions of the Section regarding replacement housing would not apply. The Mello Bill and Council Policy B-1 generally require a property owner to provide replace- ment housing for persons or families of low income displaced by the conversion or demolition of existing dwelling units. Resi- dential dwelling units are defined to include mobilehomes. The City would be exempt from providing replacement housing if the con- version or demolition of the park is for either a "coastal depend - en£" or "coastal related" use. The City would be required to give the residents one year's notice of its intent to convert the park at the expiration of the term of the master lease and make findings prior to such notice that the Marinapark is required for a tide- land trust or other public purpose. The City would be required to prepare a report on the impact of the conversion on the displaced residents and would be empowered to take steps appropriate to mitigate the adverse impact of the conversion on the "displaced persons." The City probably would not be required to make relocation assistance payments to the tenants if the lease is not renewed. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: In an effort to be of assistance to the City in determining a fair rental value at the Marinapark, Richard A. Fuller, MAI, was com- missioned to do an appraisal. On January 29, 1985, he submitted two copies of the full appraisal. Attached, are copies of the im- portant pages of the report. This appraisal was used extensively by the Committee in deriving the recommendations and conclusions made herein. The final recommendations concerning the Marinapark only are as follows: 1. That a new lease be approved having a fifteen year term to correspond with the current term of the adjacent American Legion property. To: Mayor and City Council -5- 2. That the rents be adjusted as follows: Mobile Home Space 25 beach front 22 interior 11 rear Rents are to increase annually, based on the adjustment represents .Current $ 412.00 347.00 347.00 on October 1st and C.P.T. increases. a 66% increase. 'Proposed $ 732.00 550.00 516.00 are to be adjusted The immediate 3. The new lease shall provide that within five years of October 1, 1985, all Marinapark mobile home tenants must be residents of the City of Newport Beach unless an exception is granted by the City Council. 4. The agreement contains language giving the City the right to convert Marinapark to another use upon expirat- ion of the lease, without obligation to pay relocation benefits or providing other forms of relocation assistance. The lessee in the proposed lease waives, gives up the right to receive, and releases the City from any obligat- ion due to termination of the proposed lease. Electricity is individually metered, but water and gas are master metered. The lease provides for the tenants to reimburse the City for the cost of water and gas utilized at the Marinapark for all purposes. The City shall provide maintenance for the common areas and facilities. Attached, members of the Council will find a copy of the proposed lease document. The document can be explained in greater detail during the Council meeting. One item that received considerable attention of the Committee was the possible widening of the public walkway between the Marinapark and the American Legion. Currently, there is an 8' walkway. To widen the walkway to 18,1, in the event that the walkway is to be used in the future for hand -launching of boats, view corridor, etc. would require the relocation of three mobile homes. if the walkway is widened by 5' so that it would have a total width of 131, one trailer would have to be relocated at least 51. To make this option possible, Section 8.F was added to the lease. This section reads - "Should lessee . elect to sell ... City shall have the right of first refusal to acquire ... interest ..." This section To: Mayor and City Council -6- gives the City the right of first refusal to acquire the lease- hold interest and widen the walkway if future planning requires this action. Additionally, the City added Section 14.B, which gives the City the right to relocate the most northeasterly coach 5' to the west at City expense, not to exceed $10,000. Therefore, if the City Council decides to widen the walkway the Committee believes that the above two sections gives the City the right to do so. If the City Council accepts the recommendations made herein, future studies will be done on the adjoining property, i.e., lawn bowling greeen, Parks, Beaches & Recreation former headquarters, and Girl Scout House, and specific recommendations will be made to the City Council on the future use of these parcels. The Home- owners' Associations in West Newport, the Peninsula Point, and the Central Balboa area, require additional time and information. Additionally, the Girl Scouts, the Power Squadron, and possibly the Newport Beach Nautical Museum representatives need additional time for planning and research. For this reason, the Committee proceeded with the lease arrangement on the Marinapark with the understanding that the balance of the assignment would be submitted to the City Council after needed dialogue with all interested parties. MARINAPARK MOBILEHOME AD HOC COMMITTEE Mayor Philip Maurer Council Member John C. Cox, Jr. Council Member Donald A. Strauss By: Robert L. Wynn, City Manager tRhiiTAL COHPARABLES I*Niarinapark / 770 West Balboa Boulevard ewport Beach, California January, 1985 Kichard A. Fuller, M.A.I. w ��tNNS l TRAr J c NTm q •.1 Or, .� l n1 %A t MKO IINi v uMo n uor /I�WI I 31M4 V �I'V•C E I I I c Pal VALUATION Method of Valuation: Scope of Market Data Search: A market data search was completed for waterfront and non waterfront mobile home space rentals, situated within ocean front and bay front mobile home parks, located between San Diego and Malibu. Market Data: In all, twelve items of market data were discovered with varying degrees of comparability to the subject property. Your attention is invited to the Market Data Map on the facing page, which sets out the location of each item of market data, and to the Market Data section of..this report, where a summary of each rental is set out. Comparative Criteria: In analyzing each item of market data, a comparison was made between the rental property and the subject property. Consideration was given to bay or ocean frontage, maximum space size, park amenities, location, and utilities. After adjustments for these and other factors, an indicated value of'the subject rental was derived. Comparison to the Subject Property: Your attention is invited to the Rental Summary facing the following page. This summary sets out the pertinent data con- sidered in each rental comparable. Following is a brief desc- ription of each itemofmarket data considered in this analysis: Rental 1: This is the DeAnza Harbor Resort located in.San Diego. This mobile home park has bay frontage, and park amenities which include a swimming pool and clubhouse. The predominate maximum mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities provided by the landlord include water and trash. -13- RICHARo A. FULLER. M. A. I. - - BkOTAL SMIARY ' rIARIIIAPARK - 1770 MLST BALBOA BOULEVARD • hK%POhT LEACH. CALIFORNIA Landlord oral No. Waterfront Rental Non Waterfront Rental Expenses Rater haximum o. Ilame Location Spaces ai Avera7.e Lou HiKU Average .Water Trail Rental Term Frontage Space Amenities DeAnza Harbor Resort San Diego 509 576 755 723 400 610 500 X x 1 Year Bay Double Pool. Clubhouse 2 Capistrano Shores San Clemente 90 1050 1185 1120 hone None None X x 1 Year Ocean Double 3 Dana Strand Club Dana Point 84 1115 1115 1115 1041 1073 1050 x x 5 Year Ocean Double Pool, Clubho� - Tennis Courts 4 Treasure Island Laguna Beach 266 900 1600 1100 350 600 550 x x 1 Year Ocean Double Pool, Clubhouse Trailer Park 5 L1 Horro beach Laguna Beach 294 445 500 460 230 306 285 A x 15 Year Ocean Single liobile Rome Park 6: Bayside Village Newport Beach 291 771 771_ 771 439 535 454 X X 9 Year Bay Double Pool, Clubhouse 7 Cannery Village Newport Beach 34 650 700 675 650 760 700 Y 5 Year Bay Single Pool Mobile hom Park D Lido Part. Newport Beach 209 550 735 670 440 440 440 X x 1-5 Year bay Single Clubhouse 9 riarinapark (Subject Newport Beach 58 427 427 427 362 362 362 x x 1 Year Bay Double -- 10 Palos Verdes Shores San Pedro 242 595 763 595 347 595 525 X x 'Honth/Honth Ocean Double Pool, Clubhouse, Tennis Courts I1 Paradise Cove -Malibu 260 450 550 500 250 325 300 X x I:onth/Honch Ocean Double Clubhouse 12 point Dwe halibu 277 410 689 550 •325 450 400 x x Honth/Month Ocean Double Pool, Clubhouse ..Q n PPPI �-w :� by 1.Y r�S-`. .5_ . S"+.Ji3k �, t[ .-sic ,}�}i .'.*4+.iM1"L yrK:f .� r t.MIMI �.v.: .ri �. JX � y.•p Waterfront space rentals vary from $576/month to $755/month, with an average of $723/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary from $400/month to $610/month, with an average of $500/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for park amenities, location, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered similar to the subject property. Rental 2: This is the Capistrano Shores.Mobile Home Park located in San Clemente. This mobile home park has ocean frontage and park amenities, which include a clubhouse. The predominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities paid by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront space rentals vary from $1,050/month to $1,185/month, with an average of $1,120/month. There are no non waterfront space rentals. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for ocean frontage and utilities. Overall, this mobile home park is superior to the subject property. Rental 3: This is the Dana Strand Club located in Dana Point. This mobile home park has ocean frontage, and park amenities, which include a swimming pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts. The predominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities paid by the landlord include natural gas, electricity, water, trash, and cable TV. Waterfront space rentals are $1,115/month. Non water- front rentals vary from $1,041/month to $1,073/month, with an average of $1,050/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for ocean frontage, park amenities, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is superior to the subject property. -14- RICHARD A. FULLER, M. A. I. Rental 4: This is the Treasure Island Trailer Park located in Laguna Beach. This mobile home park has ocean front- age, and park amenities which include a swimming pool and clubhouse. The predominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities paid by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront'space rentals vary from $900/month to $1,600/month, with an average of $1 100/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary from y350/month to $600/month, with an average of $550/month. In comparing his mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for ocean frontage, park amenities, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered superior to the -subject property. Rental 5: This is the E1 Morro Beach Mobile Home Park located in Laguna Beach. This mobile home park has ocean front- age, there are no tennis courts, swimming pools, or clubhouse. The predominate mobile home space accomo- dates a single. Utilities paid by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront space rentals vary from $445/month to $500/ month, with an average of $460/month . Non waterfront space rentals vary from $230/month to $306/month,with an average of $285/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for ocean frontage, maximum space size, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered similar to the subject property. Rental 6• This is the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park located in Newport Beach. This mobile home park has bay front- age,and park amenities which include a swimming pool and clubhouse. The predominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities provided by the land- lord include water and trash. -15- RicHARD A. FULLER, M. A. I. Waterfront space rentals are $771/month. Non water- front space rentals vary from $439/month to $535/month, with an average of $454/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for park amenities, location, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile. home park is considered similar to the subject property. Rental 7: This is the Cannery Village Mobile Home Park located in Newport Beach. This mobile home park has bay frontage, and park amenities which include a swimming pool. The predominate mobile home park space accomo- dates a single. Utilities paid by the landlord include trash. Waterfront space rentals are dependent upon the date of lease inception,and vary from $650/month to $700/ month, with an average of $675/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary with the date of lease inception, and range from $650/month to $760/month, with an average of $700/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for maximum space size, park amenities, location, and utilities fur- nished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered inferior to the subject property, P,ental 8 : This is the Lido Mobile Home Park located in Newport Beach. This mobile home park has bay frontage, and park amenities which include a clubhouse. The pre- dominate mobile home space accomodates a single. Utilities provided by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront space rentals vary from $550/month to $785/ month, with an average of $670/month. Non waterfront space rentals are $440/month. -16- RICHARD A. FULLER. M. A. 1. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject Property, adjustments were made for maximum space size, park amenities, and utilities furnished. Over- all, this mobile home park is considered slightly inferior to the subject property. Rental 9: This is Marinapark, which is the subject property located in Newport Beach. This mobile home park has bay frontage and has no swimming pool, clubhouse, or tennis courts within the park boundaries. The pre- dominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities provided by the landlord include natural gas, water, and trash. Waterfront space rentals are $427/month. Non water- front space rentals are $362/month, This is the rental of the subject property. Rental 10; This is the Palos Verdes Shores Mobile Home Park located in San Pedro. This mobile home part: has ocean frontage, and park amenities which include a swimming pool, clubhouse, and tennis courts. The predominate mobile home space accomodates a double. Utilities provided by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront space rentals vary from $595/month to $763/ month, with an average of $595/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary from $347/month to $595/month, with an average of $525/month. In comparing this mobile home park.to the -subject property, adjustments were made for park amenities, location, and utilities furnished, Overall, this mobile home park is considered inferior to the subject property. Rental f1: This is the Paradise Malibu. This mobile park amenities which dominate mobile home Utilities provided by trash. -17- Cove Mobile home Park located in home park has ocean frontage, and include a clubhouse. The pre - space accomodates a double. the landlord include water and RICHARo A. FULLER, M. A. I. i L L L L L L I L L L Waterfront space rentals vary from $450/month to $550/month, with an average of $500/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary from $250/month to $325/month, with an average of $300/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for park amenities, location, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered inferior to the sub- ject property. Rental 12: This is the Point Dume Mobile Home Park located in Malibu. This mobile home park has ocean frontage, and park amenities which include a swimming pool and clubhouse. The predominate mobile home space accomo- dates a double. Utilities provided by the landlord include water and trash. Waterfront space rentals vary from $416/month to $689/ month, with an.average of $550/month. Non waterfront space rentals vary from $325/month to $450/month, with an average of $400/month. In comparing this mobile home park to the subject property, adjustments were made for park amenities, location, and utilities furnished. Overall, this mobile home park is considered inferior to the sub- ject property. Correlation: In the valuation of the subject property, Rental 1 with frontage on San Diego Bay was considered very comparable. Rental 2 is located in San Clemente and has frontage directly on the Pacific Ocean, and was considered an upper limit of value indicator. - Rental 3 is located in Dana Point with the predominate number of mobile home spaces having either frontage on the Pacific Ocean or views of the Pacific Ocean. This mobile home park has superior park amenities and is'considered an upper limit of value indicator Rental 4 is located in Laguna Beach, on the bluffs above the Pacific Ocean. This park is considered an upper limit of value indicator. Rental 5 is located on the beach adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and on the inland side of Coast Highway'in Laguna Beach. The rentals within this park were negotiated in the resolution of a lawsuit. Rentals were not considered indicative -12- RICHARD A. FULLER. M. A. 1. C RELATIONSHIP NON WATERFRONT SPACE RENTAL TO WATERFRONT SPACE RENTAL SUMMARY Average Average % Average Non Waterfront Waterfront Non Waterfront Space Rental Rental Space Rental mace Rental & Waterfront Space Rental 1 500 723 69% 4 550 — 1100 50% 5 , 285 460 6 2 % 6 454 771 59% 8 440 670 66% 9 362 427 85% 10 525 595 88% 11 300 500 60`ie 12 400 550 7301 Average 68% of fair market rental value as they represented the forfeiture of relocation expenses which would have been received by the tenants. These rentals were not considered in this analysis. Rental 6 has bay frontage in Newport Beach and is considered very comparable to the subject property. Rental 7 has bay frontage in Newport Beach, however, the rentals represent older 11 rates and are not representative of fair market value. This rental comparable was not utilized in this analysis. Rental 8 has bay frontage in Newport Beach and is considered very com- parable. Rental 9 is the rental of the subject property and as they are not the result of fair market negotiations, they were not considered pertinent in this analysis. Rental 10, Rental 11, and Rental 12 are located in Los Angeles County. These rental comparables are situated on bluffs over- looking the ocean and are all subject to rent control. These mobile home parks are considered inferior in location and lower limit of value indicators only. Your attention is invited to the Relationship Non Waterfront Space Rental to Waterfront Space Rental Summary set out on the facing page. This analysis was completed to establish a rela- tionship between the rentals of non waterfront spaces to the rentals of waterfront spaces. Selected items of market data were utilized wherein the average non waterfront space rental was compared to the average waterfront space rental and a percentage was derived. It is concluded from this study that non waterfront space rentals vary from 50% to 88% of the water- front space rentals, with an average of 67%. With greatest emphasis on Rental 1, Rental 4, Rental 6, and Rental 8, it was concluded that non waterfront space rentals would be equivalent to 67% of waterfront space rentals. j Conclusion: L After careful consideration of the foregoing data, and other factors, it is my opinion that the fair market rental value of the Marinapark Mobile Home Park, subject to the limiting con- ditions set out elsewhere in this report, as of January 15, 1985 was as follows: Waterfront Spaces.. .� .$750/month (1001'.) Non Waterfront Spaces ................ ........$500/month (67V 1 L -19- LRICHARD A. FULLER. M. A. I. FAIR MARKET RENTAL VALUE: Waterfront Spaces ........................$750/month Non Waterfront Spaces....................$500/month -20- RICHARD A. FULLER, M. A. I. 0 RESOLUTION NO. E5 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE NEW LONG TERM LEASES" WITH EXISTING TENANTS OF THE MARINAPARK' MOBILEHOME PARK WHEREAS, City is the owner, and is in possession and control, of a parcel of real property, consisting of tidelands and uplands, located northerly of Balboa Boulevard and between Fifteenth Street and Nineteenth Street in Newport Beach, commonly known as Marinapark and generally described on the plot plan attached as Exhibit "A" (hereinafter "plot plan"); WHEREAS, the property within Marinapark was under lease prior to the effective date of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach and, pursuant to the provisions of Section 1402 of the City Charter, the City Council is empowered to release the property; WHEREAS, pursuant to a lease dated March 24, 19762 (hereinafter 111976 Lease"), the City leased 58 trailer park spaces in Marinapark as shown on the plot plan, under a standard lease which would have expired on the 30th day of September, 1985, subject to the right of the Lessee to extend the term of the lease for a five (5) year period should the City Council determine, prior to that date, Marinapark was not required for any trust, or any public, purpose; WHEREAS, the existing tenants of Marinapark have asked the City Council to enter into a long-term lease with the understanding the City would have the right to convert Marinapark to a public recreation area upon expiration of the lease; -1- 1 WHEREAS, the Marinapark Ad Hoc Committee recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the long-term lease (attached as Exhibit "A," hereinafter referred to as the "Lease"), which provides for increased rents and a waiver of relocation assistance to which tenants may otherwise be entitled upon conversion of Marinapark to a public recreation area; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best interests of the City of Newport Beach to enter into the Lease because of the increased revenue derived by the City and the right to convert Marinapark into a public recreation area upon the expiration of the Lease, or shortly thereafter, without payment of relocation benefits or other forms of assistance to persons displaced due to the conversion; WHEREAS,, the City Council finds and declares that the Lease operates to preserve an important and unique housing resource to be occupied by permanent residents and affordable to persons of low and moderate income. As such, the lease of space within Marinapark confers a substantial benefit upon the citizens of Newport Beach and is consistent with, and furthers the objectives of, the 1984 Housing Element of the General Plan of C. the City of Newport Beach; WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of the Lease are not inconsistent with the provisions of the public trust imposed upon those portions of Marinapark which constitute tidelands in that: (1) the preservation of a significant amount of rental housing affordable to persons of low and moderate income is a matter of general state-wide interest; (2) the revenue generated by that portion of Marinapark consisting of tidelands is utilized by the City to enhance public use of tidelands in the immediate vicinity of Marinapark; and (3) the City has, through the lease, established 50 its right to convert the property to public recreational use upon expiration of the Lease without obligation to pay relocation benefits, or provide other forms of assistance, to displaced tenants; WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of the Lease, as they relate to tidelands and uplands, do not constitute a violation of the gift clause of the Constitution of the State of California, in that the preservation of affordable housing stock is of significant public benefit and the revenues generated by the terms of the Lease are effectively and efficiently used to enhance the public recreational use of nearby tidelands; WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that the terms and conditions of the Lease comply, and are consistent, with the Charter of the City of Newport Beach including, without limitation, the provisions of Section 200 and 1402 of the Charter; WHEREAS, the City Council also finds and declares that the provisions of the Lease are consistent with the plans, policies, rules and ordinances of the City of Newport Beach and, Cmore specifically, are consistent with the General Plan,. which provides that the mobilehome park may be continued until phased out, and the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program which specifies that it is the intent of the City to preserve the mobilehome park as a means of providing a variety of housing opportunities within the City; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of the Lease are in compliance, and consistent, with the provisions of the Mobilehome Residency Law (Section 798, et seq. of the Civil Code) and the State Zoning and Planning Act (Sections 65863.7 and 65863.8 of the Government Code). -3- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute a Lease with each of the existing Marinapark tenants, the form and content of the Lease to be substantially identical to Exhibit "A." ADOPTED this day of , 1985. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor sn • CI c u $732.00 $550.00 1 - A B 2 - A B 3 - A B 4 - A B 5 - A B 6 - A B 7 - A B F 8 - A B 9 - A B 10 - A B 11 - A B 12 - A B 1 - C D 2 - C D 3 - C D 4 - C D 5 - C D 6 - C D $516.00 1 - E 2 - E 3 - E 4 - E 5 - E 6 - E 8 - E 9 - E 10 - E 11 - E 12 _ E • .7.� +''4••SL�•+�..�r. •u1~•v' !^`'".•'].r'�. �'ti•+r `�v+'Ew.Y '' J��1 y t CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DRAWN "Fw__- DATE 4 G� PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPROVED PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SECT/O,CI /O R.E. N0. - �l Lc `4 { ' 'j • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • i P,.arks, Beaches & Recreation Department DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: September 6, 1983 Robert L. Wynn, City Manager Parks, Beaches and Recreation Director Marinapark Study - Additional Information Request After the initial review of the Marinapark Study -Alternate Uses by the City Council at their Study Session of June 27, 1983, a number of questions and additional information was requested for further deliberation on the concept as proposed in the report. Listed below are answers as determined by the committee and/or other City Departments. An alternate concept that signi- ficantly reduces the impact of vacating the entire mobile home park is provided for your, review. By eliminating 5 trailer spaces, some of the proposed recreational and community uses can be accommodated. I will verbally and graphically show you this plan at your convenience. On Page 7 of the Study we referred to a No ballot measure on coastal legislation. This was wording that was taken from the 1972 "Marinapark Planning Study -A Unique Opportunity for Public Shoreline." It referred to the legislation that created the Coastal Commission. We unfortunately used the historical information in the new report and failed to catch this inconsistency. To further answer the question, there is no new -initiative concerning coastal issues and the report has been corrected to eliminate this statement. 2. A concession operation is discussed on Page 13 and further narrative is provided to clarify this concept. A Community Multi -purpose Building of -6,000 s.f., as indicated on Page 14 of proposed development costs, would include on the ground floor a small ±500 s.f. concession operation similar to what is found at the Corona del Mar City/State Beach. Not envisioned to be.a restaurant, but an operation that provides hamburgers, hot dogs, soft drinks, beach supplies, etc. This recommendation combines Community Center, public restrooms and concession building into one area for cost efficiency. 3. The information regarding traffic generation has been supplied in a memo from the Planning Department (attached). 4. A larger photo map has been mounted to show existing conditions for review purposes. In addition, an alternate concept is shown on an overlay. The question of responsibility of relocating existing tenants was reviewed by the committee as indicated by the Planning Department dated April 4, 1983 (attached). Although discussed by the committee, they chose to not include the information in their report as it was felt that the decision and/or action was beyond the scope of the study. In summary, with a notification to tenants; of a maximum one year, prior to conversion of the mobile home park there are no relocation cost requirements. 1 • -2- • As determined by our Environmental Coordinator, Fred Talarico, the implementation of the recommended proposal would require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the estimated cost of this report would be $8,000 to $12,000. The study committee has to the City Council as request, please call. Attachments indicated a desire to transmit the original recommendations soon as possible. If I can be of help to accommodate this CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT August 30, 1983 T0: Ron Whitley, Parks, Beaches & Recreation Director FROM: Sandra L. Genis, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Marinapark When we last discussed the potential Marinapark redevelopment, you requested that we obtain some additional information for you. This is summarized as follows: Environmental Documentation Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator, has indicated that an environmental impact report (EIR) would be required for the plan earlier proposed to the City Council. The estimated cost of the EIR would be $8,000 to $12,000. Traffic Based on traffic generation rates for similar uses, provided by Traffic Engineering, the proposed plan would result in the generation of approximately 1174 average daily trips ends (ADTE) on a weekday and 2120 average daily trip ends on a Saturday, increases over existing levels of 170 ADTEs and 700 ADTEs, respectively. SANDRA L. GENIS ]g CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: April 4, 1983 TO- Ron Whitley FROM: Sandy Genis!�' SUBJECT: Conversion of Marinapark State statutes for conversion of mobilehome parks exist in the Civil Code, primarily addressing tenant/landlord relations, and in the Government Code, primarily addressing the responsibilities of the governing body to ensure that certain actions are taken. In this case, the City fulfills both the role of the landlord and `that of the governing body. It must therefore meet the responsibilities of both. Under Section 798.56 of the Civil Code a mobilehome park owner must provide homeowners in the park with a notice of change of use as follows: 1. The management gives the homeowners at least 15 days written notice that the management will be appearing before a local governmental board, commission or body to request permits for a change of use of the mobilehome park. 2. After all required permits requesting a change of use have been approved by the local 'governmental board, commission, or body, the management shall give the homeowners six months or more written notice of termination of tenancy. If the change of use requires no local governmental permits, then notice shall be given 12 months or more prior to the managements determination that a change of use will occur. The management in the notice shall disclose and describe in detail the nature of the change of use. 3. The management gives each proposed homeowner written notice thereof prior to the inception of his tenancy that the management is requesting a change of use before local governmental bodies or that a change of use request has been granted. 'rV R.Whitley • . 4/4/83 Page 2. Although the City will not need a permit for a change of use, it would be desirable to notice all homeowners before any public hearings regarding park conversion. Under Section 65863.7 of the Government Code, prior to converting a mobilehome parking to another use, the project proponent must file a report describing the impact conversion will have on the residents of the park. The report is to address the availability of adequate replacement space in mobilehome parks. in addition, as stated in the statute: The person proposing such change in use shall make a copy of the report available to each resident of the mobilehome park at least 15 days prior to the hearing on the impact report by the advisory agency, or if there is no advisory agency, by the legislative body. The legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, shall review such report, prior to any change of use, and may require, as a condition of such change, the person or entity to take steps to mitigate any adverse impact of the conversion on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park. Thus, the City must prepare a "resident impact report", circulate the report to the park residents, and consider the report in reading its ultimate decision regarding conversion. Additional requirements pertain if the conversion involves the filing of a tentative or parcel map. However, because the proposed conversion of Marinapark would entail no subdivisions, these conditions are not a factor. Section 65590 of the Government Code regulates the removal of housing units in the Coastal Zone. Marinapark is in the Coastal Zone, but, because the proposed use is considered coastal dependent, portions of the Section regarding replacement housing would not apply. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER JunC28, 1983 TO: PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK STUDY On June 27th the Newport Beach City Council, in study session, reviewed the Marinapark Study, -at which time it appeared to be the consensus of the City Council that said report was to be referred to the Planning Department and Commission to consider alter- nate uses in conjunction with the preparation of the Specific Area Plan, Local Coastal Plan, the currently ongoing transit studies -and; finally,in light -of the Fair Housing law suit currently active and pending. Possibly we should meet to match notes on the subject matter, inasmuch as it has received con- siderable attention in the last few years. RUl'_WNROBERT LJ 0 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER June 28, 1983 TO: RON WHITLEY, P, B & R DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - MARINAPARK STUDY As a result of the City Council review on June• 27th of the Marinapark Study, the following additional in- formation will be required. 1. On Page 7 of the subject report you referred to a.petition prepared by the Coastal Alliance. Please be more specific and, if possible, obtain the initiative that is allegedly,on the November ballot to establish."stern coastal legislative measure." 2. On Page 13 of the subject report you refer to a concession operation. Please supply information on the size of the community multi -purpose building and, speci- fically, on the size and type of concession operations. 3. In the report on several pages you discussed traffic generation characteristics of the proposed project. Please be more specific with the traffic generation aspects of the proposed development. 4. Please prepare a map and/or an overlay showing present uses in the subject area between 15th Street.and 19th Street. 5. Please obtain an opinion as to whether the City would be responsible for relocation costs of current tenants in the Marinapark. 6. Will an EIR be required for the proposed changed uses, and if an EIR is required please estimate said cost. I am sure additional information will be required as this possibility is further reviewed by different City bodies. CC: Planning Director R �-(V� ROBERT L. WYNN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER August 24, 1982 TO: P, B & R DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: STUDY OF ALTERNATE USES/MARINAPARK MOBILE HOME PARK On August 23rd the Newport Beach City Council directed the P, B & R Department/Commission to institute additional studies and prepare alternate uses for the Marinapark Mobile Home Park. As you know, the current leases extend through 1985. The study, therefore, should be complete for City Council review within one year. This should give ample time for the studies necessary to list feasible alternatives. The study, in addition to listing alternate land uses, should be specific in the follow- ing areas. -- 1. Capital costs to implement the alternate land use plans. 2. Maintenance and operation costs to maintain the alternate land use plans. 3. Estimated value of the current property. Attached, you will find a copy of the various reports that went to the City Council on August 23rd. ROBERT L. WYNN Attachment i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER January 5, 1983 TO:. PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION DIRECTOR FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK MOBILE HOME PARK STUDY You and members of your Commission are cur- rently studying alternate uses for the Marinapark Mobile Home use. Recently Assembly Bill No. 2748 (copy attached) was adopted. I thought this bill, which impacts replace- ments of mobile home parks, may be of interest to you in your study. 23-Gu ROBERT L. YNN • • r -,ovp,� Compliments of Assemblywoman Marian Bergeson 70t1i Assembly District Assembly Bill No. 2748 `il«— , ;ems— O.. Ts3 Passed the Assembly August 30, 1982 Chief Clerk of the Assembly Passed the Senate August 25, 1982 Secretary of the Senate This bill was received by the Governor this day of , 1982, at o'clock _M. Private Secretary of the Governor AB 2748 — 2 — — 3 — OAB 2748 January 1, 1989, the provisions contained in the bill for .CHAPTER which state reimbursement is required. An act to amend, repeal, and add Section 66427.4 of the Government Code, relating to subdivisions. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2748, Wray. Subdivisions: conversion of mobilehome parks. (1) Existing law authorizes the legislative body or an advisory agency which is authorized by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove a tentative or a parcel map for a subdivision to be created from the conversion of a mobilehome park to another use, to require the subdivider to take steps to mitigate any adverse impact of the conversion on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park. This bill would leave this authority intact, but alternatively would require the legislative body or the advisory agency to take such steps by zoning for additional replacement housing, unless there already exists land zoned for replacement housing or adequate space in other mobilehome parks for those residents who will be displaced, or to make a finding that neither zoning for additional replacement housing or requiring the subdivider to mitigate the adverse impact of the conversion is feasible. (2) Article XIII B of the California Constitution and Sections 2231 and 2234 of the Revenue and Taxation Code require the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Other provisions require the Department of Finance to review statutes disclaiming these costs and provide, in certain cases, for making claims to the State Board of Control for reimbursement. However, this bill would provide that no appropriation is made and no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (3) This bill, in compliance with Section 2231.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, would also repeal, as of The people of the State of California do enact as follows SECTION 1. Section 66427.4 of the Government Code is amended to read: 66427.4. At the time of filing a tentative or parcel map for a subdivision to be created from the conversion of a mobilehome park to another use, the subdivider shall also file a report on the impact of the conversion upon the displaced residents of the mobilehome park to be converted. In determining the impact of the conversion on displaced mobilehome park residents, the report shall address the availability of adequate replacement space in mobilehome parks. The subdivider shall make a copy of the report available to each resident of the mobilehome park at least 15 days prior to the hearing on the map by the advisory agency or, if there is no advisory agency, by the legislative body. The legislative body, or an advisory agency which is authorized by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the map, shall be required to (a) take steps to mitigate any significant adverse impact of the conversion on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park by zoning for additional replacement housing, (b) find that there already exists land zoned for replacement housing or adequate space in other mobilehome parks for those residents who will be displaced, (c) require the subdivider to take steps to mitigate any significant adverse impact of the conversion on the 'ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park, or (d) make a finding, based upon substantial evidence, that mitigation pursuant to subparagraphs (a) and (c) is not feasible. Such finding shall be reviewable pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As used herein, "feasible" shall mean capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into r '.' ��s AB 2748 — 4 — 0 • — 5 — 04-B 2748 account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. This section establishes a minimum standard for local regulation of conversions of mobilehome parks into other uses and shall not prevent a local agency from enacting more stringent measures. This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1989, and as of such date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, which is chaptered before January 1, 1989, deletes or extends such date. SEC. 2. Section 66427.4 is added to the Government Code, to read: 66427.4. At the time of filing a tentative or parcel map for a subdivision to be created from the conversion of a mobilehome park to another use, the subdivider shall also file a report on the impact of the conversion upon the displaced residents of the mobilehome park to be converted. In determining the impact of the conversion on displaced mobilehome park residents, the report shall address the availability of adequate replacement space in mobilehome parks. The subdivider shall make a copy of the report available to each resident of the mobilehome park at least 15 days prior to the hearing on the map by the advisory agency or, if there is no advisory agency, by the legislative body. The legislative body, or an advisory agency which is authorized by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the map, may require the subdivider to take steps to mitigate any adverse impact of the conversion on the ability of displaced mobilehome park residents to find adequate space in a mobilehome park. This section establishes a minimum standard for local regulation of conversions of mobilehome parks into other uses and shall not prevent a local agency from enacting more stringent measures. This section shall become operative January 1, 1989. SEC. 3. No appropriation is made and no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution or Section 2231 or 2234 of the Revenue and Taxation Code because the local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act. • TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Councilogeting August 23, 1982 Agenda Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH V�� ✓ City Council Planning Department Amendment No. 576 0' Request to consider an amendment to a portion of Districting Map No. 9 to reclassify the Marinapark Mobile Home Park site from the R-4 District and the Unclassified District to the R-4/MHP District and the Unclassified/MHP District. LOCATION: The Marinapark Mobile Home Park property is located at 1770 West Balboa Boulevard, northerly of West Balboa Boulevard, between 15th Street and 18th Street on the Balboa Peninsula. • ZONES: Unclassified APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Proposal It is proposed to change the zoning on the property from the Unclas- sified District to the Unclassified/MHP District. Amendment procedures are outlined in Chapter 20.84 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Planning Commission.Action and Recommendations At its meeting of August 5, 1982, the Planning Commission voted (5 Ayes, 1 Abstention and 1 Absent) to (1) disapprove Amendment No. 576, (2) to recommend to the City Council that the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission be directed to initiate additional studies and prepare a plan for the ultimate use of the site, and (3) to recommend that an amendment to the City's Local Coastal Program be •initiated when feasible (that is, when a plan and a schedule for the redevelopment of the site has been adopted). Section 20.84.040 of the Municipal Code provides that if the Planning Commission disapproves an amendment application, no further action shall be taken unless an appeal is filed in writing with the City Council within twenty-one days after such disapproval. Since the City Council directed the Planning Commission to commence public hearings to determine the advisability of imposing the mobile home park overlay zone on the Marinapark property, and inasmuch as the Planning Commission has passed on to the City Council additional recom- i 0 Y TO: City Council - 2. ' mendations regarding the Marinapark site, the Council may desire to call this matter up for review on its own motion, as provided for under Section 20.84.060. The last meeting that the City Council will •have to consider setting a public hearing on the Planning Commission's disapproval of Amendment No. 576 is August 23, 1982. If the City Council does not wish to consider Amendment No. 576, it may still act on the Planning Commission's remaining Marinapark recommendations independent of Amendment No. 576. Attached for the information and review of the City Council is an excerpt from the Draft Planning Commission minutes of August 5, 1982, a copy of the Planning Commission staff report, and the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission. - Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT A S D. HEWICKER, Director • JDH/kk Attachments for City Council only: 1) Excerpt of Planning Commission minutes 2) Planning Commission Staff Report 3) Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission Recommendations C7 COMMISSIONERS AT7 ENT NO. 1 MINUTES August 5, 1982 m m y. City of Newport Beach DRAFT ROANICALI I I I I I I I INDEX • • Request to consider an amendment to a portion of Item 11 Districting Map No. 9 to reclassify the Marinapark Mobile Home Park site from the Unclassified District to the Unclassified/MHP District. LOCATION: The Marinapark Mobile Home Park property, located at 1770 West Balboa AMENDMENT Boulevard, northerly of West Balboa NO. 576 Boulevard, between 15th Street and 18th Street on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Planning Director Hewicker presented information on the most recent sales of coaches in the Marinapark Mobile Home Park. He stated that indications are that people are paying somewhere in the neighborhood of $75,000 to $90,000 as a lot premium for space in Marinapark, recognizing that the leases expire in 1985. He added that each individual sale and new lease has to be approved by the City Council. The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. James Parker, 1201 Dove Street, representing the tenants of Marinapark Mobile Home Park, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Parker stated that this issue is virtually identical to that of the DeAnza Mobile Home Park issue. He stated that the overlay zone provides an added layer of protection for the actual residents of the mobile home park. Mr. Parker stated that in' this particular case, the City of Newport Beach is the landowner. He stated that the overlay zone requires that a landowner who wishes to change a mobile home use to another use, must present a specific plan. He stated that this plan must go through the public hearing process and must allow for relocation assistance, as required by State law. He stated that the tenants of Marinapark are in favor of the overlay zone. -5- 1110 11 9 i,COMNVSSIONER51 MINUTES August 5, 1982 r c m c m T m y > of Newport Beach ROLL CALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX • • Commissioner Balalis asked how many full time tenants reside in Marinapark. Mr. Parker stated that of the 58 spaces in Marinapark, the staff report indicates that there are 23 permanent residents. Commissioner Balalis questioned the definition of a permanent resident. Mr. Parker stated that many tests have been applied to determine what constitutes a permanent resident, such as number of days a person sleeps in a given place, if the person is registered to vote at that location, or if the person's children attend school in the district. Mr. Parker stated that although Marinapark does not have a 100 percent occupied permanent residency, he stated that 50 percent of the people who signed their leases in 1973 with Marinapark, are still residing in the Park. He also stated that some of the tenants, which are not on a full-time basis, have resided at Marinapark for a cumulatively longer period than others, which indicates an on -going commitment. He stated that many of the permanent residents of Marinapark are senior citizens. Chairman King stated that he does not assess absentee owners as having any commitment to the City. He stated that if the absentee owners have an income generating piece of property, it is in their best interest to continuing renewing the lease year after year. Chairman King stated that this issue and the DeAnza Mobile Home Park issue are significantly different, in that the landlords are different; one being the City, as opposed to a private landlord. He stated that this proposal would cause the City to take an action against itself, by adding another layer of both cost and time, when the area is public tidelands and has been planned as public recreation open -space for some time. Mr. Parker stated that the City imposed this overlay zone protection for the tenants of the DeAnza Mobile Home Park and should provide the same protection for E15 COMMISSIONERS F-i-; f7cG) 3City �I�o10 � N CI August 5, 1982 0 Beach the tenants of Marinapark. He stated that the City will undoubtedly require this layer of protection for the tenants of the other mobile home parks within the City and will impose this overlay zone on every private owner of mobile home parks in the City. He stated that because the City is the landowner in this particular case, the City should not be exempt from the overlay zone, which it imposes on private landowners. Commissioner Balalis stated that the Local Coastal Plan and the Housing Element designates this property as recreational and environmental open space. He stated that the other mobile home parks within the City do not have this designation. Therefore, he stated that a specific plan need not be developed for this property, as all of the documents indicate an existing plan for • I I ( I I I recreational and environmental open space on the Marinapark property. Mr. Parker stated that the current lease which exists between the City and the tenants of Marinapark, grants to the tenants the option to renew the term of the lease for an additional period of time, unless the City has decided and adopted a specific plan to use the tidelands for tideland purposes, or to use the Park for some other public purpose. He stated that the City has retained for itself, the absolute right to control its desired use of the property. However, he stated that the City is required to formally adopt such a plan. He stated that the adoption of the mobile home overlay zone requires the City to adopt such a plan. I I I I I I Mr. Parker referred to a mobile home park in the Malibu area which was owned by a governmental entity. He stated that the leases were cancelled and all of the • tenants moved out, because the mobile home park was to be converted for public purposes. He stated that this occurred several years ago and the property still sits vacant, because the governmental entity did not have a specific plan for the property and did not go through the public hearing process. -7- MINUTES I • August 5, 1982 • MINUTES • C] 3 � c J c O 0 w J m x d A y o of Newport Beach Mr. Parker stated that the Marinapark property is valuable land and the mobile home park is a good interim use which meets a number of City policies, such as providing a variety of housing within the City. He stated that this is probably the closest to affordable housing within the City of Newport Beach. Chairman King stated that a mobile home park is a good interim use of the property and that the City is committed to that use until the lease expires in 1985. Mr. Parker referred to the Marinapark Planning Study which he stated is 10 years old. He stated under the mobile home overlay zone, the City would be required to develop and adopt a specific plan which can be defined to the tenants of Marinapark before they are displaced and relocated. Commissioner Balalis stated that the tenants of Marinapark have a contractural agreement with the City for a specified amount of time in their lease until 1985 and a specified time of renewal for five years, unless the City takes other action. He stated that the placement of an overlay zone on Marinapark, accomplishes absolutely nothing for the tenants of Marinapark. He stated that the overlay zone provides protection for other mobile home park tenants, where the tenants do not have a specified length of time for occupancy. Mr. Parker stated that according to the terms of the lease, the City Council could theoretically say that Marinapark is no longer required for any public trust purpose or any other public purpose, and Marinapark would no longer be in existence after 1985. He stated that the imposition of the overlay zone on Marinapark would add more protection to the tenants of the Marinapark Mobile Home Park. He stated that the City should subject themselves to the same public hearing process, as any other landowner in the City would have to. Mr. Parker stated that the Local Coastal Plan only indicates that the Marinapark property will rezoned for an open space district. Im INDEX 9 • August 5, 1982 • MINUTES 3 F nri v m m F G1 v D of Newport Beach ROILCALL I I I I I I I I I INDEX • • Planning Director Hewicker stated that the LCP Land Use Plan contains language that the mobile home park will be retained and public access improved bayward of the mobile home park. He stated that prior to the time that the City can change the use of the property, public hearings'would have to be held and it would have to be heard by the Coastal Commission, before the LCP Land Use.Plan could be changed. Mr. Robert Burnham, Assistant City Attorney, referred to the gift of public funds issue and stated that if DeAnza Bayside wants to redevelop their property, they can fund the relocation, benefits, and compensation which would have to be paid to the existing tenants through the profits which would be derived from the redevelopment of the DeAnza property. He added that the City does not have this option, in this particular case. He stated that in the event the overlay zone is approved for Marinapark, the issue of the gift of public funds should be researched further. Mr. Tom Heinz, resident of 217 19th Street, appeared .before the Commission and stated that the tenants of Marinapark are approaching the end of their ten year lease. He stated that there is a need for public use facilities in the area for boating purposes. He suggested that during the next two years, a solid proposal should be developed for this property. Commissioner Balalis expressed his concern with the metal posts which impede access to the area. Mr. Heinz concurred and stated that these should be removed to improve public access. Ms. Rae Cohen, resident of 1501 Antigua Way, and Chairman of the Subcommittee for Marinapark for the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Cohen stated that the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission voted 6 Ayes and 1 Abstention, that the request for a Mobile Home Park overlay zone for Marinapark be denied and that the Marinapark area be pursued for development as a marine and beach park. She stated that there is a great need for additional bay access for small boat launching in this area and dingy storage. she stated that this property should now be utilized for public purposes, since it has been leased property.since 1955. b15 COMMISSIONERS I MINUTES I _- August 5, 1982 • o x r c c w n m x 0 y a _ 0 - ^ ROLL CALL I • • of Newport Beach Commissioner Winburn asked Ms. Cohen how the swimming beach and the small boat launching area between 18th and 19th Street is progressing. Ms. Cohen stated that this area is being utilized by the public, but the street ends are congested because there is not enough space for the boats and trailers to park. She stated that there are many residents of Newport Beach who desire access to the bay and the Marinapark property is a good location. Commissioner Balalis suggested that the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission also consider providing some type of housing for a mixed -use concept in this area. He expressed his concern for the tenants of Marinapark who have resided at the Park on a full time basis for at least the last five years. He suggested that perhaps 25 residential units be.provided, along with the proper parking, and small boat launching facilities, which would constitute a multi -use facility. Commissioner Goff asked if a mobile home park is an appropriate use for tidelands trust land. Mr. Burnham stated that this question has been asked in the past. He stated that the answer depends upon the size of the parcel, the type of residential uses, and the duration of time involved. In response to a hypothetical question posed by Commissioner Goff, Mr. Burnham stated that if litigation in the future were determine that a mobile home park is not an appropriate use for tidelands trust land, the existing tenants would be given the right, over an extended period of time, to relocate. He also stated that such a litigation would be subject to appeal. Commissioner Kurlander stated that the California Civil Code requires a 12-month notice for the change of use of a mobile home park. He stated that in the event of such a change, the tenants would be given a minimum 12- month notice. -10- INDEX r� % COMMISSIONERS � r c L'7 y > City c a a o ROLL CALL I • • August 5, 1982 • of Newport Beach Mr. Parker stated that the City Council has determined several times in the past that a mobile home park is not an improper use of tidelands trust land. He stated that the gift of public funds issue is a legitimate question. However, he referred to the State Civil Code and stated that the City, as the mobile home park owner, may be required to provide compensation for relocation expenses for the tenants in the event that the mobile home park use is changed. Mr. Parker stated that the Marinapark property would be the worst place on the Peninsula to place a boat launching facility, because of the already existing traffic congestion in the area. In summarizing, Mr. Parker stated that the Mobile Home Park overlay zone for Marinapark is a fair requirement for the City to impose on itself. He urged the Commission to adopt the overlay zone for Marinapark. Commissioner Winburn stated that as a past member of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission, many locations have been considered for a small boat launching facility on the bay. She stated that the Marinapark location is the only feasible location for the use of boat trailers and parking spaces. Mr. Parker stated that the parking and traffic congestion in this area will be staggering if boat launching facilities are provided at this location. He stated that boat launching facilities would be more feasible in the upper bay area. Commissioner King asked Mr. Parker if he would be agreeable to an overlay zone which would expire in five years. Mr. Parker stated that this would defeat the purpose of the overlay zone. He stated that the overlay zone requires that the landowner develop a specific plan for the property. He stated that a specific plan is what the tenants want. Commissioner King stated that he can not support an overlay zone which would dictate the City imposing another layer of government upon itself. He stated that in the case of a private developer in a private park, the money spent on the overlay zone is hopefully recaptured in the resulting redevelopment. men MINUTES INDEX 'COMMISSIONERS • August 5, 1982 • MINUTES � x � r � m City of Newport Beach ROILCALL I I I I I I I INDEX Planning Director Hewicker stated that the Commission may want to bring to the attention of the City Council the steps which would have to be taken in order for a new use to be considered before the termination of the lease in 1985. He suggested that perhaps the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission could be directed to initiate.the additional studies and come up with a plan and the Planning Department could then initiate an amendment to the LCP Land Use Plan when feasible. Motion X Motion was made to recommend to the City Council that Ayes X X IX X X Amendment No. 576, be denied and further recommended Abstain X that the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission be Absent * directed'to initiate the additional studies to come up with a.plan for this area and the Planning Department • I I I I I I I I could then initiate an amendment to the LCP Land Use Plan when feasible, which MOTION CARRIED. El Request to permit the installation of outdoor lighting Item #3 on 20 foot high standards 'in conjunction with an existing tennis court in the R-1-B-2 District. LOCATION: A portion of Lot 287, Newport Heights Tract, located at 2321 22nd Street on JUSE PERMIT \ the southerly side of 22nd Street, INO. 2082 between Irvine Avenue and Tustin Avenue. ZONE: \ R-1-B-2 APPLICANT: Rigger Luby, Newport Beach OWNER: Same a'applicant Mr. Robert Burnham, Assist a t City Attorney, stated that although Commissioner Goff as not a member of the Commission at the time this item s first introduced - on the Agenda, he stated that Commi ioner Goff would be eligible to vote upon this item, bec a he has read the previous staff reports on this matter. -12- APPROVED CONDI- TIONALLY L Planning Comttission Meet August 5, 1982 Agenda Item No. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 • CITY OF N3MRT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Amendment No. 576 (Public Hearing) Request to consider an amendment to a portion of Districting Map No. 9 to reclassify the Marinapark Mobile Home Park site from the R-4 District and the Unclassified District to the R-4/MHP District and the Unclassified/MHP District. LOCATION: The Marinapark Mobile Home Park property is located at 1770 West Balboa Boulevard, northerly of West Balboa Boulevard, between 15th Street and 18th Street on the Balboa Peninsula. ZONES: APPLICANT: • ONNER: R-4 and Unclassified City of Newport Beach Same as applicant It is proposed to change the zoning on the property from the R-4 District and the Unclassified District to the R-4/MHP District and Unclassified/MHP District. Amendment procedures are outlined in Chapter 20.84 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Suggested Action Hold hearing; close hearing; if desired, Reomnezd to the City Council that Amendment No. 576, reclassifying the Marinapark Mobile Home Park site from the Unclassified District to the Unclassified/MHP District be approved. Since the time of the legal notice and first staff report additional project •review has occurred. It was determined that the R-4 parcel is not a part of the mobile home park and should not be included in the reclassification. The suggested action has been prepared to reflect this determination. Environmental Significance This project has been reviewed and it has been determined that it is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15079.3). CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals by any local government, as defined in Section 30109 of the Public Resources Code, necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal TO: Planning Corfission - 2 • program pursuant to the California Coastal Act (commencing with Section 30000 of the Public Resources Code). • Conformance with the General Plan Land Use Element. The Land Use Element of the General Plan (Pg. 19) designates the site as "Recreational and Environmental Open Space with the following discussion of the Mobile Home Park site. "Marinapark shall continue as a mobile hone park until such time as that use is phased out, at which time the property shall be rezoned to the OS - Open Space - District." The proposed rezoning will prohibit redevelopment of the mobile hare park and insure the continued use of the property as a mobile hone park until such time as the MHP designation is removed. When the MHP Zone is removed the site can be redeveloped and reclassified to open Space as stated in the Land Use Element. Therefore, application of the Mobile Hare Overlay Zone to this site is consistent with the Land Use Element. Housing Element. The Housing Element discussion of mobile home parks (Pp. 45-48) consists of a general overview of the City's mobile hone parks, •the tenants living in mobile hare parks, and the cost of mobile home housing. An analysis of housing costs shows that a mobile home can be a source of housing for low and moderate income households who have owned their mobile homes for several years. However, if mobile hone prices such as those observed in 1981 and discussed in the Housing Element prevail the cost of a mobile hoe will exceed the affordability ranges of low and moderate income households. Housing Element Objective 7 which is aimed at promoting and assisting the development of housing for law and moderate income households has an implementation action directed towards mobile hone parks. Implementation Action 7e states that the City will preserve mobile hoe park land uses through the establishment of a mobile home park zone. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Housing Element objective. Recreation and Open Space Element. The Recreation and Open Space Element (Pg. 17) states that the Balboa Peninsula is not considered to be deficient in terms of parks. However, the Element also identifies the existing las Arenas Park for expansion and development as a marine -oriented park. A concept plan for the redevelopment of Marinapark/Las Arenas Park was approved by the City Council in June of 1972. Appling the Mobile Home Zone to the Marinapark Mobile Hare Park would not preclude the removal of the mobile hone park and the implementation of a redevelopment plan. Therefore, the application of the IsSpace have zone to this site is not inconsistent with the Recreation and open Space Element. Marinapark Planning Study A comprehensive planning study for the Marinapark site was prepared for the City Council and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission in 1972. A copy of this study was attached to the June 10, 1982 staff report which discussed the setting of this item for public hearing. If additional copies of this study are needed they are available at the Planning DeparbTent. The plan recommended that the mobile home park be phased out and a Newport io: Planning Caosion - 3 • Peninsula Tennis and Aquatic Center be established, including the following elenents: 1. Open Space Vista and Harbor Green 2. • Night -lighted Tennis Courts 3. Tennis Center Parking Facilities 4. Tot lot 5. Aquatic Sailing Center 6. Public Restroom 7. Basketball Courts S. Volleyball Courts 9. Community Meeting Room Patio (between the existing buildings) 10. Bicycle Paseo Link 11. Small Boat Regatta Staging Area 12. Public Parking Facilities 13. Expanded Sand Beach At the May 10 City Council meeting the Council requested that the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission evaluate alternative proposals for the mobile have park such as those discussed in the 1972 Marinapark Planning Study. The Planning Department staff will be meeting with the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission on Tuesday, August 3rd and report their findings and rec=endations to the Planning Commission at the August 5th meeting. • Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program The Development Policies and Land Use Plan (LUP) of the Local Coastal Program discuss the Marinapark Mobile Home Park (Pg. 42). The mobile hare park portion of the site is designated for "Recreational and Environmental Open Space" uses. in addition, the LUP states that it is the intent of the City to preserve the mobile home park use as a means of providing a variety of housing opportunities within the City. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program. Tidelands Trust The Marinapark site consists of approximately 5 acres of tidelands and submerged lands granted to the City of Newport Beach by the State of California on May 25, 1919 and April 5, 1927. On: May 29, 1929, this grant was amended by the State of California to set our provisions relating to the granting of franchises upon or leases of these certain tidelands. An additional portion of the property was acquired from the Pacific Electric Land •Company on July 7, 1919. In 1972, the City Attorney give the opinion that residential uses are appropriate uses of the tidelands trust. At the time the leases have been granted or extended, the City Council has made the determination that the leases are not inconsistent with the trust purposes imposed upon public tidelands. Also, it has been found that the leases are not in violation of the gift clause of the State Constitution and that they complied with the Charter of the City of Newport Beach. Litigation has resulted in opinions that only those residential uses in which there is a general, state-wide interest would be consistent with the trust obligations. The June 10 staff report mentioned hotels or motels as a residential use with statewide 13 T0: Planning cor*ion - 4 • interest. In addition, recent legislation (AB 2853 Housing Elements) and litigation has established that there is a state-wide interest in the supply of •housing particularly housing affordable to low and moderate income households. Therefore, the acceptability of long term, private residential uses on this site is not clear. Background on May 10, 1982, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to commence public hearings to determine the advisability of imposing the mobile have park zone on Marinapark. At the June 10, 1982 Planning Commission meeting the Camiission set the reclassification of the Marinapark Mobile Ham' Park for public hearing on August 5, 1982. The Mobile Home Park (MHP) zone as adopted is an overlay zone designed to be applied to existing mobile home parks in conjunction with an underlying primary zoning designation. The MHP zone requires that a minimum of six (6) criteria be taken into consideration to determine whether the MHP Zone is appropriate for the property. Those criteria are as follows: a) Existing zoning and General Plan designations. b) The age and condition of the mobile here park. • c) The relationship of the mobile here park to surrounding land uses. d) Vehicle access to the area under consideration. e) Site area. f) Site configuration. These items are discussed in the site discussion section of this report. When a property is zoned MHP none of the uses allowed by the underlying zoning are permitted. However, the MHP zone does contain a section which allows for the removal of the overlay zone provided that several findings are made by the City. Those findings are as follows: a) That the proposed zoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach and all elements thereof, and in the event that the proposed zoning is P-C, that the Planned Community Development Plan has been submitted and is consistent with the General Plan and all elements thereof; b) That the property which is the subject of the zoning amendment would be more appropriately developed in accordance with uses • permitted by the underlying zoning, or proposed zoning, and if the underlying zoning or proposed zoning is P-C, that a Planned Canmznity Development Plan has been submitted and the property would be more appropriately developed with the uses specified in that plan; c) That a mobile here park phaseout plan has been prepared, reviewed and considered and found to be acceptable. A phaseout plan shall not be found to be acceptable unless it includes (1) a time schedule and method by which existing mobile hares, cabanas, ramadas and other substantial improvements and tenants, are to be relocated or appropriately canpensated; (2) methods of TO: Planning CoOssion - 5 CJ • • mitigating the housing impacts on tenants having law and moderate incomes, elderly tenants and tenants who are handicapped; (3) the programs or other means that are to be inplemented such that the housing impacts on those described in (2), above, are mitigated. For purposes of this provision, low and moderate incomes" shall be defined in accordance with the provisions of the Housing Element of the City of Newport Beach. Removal of the overlay MHP zone would permit development of the property with those uses allowed by the primary zoning and the General Plan or Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program. Site Discussion As previously discussed the proposed zone is consistent with the Land Use Plan of the Local Coastal Program and the, Land Use, Housing, and Recreation and Environmental Open Space Elements of the General Plan. The proposed MHP Zone is also cmipatible with the primary underlying Unclassified zoning. The Marinapark Mobile Hone Park is located on the North side of West Balboa Boulevard between 15th Street and 18th Street. This park is rectangular in shape with no apparent features detracting from its use as a mobile hare park. The Park has adequate vehicle access from both West Balboa Boulevard and 18th Street. The property is approximately 5 acres in size, has 60 spaces and is developed at 12.0 units per acre. Information provided by park management in January of 1982 for the annual State Department of Finance population estimate indicated that 23 of the spaces were occupied by permanent residents. The permanent resident population at that time was 36 persons or approximately 1.6 persons per household. The mobile hone park was developed by the City of Newport Beach in 1955. The Park is managed by the City with individual tenants leasing their space from the City. The current lease was negotiated in March of 1976 and terminates in September of 1985. Space rents range from $308 to $366 per month. The park and mobile hares are generally in good condition with no signs of deterioration or neglect. The mobile home park is not out of character with the area. The Park is surrounded with residential, recreational and visitor -serving facilities. Since the Park is occupied by both full-time and part-time residents it functions as a source of resident housing and as a visitor -serving facility. •It is expected that the MHP zone will preserve the mobile here park use until such time as the MHP designation is removed. It should be noted that application of the MHP zone to the property may enhance the sale of individual mobile homes because of a perceived assurance of a continued mobile hoe park use. The possible increase in the sale price of individual mobile hares may increase housing costs beyond the affordability ranges of low and moderate /S- TO: Planning Caresion - 6 income households. Both existing and future tenants of the mobile hare park should be aware of the provision of the mobile ham' park zone and take them •into consideration. PIANNING DEPAFUMEW JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director Senior F CTB:nma Attachments: 1. Map 2. Mobile Hcme Park Zone • • (p ATTACHMENT •L 0 • • Sections: 20.20.010 20.20.020 20.20.030 20.20.040 20.20.050 Page 63-1 MOBILE HOME PARK DISTRICT Chapter 20.20 MOBILE HOME PARKS Chapter 20.20 MOBILE HOME PARKS Intent Definitions Criteria for Application of Zone Uses Permitted Removal of the Mobile Hare Park Overlay Zone 20.20.010 INTENT. The Mobile Home Park Residential zone is hereby established as an overlay zone to permit the application of a mobile home zone to parcels of land developed with mobile hare parks and zoned with a primary underlying zoning designation. The purpose of the mobile hoe park zone is to designate existing mobile hare parks in appropriate locations for mobile hone park uses in order that these uses may be encouraged, maintained, and protected. The regulations of this district are designed to achieve an environment of stable, desirable residential character and preserve areas or oamiunities developed with mobile home residential uses. Whenever reference is made in this section or on any districting maps to MHP, this shall mean Mobile Home Park Overlay Zone. 20.20.020 DEFINITIONS. As used in this Chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: (a) Mobile home - "Mobile hone" is a structure transportable on a street or highway by authorization or a permit in one or more sections designed and equipped for human habitation to be used with or without a foundation system. Mobile hare includes manufactured hones but does not include recreation vehicles, commercial coaches, or factory -built housing. • (b) Mobile home park - "Mobile home park" is any area of land used primarily for the placing, parking or storage of two or more nubile hares for housekeeping, sleeping or living quarters. (c) Mobile home space - "Mobile home space" is any area, tract of land, site, lot, pad or portion of a mobile hone Park designated or used for the occupancy of one mobile hone. 0 K Cage 63-2 MOBILE HOME PARK DISTRICT Chapter 20.20 20.20.030 CRITERIA FOR APPLICATION OF ZONE. The City Council, in making its determination whether to apply the MPH zone to any particular property, shall consider the following factors in making its determination as to whether the MHP zone is appropriate for the property: (a) Existing zoning and General Plan designations. (b) The age and condition of the mobile home park. (c) The relationship of the mobile home park to surrounding land uses. (d) Vehicle access to the area under consideration. (e) Site area. (f) Site configuration. 20.20.040 USES PERMITTED. • (a) Mobile home parks as regulated by the State of California. (b) Accessory uses and structures incidental to the operation of mobile home parks such as recreation facilities and/or eommarnity centers of a non-oamercial nature, either public or private, storage facilities for the use of the mobile hone park residents and any other uses or structures that are incidental to the operation of a mobile home park. (c) Whenever property is zoned MHP, any use permitted by the underlying zoning of such property shall not be permitted. 20.20.050 REMOVAL OF THE MOBILE HOME PARK OVERLAY ZONE. The City Council shall not approve a zoning amendment for any parcel, which amendment would have the effect of removing the MEP designation from that property, unless the following findings have -been made: (a) That the proposed zoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach and all elements thereof, and in the event that the proposed zoning is P-C, that the Planned Camunity Development Plan has been submitted and is • consistent with the General Plan and all elements thereof; That (b) the property which is the subject of the zoning amendment could be more appropriately developed in accordance with uses permitted by the underlying zoning, or proposed zoning, and if the underlying zoning or proposed zoning is P-C, that a Planned Community Development Plan has been submitted and the property would be more appropriately developed with the uses specified in that plan; /9 j(7 • Oe 63-3 MOBILE HOW PARK DISMUCr Chapter 20.20 M • (c) That a mobile hcMe park phaseout plan has been prepared, reviewed and considered and found to be acceptable. A phaseout plan shall not be found to be acceptable unless it includes (1) a time schedule and method by which existing mobile homes, cabanas, ramsdas and other substantial improvements and tenants, are to be relocated or appropriately carpensated; (2) methods of mitigating the housing impacts on tenants having low and moderate incomes, elderly tenants and tenants who are handicapped; (3) the programs or other means that are to be implemented such that the housing impacts on those described in (2), .above, are mitigated. For purposes of this provision, "low and moderate incomes" shall be defined in accordance with the provisions of the Housing Element of the City of Newport Beach. (Adopted by Ord. 1894; 'January 11, 1982). • C ao /•co � C ,. ���� Z"t�m.�? - JgYYIC'.r'Kli nPi2f" N0, S% ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH �� •C PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION August 4, 1982 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION SUBJECT: APPLICATION OF THE MOBILE HOME PARK OVERLAY ZONE TO 14ARINAPARK RECOMMENDATION: • Deny the request for a Mobile Home Park overlay zone for Marina - park and; pursue returning this valuable and highly desirable public resource to public use at the expiration of the existing leases which terminate in 1985. DISCUSSION: The Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission at thei est, as presented ation of a Mobile r As City owned public tidelands it was felt by the Commission that for over 30 years the Marinapark properly has been used by a relative few tenants many, perhaps over half, that are not even permanent residents. It was further recommended that the City develop the land into a City -owned and operated marine and beach park. This concept would include consideration for much • needed public amenities such as a small boat launching area, small boat storage, parking and public recreation programs. The Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission strongly urges that their recommendation be given consideration. &eC. Bruce Stuart, Chairman Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission BS/dob 02-1 � eft CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Office of CITY ATTORNEY June 2, 1980 To: City Manager From: City Attorney Subject: Acquisition of Two Trailer Spaces - Marinapark In response to your memorandum of May 28, I have reviewed the Marinapark lease. The lease provides for a definite term running to September 15, 1985, for each trailer space in Marinapark. The provision on term, paragraph 3, page 3, indicates that after September 30, 1985, "should the City Council find and determine on or about the expiration of this lease that Newport Marinapark is not required for any public trust purpose, or other public purpose, lessee shall have the option to extend this lease for five (5) years following the expiration of the initial term, upon the same conditions herein contained." It would seem to me that at the end of the initial term we would have the ability, though it is not expressed in the lease, to terminate the lease as to a portion of Marinapark if that area is needed for a public trust purpose or other public purpose. However, an attempt to terminate the lease over a portion of Marinapark prior to the termination of the primary term would probably require the City's acquisition of the value of the lease from the lessee. I do not believe vae have discretion under Section 7 of the lease, page 5, regarding "sale" to "arbitrarily" refuse to consent to a sale or transfer of one or more mobilehomes in hopes that we would be able "for free" to acquire the lessee's interest for public purpose. In conclusion, I do not believe we have the right under the lease to terminate the two spaces in question without the pay- ment of adequate consideration. I believe we do not have the legal ability to refuse the sale or assignment should these parcels be up for sale at some tim the future during the term of the lease without incurring a liability. However, at the end of the term I believe we may be able to dispose of these two parcels without incurring City liability. June 2, 1980 Page Two Acquisition of Two Trailer Spaces - Marinapark In regards to the access issue involved, it may be cheaper for the City to sever a small portion of the American Legion lease to widen the access parcel rather than deal with the mobilehome site. As you are probably aware, there have been considerable changes in the California law over the last several years providing considerable protection to mobilehome tenants, including certain relocation rights and certain rights to main- tain their mobilhome tenancy even in light of public interests in terminating the tenancy. To fight a mobilehome tenant in these times is a difficult task. jl Hugh R of fin CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MEMORANDUM: From t'0....... Mr..,Robert..!Jyi???........................... ...April 21,......... , 19.80... ............ ........ Both, this weekend and last weekend parking in Marinapark by outsiders has become a serious problem! When tenants come in, their spaces are taken by outsiders and they become very upset. The requirements necessary to have them towed out is unreal.. (owner's name, legal owner's name, address of both etc.) Since I am not a City employee, I really don't have the authority to tow cars out. In trying to enforce the 'no parking' in Marinapark by outsiders, I have been chased, threatened, cussed at and had my own car damaged. May I suggest that the Moter Maids be authorized to ticket cars in the park when called and I feel this will solve some of our problems. If nothing else, the tenants will feel that we are trying to do something to help Reply wanted NC alleviate the parking problem and it will get worse as summer approaches. Reply not necessary ❑ By Norb....Reinhart.. ....................................... NI.20. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER _April 21, 1980 TO: NORB REINHA T, Marinapark anager FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: TOWING OF UNAUTHORIZED PARKING By this memo, you are hereby authorized to impound vehicles improperly parked and unauthorized by the tenants from the area within the Marinapark itself. This authorization is contingent upon Section 22658(a) of the California State Vehicle Code. This section reads as follows: "The owner or person in lawful possession of any private property may, subsequent to giving notice to the City Police...cause the removal of a vehicle parked on such property to .the nearest public garage if there is displayed in plain view on the property a sign prohibiting public parking and containing the telephone number of the local traffic law enforcement agency. The person causing removal of such vehicle shall comply with the requirements of Section ... 22853 relating to notice in the same manner as applicable to an officer removing a vehicle from private property." Section 22853 of the Vehicle Code reads as follows: "Whenever a ... employee removing a.vehicle from ...private property for storage under this Chapter does not know, and is not able, to ascertain the name of the owner..., the employee shall immedi- ately send, or cause to be sent, written report of such removal by mail to.the Department of Justice at Sacramento and shall file a copy of the notice with the proprietor of any public garage in which the vehicle may be stored. The report shall be made on a form furnished by such Department and shall include a complete descrip- tion of the vehicle, the date, time and place from which removed, the amount of mileage on the vehicle at the time of removal, the grounds for removal, and the name of the garage or place where the vehicle is stored." TO: NORB REINHART - Page Two It is therefore requested that you make certain that the property is properly noticed and that you have the forms from the Depart- ment of Justice. For our purposes, the Marinapark is considered "private property" because it is under lease to individual tenants. The property is not considered public property in the sense used in the City's Municipal Code or the Vehicle Code by virtue of the leases on the subject property. If you have any questions with respect to this authorization, please contact me. ROBERT L. WYNN City Manager RLW/jmb xc: Chief Gross CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION DEPARTMENT June 4, 1976 LGAS TO: ROBERT L. WYNN, CITY MANAGER FROM: PB & R Director SUBJECT: MARINAPARK MASTER PLAN & DEVELOPMENT On June 14, the City Council will be reviewing the Master Plan of Marinapark as proposed by the PB & R Commission. This plan differs somewhat from the original Master Plan that was conceived by the Council Ad Hoc Committee during discussions with the Marinapark tenants on the renewal or extension of their leases. A package from the PB & R Commission has already been submitted and will be utilized for the public hearing on the 14th. However, at the PB & R Commis- sion meeting of June 1, the Commission placed the development proposals in a priority basis. This differs slightly from page three of the original report sent to City Council. I am forwarding to you one copy of the report showing the items in their priority order as approved by the Commission. Additionally, the Commission requested that funds be appropriated in the 1976-77 fiscal year for the development of the area surrounding Marinapark. It was suggested that if sufficient funds were not available to do the total project in one fiscal year, then the items be developed in the priority order as suggested by the Commission. If any additional information is required to give consideration for inclusion of any of these items in the 1976-77 budget, please advise. Calvin C. Stewart CCS:h Attachments N +' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION COMMISSION June 14, 1976 s TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL FROM: PB & R Commission 0 - 2 SUBJECT: MASTER PLAN - MARINAPARK Several months ago the City Council directed the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission to review the Master Plan of Marinapark and the surrounding area as had been prepared by the City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Marinapark. The Commission was directed to review this Master Plan and make recommendations regarding the Plan. The Commission apologizes for the length of time that this study has taken; however, in order to get input from the residents of the surrounding area, the PB & R Commission discussed the subject at two consecu- tive meetings and conducted one Public Hearing. After the Public Hearing, the staff was requested to prepare a map identifying the recommendations and the input that had been made at the Public Hearing. On April 6, 1976 the PB & R Commission reviewed that map and took the following action: A motion was made by Commissioner Lovell to approve the revised Master Plan as presented, which included all of the elements of input that were reviewed at the March meeting. Commissioner Hart asked the maker of the motion if he would consider eliminating the proposal to make the existing sidewalk public from the total Plan. Commissioner Lovell answered affirmatively. After additional discussion, the motion carried four to two with Commissioner Trebler absent. In order to identify the changes that the new Plan represents from the previous one submitted by the City Council Ad Hoc Committee, it would be best to take each particular item separately: (1) Beginning at 15th Street and working to the west, the Commission deleted the boat -launching ramp that was proposed for the street - end at 15th Street. (2) The PB & R'Commission-deleted the Sailing Center and the accompanying car and boat parking in the lawn bowling green site and replaced it with a multipurpose play field and a shelter area for senior citizens. (3) The third area of consideration is the playground area and restroom and with minor shifting, that remains substantially the way it was in the Council's Master Plan. (4) The Commission agreed with the addition of two tennis courts adjacent to those existing on Balboa Boulevard. (5) The PB & R Commission recommended elimination of the bicycle trail and pedestrian walk bayward of the bulk- head in front of Marinapark. (6) The Commission agreed with the relocation of the parking lot from 17th Street to the intersection of Balboa Blvd. and 18th Street with the entrance to Marinapark relocated to 18th Street. • -2- D-2 (7) The Commission recommended that the two City -owned lots on Bay Avenue be converted to a mini -park with turf, picnic tables, park benches, etc. (8) That the existing restroom at Bay Avenue and 19th Street be enlarged by 50 square feet in order to offer a better storage area for sailboats and retain the sailing instruc- tion program at this location. The only other.recommendation that had been made by the PB & R Commission, but was deleted in its action, was to make the sidewalk currently existing in front of the Marinapark open to the public by'removing the gates at each end of this sidewalk. When this subject is discussed by the City Council, a map showing the PB & R Commission's proposal, as well as a map identifying the Ad Hoc Committee's proposal, will be placed side by side so that the comparisons will be more visible. In addition to asking the PB & R Commission to adopt a Master Plan, the Commission was also directed to prepare cost estimates for the implementation of these recommendations. Attached hereto is a breakdown of the costs related to each of the Commission's recommendations. 8;1L 1,,� ai"� Bill von Esch, Chairman Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission BvE:CCS:h Attachments i �1 �co ve�:;InL °n va F c •� v iLL'�'I n L - ewl sy Iov P�-'_tre• �• A ;^ FS D A 1%5: Flm P111=1 AM sman-mi .':w[t ^GCS° LD i l 1 m � 4!,: I:> V V b PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS June 1, 1976 r, pLGb I I � I C�HCrL`^ Jlse. 1 H •I D-2• •---------- =---------- --=------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ ._•_- - - - ------------ � ;,----*------ -.. -- IJ> g.�Ci+t.V uN� - -- - —_ _= -------' '' �LEuollta+tcupY�ciuticwvh•�.)��,�-�.�(, - — - — - — _---�-—^--_-_,-- _""�" . • ' .$ . ,, .-� rr,rr+Ud lwvr�1 L—j i_ — ._.;—i .- -, .I ewe.-�Fi•t� I I-_ J r- VjW i�-- �: - r IT'- r-4_ I l i I I I 1 1 !• j.m �r.cen!lro !N.pNN^'T7L .�<crsc - G R��.cz i hl J1G+,L+fi+vP%r�1•V^ n7=- an"✓yl 'r � yotiG �• <I] exec ifl -' . w •-,)rJCa / •' Q . � I I .t �� HeivKecupt+rt COMPLEw Mr MLV� SECT LAM 39&& qD9M 400, CITY COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS p- 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 22, 1975 STUDY SESSION - # 12 EVENING AGENDA - F8 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Ad Hoc Committee on Marinapark Leases SUBJECT: LEASE RECOMMENDATIONS The Council Ad Hoc Committee has met three times with representatives from Marinapark to formulate recommendations regarding the Mobilehome Park Leases. After these discussions the committee makes the following recommendations: (1) Length of leases: The leases to be renewed for a period of eight years beyond the present lease expiration date of September 20, 1977. An additional five years may be approved if it is determined in 1985 that the land is not needed for public use, navigation, fisheries or commerce. (2) Lease Rates: Rates will increase annually beginning October 1, 1977 with the iincrease based on the Los Angeles, Long Beach Consumer Price Index for the previous fiscal year beginning July 1 and ending June 30. However, the mimimum annual increase will be $15.00 per month and the maximum increase will be $25.00 per month for the inside mobilehome units and $30.00 for the bayfront units. (3) East End Entrance: There should be no removal of mobilehomes at the easterly en of t e park. The existing fence should be relocated to provide a public walkway of approximately 101. Loss of revenue from removed units was a major, factor in this recommendation. (4) Restrooms: Public restrooms would be located in an area near the bay eac entrance which would also serve the playground area and the tennis courts. Marinapark resident input on location and size is suggested. (5) Bikewa /walkway: A new bicycle path/pedestrian walkway would be cons ructe ayward of and adjacent to the retaining wall in front of Marinapark. The width would be 12' to accommodate both bicycles and pedestrians and will connect with the public walkway to be cotstructed on the easterly end of the park. (6) Administrative Fee: A fee equivalent to six months rental will be collected y the City w en mobilehome units are sold to cover costs of services pro- vided by the City, i.e., preparation of new lease; electrical, plumbing and sanitation inspections; inspection for code violations and other necessary services. (7) Amendment to Lease: Amend the section of the lease that relates to sub - easing by the tenants to read as follows; "Tenants may sub -lease their 4 mobilehome units provided the sub -lease has the approval of the Park Manager." Delete the wording "Tenants may not lease their mobilehome units without prior approval of the Park Manager." This adds a positive rather than negative note to the sentence. (8) Relocation of Entrance: It is recommended that a study be made to determine a values of relocating the entrance of Marinapark to 18th Street in order to provide better utilization of the Balboa Boulevard property. (9) Masterplan: A Master Plan of the area has been prepared indicating a o the above recommendations and specific facility location. (10) It is further recommended that revenues from Marinapark be utilized to make the proposed amendments to Marinapark as well as install the i.e., tennis courts, relocated parking lot, restrooms, sailing facility on the old bowling green site, and small boat launching ramp at 15th Street. (11) Mobilehome Width: A maximum width of 24' be approved for mobilehome units —ncluding cabanas. Landscaping adjacent to mobilehomes would be limited to 3' in height to minimize view obstruction of the bay from inside units. Finally, to implement the above, it is further recommended that: (1) The City Attorney be directed to prepare a lease document that will be formally presented to the City Council. (2) The Master Plan be forwarded to the PB & R Commission for their review and comments. (3) The staff be directed to prepare cost estimates for revisions to Marinapark and the immediate surrounding area in accordance with the Master Plan. CCS:dm COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE • CITY OF NBRRT BEACH 0 12-22-75 ESTIMATED COSTS FOR CAPITOL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE CIVIC LEGION MARINAPARK COMPLEX 1976 - 77 1. East End Entrance„ a. Move 200' of 6' Redwood fence $ 500.00 b. Install 3,000 square -feet P/C/C sidewalk @ 1.00/ 3,000.00 c. Landscaping 1/4 acre @ 25,000/acre 6,250.00 9,750.00 SAY $10,000.00 2. Bay Front Bicycle Trail a. Construct 940' of 12' wide P/C/C sidewalk 11,280.00 @ 12.00/ft. SAY $12,0 00.00 3. Tennis Courts a. Demolish 8,000 square feet A/C @ 10:00/ b. Construct two Tennis Courts including provisions 800.00 for. lighting. 50,000.00 5 ,800.00 SAY $5 ,000.00 ARCHITECT FEES 2,000.00 TOTAL 1976-77 $75,000.00 1977 - 78 1. Rest Room Facilities a. Construct rest room at east end entrance to complex $20,000.00 2. Public Parking Lot @ Balboa Blvd. and 18th Street (30 cars) a. Demolition 2,000.00 b. Install 12,000 square feet A/C paving @ .50/ 6,000.00 c. Install parking meters 2,400.00 d. Landscaping 3,000.00 13,400.00 SAY 5,0 0.00 ESTIMATED COSTS FOR CAPITOL IM 0VEMENTS WITHIN THE CIVIC LEGION MARINAPARK COMPLEX - PAGE 2 CONTINUED 3. Aquatics Center a. Construct 1,000 square feet building for storage and instruction @ 20.00/. $20,000.00 b. Install 20,000 square feet A/C paving for vehicle and 10,000.00 trailer parking lot and dry land boat storage area. c. Provide 220' fencing @ 4.00/ and 60' of gates @ 9.00/ 1,220.00 d. Construct concrete boat launching ramp @ 15th street 1,000 square feet @ 1.50/ 1,500.00 e. Provide dinghy racks for sabot storage 1,000.00 33,220.00 SAY 35,500.00 ARCHITECT FEES 3,000.00 TOTAL 1977-78 $73,500.00 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MARINAPARK LEASE STUDY Typical rates based on 1.5 % increase compounded annually ESTIMATED YEAR 34 UNITS 24'UNITS —GROSS REVENUE TO CITY 1976 - 77 •200 .245 ••. 126,000 New eight year lease 7.5% 15 18 1977 - 78 215 263 136,120 7.5% 16 20 1978 - 79 231 283 146,460 7.5% 17 21 1979 - 80 248 304 157,280 7.5% 19 23 1980,- 81 267 327 169,260 7:5% 20 24 1981 - 82 287 351 181,820 7.5% 22 26 1982 - 83 309 377 195,540 7.5% 23 28 1983 - 84 332 405 214,130 7.5% 25 30 1984 -•85 357 435 225,780 City Council Meeting Sept'Amber 8, 1975 Agenda Item No NEWPORT BEACH September 2, 1975 TO: FROM: CITY COUNCIL Department of Community Development F-5 SUBJECT: Amendment to the Council Policy Manual - Section R-1. Suggested Action If desired, approve amendment to the Council Policy Manual establishing policy regarding the maximum permitted mobile home width which may be installed in the City's Marina Park mobile home park. Background On July 8, 1975, the City issued a location permit for the installation of a new mobile home in Marina Park. The width of this mobile home was 24 foot. The majority of the existing units are approximately 22 foot in width. However, there were already several 24 foot wide units in the park. As a result of the issuance of the subject permit the City received complaints from two residents of the park (letter attached). The complaint initiated an investigation which revealed that the City did not have a policy regulating the widths of mobile homes in Marina Park. The City enforces the California Administrative Code, Title 25 in all mobile home parks. This law is written entirely by the State and establishes all'minimum safety standards including a mandatory three foot setback from common property lines as well as electrical, water and sewer connections, etc. The State law does not attempt to establish zone type regulations guaranteeing views or other esthetic qualities in a mobile home park. The matter was presented to the Council at its regular meeting of July 14, 1975 (Agenda Item No. G-8). Council Policy R-1 (attached) was adopted at this meeting. The Council, however, requested a more "in-depth" study be done and a new report submitted for the September 8 meeting. Discussi A search of the City files produced drawing No. 144-2377, dated January 27, 1956. A review of this document indicates that when the City designed the mobile home park the apparent intent was to provide an arrangement which would afford a view of the Bay for almost all of the lots. This drawing also indicates that the intent was to provide s ace for eight foot wide trailers (the prevailing width at that time with 12 foot cabanas attached. A sketch showing the typical Marina Park lot layout (attached) indicates the funnel shaped view corridor provided.by stepping the mobile homes back in progression from the street toward the Bay. The original concept has for all practical purposes been adhered to, however, mobile home widths being manufactured at the present time are considerably larger than those being produced twenty years ago. The result is that as older trailers are being replaced with newer units, the view corridor is being reduced somewhat. TO: Ciq Council - 2 - • A number of manufacturers of mobile homes were contacted in an attempt to learn what the standard size mobile home would be today. The re-. sults of this investigation revealed that 12 foot is the most common width being produced with 10 foot being the second most common. The 10 foot width represents a small proportion of the market (perhaps 10 or 15%). Most mobile homes are a combination of two of the standard widths; resulting in 20 or 24 foot wide homes. The survey also revealed that a few manufacturers will produce custom mobile homes_ of 11 foot widths at a substantial increase in cost per square foot. Mr. Herb Williams, who is a spokesman for the residents of Marina Park, has done considerable research into this matter (see letter attached) and finds that the increase in cost would be as much as $8,000 per unit to purchase a 22 foot wide mobile home as opposed to a 24 foot wide one. The attached drawing was prepared to help analyze the effect of installing the units with an additional two feet in width. It appears there would be an approximate 15% reduction in the view corridor. The staff's survey of the park revealed that, in many cases, the existing landscaping in combination with the 22 foot wide mobile homes restricts the view more than a 24 foot wide unit with controlled landscaping. In some cases, the existing landscaping extends as much as five foot beyond the sides of the structure and consists of such plants as twisting junipers, hibiscus and other dense shrubs. Mr. Williams' letter indicates that the majority of the residents of the park would prefer to have the opportunity of installing the more readily available and more economically priced 24 foot wide units. The 15% loss in view width would apparently be more desireable than paying the increased cost of custom built 22 foot wide units. Also, the 24 foot wide units could be more readily relocated to other parks which in some cases require a minimum size mobile home. Respectfully submitted, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, Director ByAA4 --� BOB FOWLER Assistant Director -Building BF:rw Attachments for City Council Only: Letter from Drs. Marvin A. Blum and Council Policy R-1 Marina Park Lot Layout Letter from Marina Park Home Owners signed by Herbert N. Williams Leon Benveniste dated 6-20-75 Assoc. dated August 12, 1975 MARVIN A. BLUM, D.D.S. DENTISTRY 4955 VAN NUYS BOULEVARD - SUITE i SHERMAN OAKS, CALWORNIA 91402 789-6189 789-1193 June 20, 10,75 Mr. Hugh Coffin i> Assistant City Attorney 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 9266o Dear Mr. Coffin, We are writing to you regarding a matter which affects us and all -of the Marinapark residents directly. As taxpayers and property owners in Marinapark in the city of Newport Beach, we would like to stress the need of the passage of an ordinance prohibiting the placement of trailers exceeding twenty two feet in width which are not already in existence at Marina - park. This ordinance should also include a regulation concerning the height of the trail- ers so that no two story buildings canbe in- stalled. It was our understanding uponzpurchasing our homes in Marinapark that the•property would have a view and no trailer would be allowed to block the'view of other trailers. If larger trailers are allowed in the park, MARVIN A. BLUM, D.D.S. DENTISTRY 4955 VAN NUYS BOULEVARD - SUITE 101 SHERMAN OAKS, CALIFORNIA 91403 789-6189 789-1193 it would set a precedent which would eventu- ally change the concept of the park, which is now known for its uniqueness and beauty.. The green lawns and shubbery add to the • parkrs concept and its contribution to our environment. Any obstruction which directly affects the view of another resident should be prohibited. A petition is now being readied to cir- culate among the residents as this problem has caused much concern. It'is seen as a threat to the original concept of the park when the park rules were formulated. We wish to formally present our views to oppose placing of trailers which exceed twenty two feet wide.* We would be present at a meeting, when notified, with legal council, in order to insure the park remains • according to the original concepts. Very truly yours, A(uvw- /4 • e�� Dr. Marvin A. Blum Space 2D DLeon Benveniste Space 2E . • R-1 MARINA PARK MOBILE HOME PARK GUIDELINES It is the policy of the City to permit a maximum width of 22 ft. for any - mobile home installed in the City's Marina Park Mobile Home Park. The 22 ft. width shall include ramadas, cabanas, covered porches, storage units or other construction which would obstruct the view of other lots. Landscaping extending beyond the maximum 22 ft. wide trailer space shall be restricted to no more than 3 ft. in height or as approved by the park association and the park manager. This policy shall apply to all applications for the installations of trailers submitted to the City after July 14, 1975. Adopted - July 14, 1975 S 6c m nnD R com peV pupa ent t G 1 A�glSor MARINAPARK HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION PV 1770 Went Balboa Blvd. CpvI esp'cN', Newport Beach, CA. August 12, 1975 Mr. Bob Fowler, Supervisor City of Newport Beach Community Development Dept. 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA. 92660 Dear Mr. Fowler: Pursuant to our conversation regarding the policy of trailer widths in Marinapark Mobile Home Park, I am pleased to advise you of our findings and recommendations. We have contacted several local mobile home manufacturers and discussed with them the feasibility of having a self-imposed restriction of 22 ft. wide units verses the production model 24 ft. wide. In each instance we have determined that, while it is possible to build custom homes any width you desire, the cost and availability factor presents some problems. First, the cost factor involved would add approximately $3000.00 more to customize a 24 ft. wide down to a 22 ft. wide unit. This would be in addition to the fact that the manufacturers do not customize their lower cost units but only the middle and more expensive units only. So this, in effect, forces the buyer to purchase a more expensive unit to begin with. The end result could cost upward to $8000.00 more per unit because of this policy--$5000.00 more to upgrade the mobile home plus an additional $3000.00 to customize from 24 ft. to 22 ft. The availability of manufacturers that do this customizing is rather limited and we found only three that showed any interest --one was a custom manufacturer and the other two were production plants that stated they would accept custom work. All three indicated that they felt that the added cost together with the loss of footage plus the eventual resale problem of a 22 ft. wide unit would be,a detrimental policy to adopt. We further asked all of our 58 residents to respond by letter to the above question of 22 ft. vs. 24 ft. widths and of those who responded, 85% indicated they preferred to keep the 24 ft. wide policy in effect. Mr. Bob Fowler • Page 2 August 12, 1975 We also had an indication that the Park Manager and Park Association, when requested by any resident, should have the authority to restrick landscaping to 3 ft. in height along- side any 24 ft. wide unit. With the aforementioned information, it would indicate that our course should be to request the City to amend the guidelines adopted July 14, 1975 to show our desire to reconfirm the original policy of 24 ft. wide homes and put aside the 22 ft. policy now in effect. I would appreciate that you initiate this request thru the proper channels and advise me when this might be before the Council so that I might attend in case there would be any questions. I trust you will be able to utilize this information together with what you have obtained to finalize this policy to every- one's satisfaction. May I take this opportunity to thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Best regards. Sincerely, MARINAPARK HOME OWNERS ASSOC. r 6 H rbert N. Williams HNW:jb r w• CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER August 12, 1975 TO: PARKS, BEACHES AND RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: INTERIM REPORT - MARINAPARK The City Council on August 11, 1975, directed the attached Interim Report be submitted to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission for your review and comment. It would be appreciated if you would schedule this report for an early meeting. Mr. Cal Stewart attended all of y the Ad Hoc Committee meetings, as did Commissioner Wood, and I am sure they could explain the unanswered questions of the Interim Report. As soon as you have reviewed and formulated a position with respect to this report, please communicate your position to the City Council. RLW:MM Attachment ROBERT L. WY�NN 1 f'" `' = `" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By r;;a ."IiY C:'J,. L CJTt August 11, 1975 i'Lt a n•::v 7 'v -y' :� ,T h TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION NO. 12 FROM: Council Ad Hoc Committee on Marinapark Leases SUBJECT: INTERIM REPORT RECOMMENDATION: Extend the leases at Marinapark for a period of 15 years, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the leases be subject to review by the T City Council every five years, at which time the leases could be terminated, if it is determined that the land is needed for public t trust purposes; i.e., to benefit navigation, commerce, fisheries or public use. 2. That monthly rates be increased annually in accordance with the Long Beach, Los Angeles Consumer Price Index. 3. That certain revisions be made to the exist- ing and surrounding facilities to (d) in- crease public awareness of the public bay beach; (2) provide public access along the easterly portion of the park by removing 3 to 5 mobile homes; and (3) improve pedestrian and bicycle access along the bay in front of the mobile home park. Also proposed is the addition of two tennis courts and a public rest room. It is further proposed that the entrance to Marinapark, the parking lot and the tot lot be relocated. DISCUSSION: The Council Ad Hoc Committee met approximately six times with represen- tatives from the staff and the PB & R Commission to review the request made by the Marinapark residents to extend their leases. The Committee studied the advantages and disadvantages related to extending the leases. ADVANTAGES TO EXTENDING LEASES: 1. Revenues collected from Marinapark tenants contribute consid- erably to the City budget. 2. The beach is a major asset and would still be available for public use. -K J. • -.2 - 3. All City residents would indirectly benefit from revenues gen- erated from the lease to improve the site and/or support the City budget. DISADVANTAGES TO EXTENDING LEASES: 1. All Newport residents would not have access to the public prop- erty on which the mobile home park is located. 2. Not consistent with 1990 Recreation & Open Space Element of the General Plan. ADVANTAGES TO TERMINATING LEASES: 1. Approximately four acres of waterfront property would be opened for public recreational use. 2. A vista from Balboa Boulevard to the Bay would be created. DISADVANTAGES TO TERMINATING LEASES: 1. Net annual revenues of $125,000 ± would be lost and would be replaced by a $40,000 per.year maintenance expenditure. 2. A new park facility would become an attraction which would create traffic and congestion. If the leases are extended, the Committee further recommends that: 1. A portion of the net revenues be substituted for acquisition and development of park property, with the subject site amend- ments having first priority. 2. The City adopt a transfer fee which would apply when ownership of mobile home units changes. 3. The monthly base rent be adjusted to reflect current value and market demand. During the study, the Committee concluded that current rates are in line with other quality mobile home parks in the area as indicated by the following breakdown: MOBILE HOME FEE STRUCTURE E1 Morro - Laguna Beach Waterfront - $135 to $150 Inland - $92 to $250 Lido Park - Lido Peninsula Waterfront - $228 to $275 Inland - $143 to $173 Bayside Village - Newport Dunes Waterfront - $200 to $250 Interior - $165 average Marinapark - 1974-75 Waterfront (24) $215 Inland (34) $180 (19' wide) (depending on size & view) 1975-76 $230 $190 1976-77 $245 $200 However, the Committee recommends that space rental fees increase an- nually from a negotiated base in accordance with the Long Beach, Los Angeles Consumer Price Index. Current rates produce an annual net rev- enue of $120,000. This figure will increase to $127,000 in 1976-77 and will continue to increase each year thereafter in accordance with an in- crease in space rental rates. +� In providing better access to and better public use of the beach in front of Marinapark, the Committee recommends the removal of three to five mobile homes at the easterly end of the park adjacent to the American Legio. The Committee realizes that the loss of each unit represents a loss of approximately $2,500 annually in revenue, but bet- ter public access at that part of the park would be achieved. It was suggested that better pedestrian 'and bicycle facilities along the Bay in front of Marinapark should be provided and this could be in the form of public use of the existing sidewalk or the installation of an additional walk immediately adjacent to the front of Marinapark. This situation may well be resolved during discussions with Marinapark representatives. This interim report is forwarded to the City Council for review with the understanding that it be referred to the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commissioners for their'comments prior to the meetings that the Council Ad Hoc Committee will hold with the Marinapark mobile home owners. Ad Hoc Committee on Marinapark Leases Howard Rogers - J. Peter Barrett t f U* MelIHLl woo ' h+t+lip �ptvww t?�tJwa� Llm CIVIC LEGION MARINA ililill!lll��illill C©I"IF'LEX SITE PLAN 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER October 17, 1972 TO: CITY ATTORNEY FROM: Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK LEASE TERMINATION Pursuant to our telephone conversation of this past week, attached e instructions I have received from the City Manager regarding future steps —fbr implementation of the City Council approved Newport Peninsula Tennis and "Aquatic Center Plan. I will prbceed'with the necessary redesign work on my own, but I do believe your assistance is called for in developing lease ter - nation procedures and strategy. 1111 Some of the a; r questions that have occurred to me are: 1. Should all park tenants be officially by the City of the Council s action on request? notified in writing their lease extension 2. What actions may City employees have taken in the past to state the City's views and "policy" toward the leases? For instance, it is rumored that park tenants have taken deposi- tions from two former park managers indicating the City had no plans for the Marinapark except to continue use as a trailer park. As you know, Park managers have historically acted as an intermediary between buyer and seller in the disposition of trailers that were for sale. 3. Should an official statement of the CityiCbuncil position be developed to be given any potential buyer of trailer spaces during the next two years? Would the "Truth in Real Estate Sales" law apply to such transactions? 4. What rights may the tenants have under the "Uniform Relo- cation Assistance Act?" 5. What have the courts generally field to be landlord respon- sibilities in regard$ to relocating displaced tenants? I would like to review this subject with you in detail at,your convenience. PHILIP F. BETTENCOURT PFB:sh Attachment cc: City Manager s 0 CITY' -OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER October 11, 1-972, TO: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK As you know, the City Council on October loth ap- proved of the P, B & R Commission plan for the Marinapark area with two conditions.: (1) That a maximum of 50 parking spaces be pro- vided for automobiles; and (2) That the aquatic, -center land acquisition be delayed until a determination is made on the American Legion Lease. While the next subject was not contained in the motion, it is my belief and, therefore, directive to you that the Council would like to consider the capability of the P,'B & R plan with some marine service oriented activity as recommended by the Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce Marine Division. Therefore, it is re- quested that: (1) You be responsible for the administration of termination procedures for the Marinapark tenants. (2) Adminis,ter and coordinate the preparation of a definitive plan,.keepi,ng in mind the recommendation of the Marine Division of the Newport Harbor Chamber of Commerce. Because of the difficulty anticipated in the termination and possible evacuation of the present tenants, it is suggested that you consult with the City Attorney and make sure that the City's procedures are legally sufficient. It may be that the present ten- ants will not oppose evacuation, but the staff should expect any eventuality and be prepared for it should evacuation procedures be- come necessary. If you have questions with respect to th•Ts subject, I• would be happy to meet with you. You might indicate to me the suggested plan for the coordination and preparation of the final development proposal. R�&4 �RLW:mm ROBERT L. WYN 0 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER May 12, 1975 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM F-4 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK LEASES I. HISTORY: The Marinapark is located at 1770 West Balboa Boulevard (see zoning district map), situated on a 4.34 acre parcel of City of Newport Beach property on Balboa Peninsula. It is a luxury mobile home park with fifty-eight rental pads on 924 feet of frontage on the public'beach of Newport Bay. The facility is City -owned and operated in a manner with a principal objective of returning a substantial revenue surplus to the General Fund. The City acquired the nucleus of the Marinapark property be= tween 15th and 16th Streets from the Pacific Electric Land Company on July 7, 1919. The parcel was originally utilized as a City operated short- term visit campground until 1944. The area was widened with the acquisition of an additional parcel to 19th Street on March 7, 1923. On March 6, 1944 a one-year lease was granted to the South Coast Company for the purpose of installing wharfs for boat berthing and repair- ing. On December 26, 1945 the City Council approved a plan for the camp- ground to be converted and operated as.a travel trailer park. On May 9, 1955 the City Council adopted a revised plan providing for a further re- development of the travel trailer park as a mobile home park and also a public beach ,between 16th and 19th Streets. Various improvements were • - 2 made between 1955 and 1957 to bring the park to its present status, and it has been used as a mobile home park since this time. On July 24, 1972 the City Council was presented with a report from the City Manager's Office proposing that Marinapark be converted into a public tennis and acquatic center. The City Council established September 11, 1972 as the hearing date for this proposed conversion. On September llth, because of the length of the hearing and diversity of opinions expressed, the City Council continued the matter to October 10, 1972. On that date the City Council, by a five to two vote, upheld the decision of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission to convert the present use to a public facility, including tennis courts, parks, beaches, etc. This new use was to be implemented upon the expiration of the tenant leases scheduled for termination on June 30, 1974. Attached as "Exhibit I" is a copy of the proposed reuse plan. During the spring of 1973 the tenants of the Marinapark ap- pealed again to the City Council for an extension to their leases. The conditions of the requested extension or "transition period" were as follows: 1. A transition period of three years and three months, for termination to occur, therefore, on September 30, 1977. 2. At least ninety days notice from the City that the leases would be terminated. 3. An increase of rents as reflected in Table II. On May 7, 1973 the City Council unanimously adopted a resolution expressing intention to permit a "transition period", provided that an r -3- agreement be signed by all current tenants stipulating that an eviction notice from the City at the expiration of the "transition period" would not be opposed. On June 25, 1973 the City Council accepted the "no contest" agreement and unanimously approved of the resolution authoriz- ing execution of an agreement with the Marinapark granting a "transition period" to September 30, 1977. II. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The City Council, during the meeting of April 28, 1975, re- ceived a request from the Marinapark tenants asking that an Ad Hoc Committee be created to review the leasing situation with the tenants. Before the City Council passed judgment on the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee, additional information on the history of the Marinapark and on the finan- cial considerations of the current use versus the proposed reuse was re- quested. The revenues and expenditures of the Marinapark for each year beginning with 1973, are as follows: Actual 1973-74 Est. 1974-75 Est. 1975-76 Est. 1976-77 Present Revenues $ 137,774 $147,640 $159,725 $167,810 Expenditures 29,600 35,864 39,720 40,000 Net to City 108,174 111,776 1.20,000 127,810 The Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department has computed the development costs for the plan proposed by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission and adopted by the City Council on October 10, 1972. These pro- posed costs do not include development of the acquatic center, inasmuch as this facility is accommodated by the recently approved American Legion Lease. 0 The redevelopment costs are as follows: Demolition - Asphaltic Concrete (walks, parking lots, etc.) - Building (2) Asphaltic Concrete (walks, parking lots, etc.) Concrete walks Curbs Restroom Building Tennis Courts (lighted) Tennis Shelter Basketball Court Landscaping (trees, shrubs, ground cover, automatic irrigation) Play apparatus Quantity 209,000 sq. ft. 58,750 sq. ft. 20,730 sq. ft. 1,000 lin. ft 1,250 sq. ft. 4 2.3 acres Unit Cost .15/sq. ft. .60/sq. ft 1.00/sq. ft. 3.00/lin. ft 30.00/sq. ft. $25,000 $25,000 Sub Total (Contingency and Architect Fees) TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST Total $ 31,350 5,000 35,250 20,730 3,000 37,500 100,000 5,000 5,000 57,500 5,000 $305,330 60,666 $365,996 0 -5- The proposed plan will require yearly maintenance estimated by the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department as follows: Personnel. 1 - Groundsman Gardener II $ 11,355 1 - Groundsman Gardener I 8,980 $ 20,335 Fringe Benefits 6,000 $ 26,335 Beach Cleaning 3,000, TOTAL PERSONNEL COST $ 29,335 Maintenance & Operation: Automotive Service $ 400 Maintenance of Equipment 200 Utilities 3,800 ($2,800 of this amount would be returned in tennis light revenues) Janitorial Supplies 150 Maintenance & Repair 1,000 (Sprinkler systems, Tennis Courts) Special Departmental Supplies 500 Small Tools 200 TOTAL MAINTENANCE & OPERATION $ 62250 TOTAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST $ 35,585 In summary, the City will realize for use by the General Fund during fiscal year 1976-77 approximately $127,810. The development.costs for a public facility, including tennis courts, parks, beaches, etc. is estimated to be $365,996, with the yearly maintenance costs estimated to be $35,585. III. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: Miscellaneous considerations that come to mind that may be of interest to the City Council are: 1. The City may be successful in receiving a land and water con - nervation grant to pay for 50% of the development costs of the proposed reuse plan. If successful, the grant process would take approximately one year. 2. One of the primary reasons for the P, B & R Commission recom- mending the public park reuse plan was to permit the establish- ment of an acquatic center. Inasmuch as the acquatic center is now accommodated on property vacant by the Lawn Bowling Association, this reason no longer exists. Also, the proposed plan shows numerous tennis courts and the use or validity of these courts may diminish if the City is able to develop a tennis center in West Newport. 3. An Ad Hoc Committee could evaluate recent developments (economic, acquatic center, tennis center) as these developments apply to an ultimate decision to either keep the Marinapark or to re- develop it to another use. In addition, maybe a middle ground is available to the City which would permit the beach areas to be more public, but still retain the Marinapark 'revenue. An Ad Hoc Committee could address this possibility. 0 -7- 4. Part of this property is designated as tidelands and total City tideland operations for 1975-76 indicate a $733,755 deficit. 5. There are 29,930 housing units in the City and 999 mobile home spaces within 12 parks. In 1972, two com- parable developments, Lido Park and De Anza Bayside Village, were charging $182 and $200 per month respectively for bay view spaces. Marinapark was charging $170. r '-1 ROBERT L. WYNN RLW:mm Attachments 1. Zoning District Map 2. Exhi'bit "I" 3. Table II SF_E Tia.. .IVEM' " R. - P-3m q-R OODlow 92"cME5L. ITo 17 mmm C. fcz oi-30U MO MTT iE,PEG t m1o, LM I IXXZm.SECi A.M.&R Q IAT II TO RIW Tog.UML FPoM GI ID CbN muiI OM]ROn Mn3 C6s ,F.NO IOTA LOCR V. • SCALC OF FEET DISTRICTING MAP NEWPORT BEACH - CALIFORNI AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL R-0 MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL C—I LIGHT COMMERCIAL DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL L_ C 2 GENFRAL COMMERCIAL RESTO MULTIFLE FAMRT RFSIDENTIAL M-1 MANUFACTURING 11 COMBINING DIS4RI0TS UNCLASSIFIED nk Y,8 Oeoth To F"4- ?Inn-•.. IL.I> -IO- </00 ORD.NO 635 Q �. �. 15"a MAP NO ✓ TABLE II 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 front Trailers (24) $ 170* $ 180* $ 215** $ 230** $ 245** Per Month 200** Rear Trailers (34) 145* 155* 180** 190** 200** Per Month 170** Total Monthly Revenue $9,010* $ 9,590* For 58 Spaces $10,580** $11,280** $11,980**. $12,680** Yearly Revenue For 58 Spaces $108,120* $115,080* $126,960** $135,360** $143,760** $152,160** *Current Contract Commitments . **Rental Amounts with Transition Period MY OLAL11 SVIMMInb • � iws eWa r , I tilt II RAM ev.cn w.orn.c no '�•��� Illllllllll;l } ► ' ,_ �. fT co. g1;vVnel+'s I I•�..u: u�rwl � _ GOiJ PRCM y�>l . N,d �R' *JIC i iLNA WA ST DAUSaA _ DbVM MQM NA PARK PLAHNIN6 'STUDY PROP031=D NEWPOPT Pf-NINSULA AQUATIG MD Tr-NNIZ) GENTr-P- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA nu* city Hall 3300 Newport Blvd. (714) 673-2110 0 rt) May 25, 1973 Mr. Leonard A. Hampel Rutan & Tucker 401 Civic Center Drive West Santa Ana, California 92702 RE: Newport Marinapark Dear Leonard: Enclosed herein please find the revised proposed agreement granting the Marinapark lessees a transitional period extension to their leases. Please review the document and advise if it will be necessary to make further modifications. You will note that all of the signatures must be obtained by - November 7, 1973, or the agreement becomes null and void. The City Manager and my office offer our assistance in ex- plaining the City's position relative to the agreement to the Marinapark tenants. zt1rs, DENNIS O'NEIL City Attorney DON dm Enc. Vcc: City Manager A RCORDING REQUESTED / IBY AND MAIL TO 3 a1, ! 079 ! P4 430 RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA min. I P.M. JUL 9 1973 l'7 Past J. Virlar CARLYIfCounty , , ecordor THIS AGREEMENT, made this 237f%day of JUN,E , 1973, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessor" and the lessees of 58 trailer park spaces in that park known as Newport Marinapark, hereinafter sometimes termed "Lessees," which Lessees are individually identified by their signatures to this document. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach,is the owner of that certain real property located on Balboa Boulevard in the City of Newport Beach presently utilized as a trailer park and known as Newport Marinapark; and WHEREAS, the City has leased 58 trailer park spaces to certain Lessees under separate standard form rental agree- ments; and WHEREAS, although said leases by their terms will expire on June 30, 1974, various alleged representations have been made concerning extension of said leases and a dispute has arisen between Lessor and Lessees concerning the termina- tion date of said leases; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 1972, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach voted to accept the recommendation of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Committee to convert Newport Marinapark into a public recreation area at the termination of said leases; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the'City'of Newport Beach wishes to terminate the Marinapark leases on a date certain; and ; 1 a WHEREAS, pursuant to Newport Beach Resolution No. 7976, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" CD and made a part herein by this reference, Lessor and Lessees, are desirous of agreeing to a transitional period to resolve their differences concerning when said leases shall terminate; and WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessees are desirous of other- wise modifying said leases. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach as Lessor and the Lessees of Newport Marinapark hereby agree as follows: 1. A transitional period shall be established whereby leases for all 58 trailer park, spaces shall be extended to and including September 30, 1977. 2. Any time after September 30, 1977, City may give ninety (90) days written notice to vacate said premises to all Lessees of Newport Marinapark. Said notice shall not be given by City until City has allocated necessary funds, approved necessary plans, and obtained all necessary govern- mental approvals, including environmental requirements, zoning requirements and any other requirements to achieve the conver- sion of Newport Marinapark into a public recreational area. Until said written notice to vacate is given, all Lessees shall remain on a month -to -month tenancy subject to the same terms and conditions as their leases shall provide as herein modified. 3. Upon the expiration of the ninety (90) days pursuant to written notice to vacate as described in paragraph 2, all 58 Newport Marinapark Lessees unconditionally agree to vacate the premises without contest, legal or otherwise. Said Newport Marinapark Lessees expressly agree to waive any and -2- all legal rights they may have to contest said vacation of the premises and agree to release said City from any and all b —14 UD f claims they may have of whatever nature to otherwise extend said lease period. Lessees further agree to waive any relo- ji�lw cation assistance or any other assistance from Lessor resulting" from vacating the premises. 4. At the end of said ninety (90) days written notice to vacate period Lessees agree that any remaining trailers and/or appurtenances in Newport Marinapark shall be deemed property of Lessor and Lessor shall have the absolute right to demolish, or otherwise remove, any such trailers and/or appurtenances without further notice or compensation of any kind to Lessees: 5. Failure of the Lessees to vacate said premises as provided in paragraphs 2 and 3 will result in damages being sustained by Lessor. such damages are, and will con- tinue to be, impracticable and extremely difficult to deter- mine. Those individual Lessees who fail to vacate said premises -in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 will pay Lessor One Hundred Dollars ($100) each for every day those individual Lessees fail to vacate said premises. It. is agreed that the One Hundred Dollars ($100) per day per each individual lessee refusing to vacate said premises is the minimum value of the actual damage caused by said failure to vacate, that such sum is to be considered liquidated damages and shall not be con- strued as a penalty. 6. Lessees agree to notify any purchaser or assignee of their interest in a trailer or tenancy in Newport Marinapark of this agreement and secure any such purchaser or assignee's express consent to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. -3- , • < 7, All Newport Marinapark Lessees agree to a rental in accordance with the following schedule, effective yu1Y y, 1973: 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 Front Trailers (24) per month $170 $200 $215 $230 $245 Rear Trailers (34) per month 145 170 180 190 200 8. All Newport Marinapark Lessees shall cooperate with Lessor in the installation of wider pathway access to the public beach at the east end of Newport Marinapark. 9. Lessees shall also cooperate with City should City desire to install additional tennis courts on the public area. 10. The provisions of the existing Rental Agreements and Regulations between Lessor and Lessees shall remain in ef- fect through the periods herein specified except as otherwise modified by this Agreement. 11. Should Lessor be required to bring suit in court to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, Lessees agree to pay Lessor its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. 12. This Agreement will be deemed null and void unless executed by each and every one of the 58 Lessees on or before November 7, 1973. 13. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Lessees' heirs, successors and assigns and shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Orange County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement -to be executed on the date first above written. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation ;. m� 4 � ' c-'1?c,� 0 RESOLUTION NO. 3 0 3 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND THE LESSEES OF TRAILER SPACES AT NEWPORT 14ARINAPARK PERTAINING TO A TRANSITIONAL PERIOD EX- TENSION OF THEIR LEASES WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council of the City of Newport Beach a certain agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the lessees of trailer spaces at Newport Marinapark pertaining to a'transitional period exten- sion of their leases; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the terms and conditions of said agreement and found them to be fair and equitable; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said agreement is approved, and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the same on behalf of the City of Newport Beach. ADOPTED this 25th day of June , 1973. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor b dm 6/25/73 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY To: City Manager From: City Attorney Subject: Marinapark Leases /� de ✓M 6�p�ir January 26, 1973 Attached is an opinion prepared by the legal firm of Rutan & Tucker for the tenants of Marinapark. We will be meeting with their attorney in your office next Wednesday at 4 o'clock, and I thought you may want to review this opinion as background before we get together. The opinion places emphasis on the theory of promissory estop- pel, citing the case of Long Beach v. Mansell, 3 Cal 3d 462. Under the rule as enunciated by the Court in the Mansell case, a party seeking to estop a municipality under the doctrine of equitable estoppel, must establish four separate elements. These elements are: (1) the party to be estopped must be apprised of the facts; (2) he must intend that his conduct shall be acted upon or must so act that the party asserting the estoppel had a right to believe it was so intended, (3) the other party must be ig- norant of the true state of facts,; and (4)' he must rely upon the conduct to his injury." The doctrine of estoppel should not be available to the Marina - park tenants under this test. The third element of the test requires the party asserting estoppel to be ignorant of the true state of facts. it would be difficult for the tenants to argue that they were ignorant of the possibilities that the leases would not be terminated on June 30', 1974, when this was the actual expiration date'as set forth in the very terms of the leases they all signed. in addition, it should be pointed out that a'public entity is immune from liability for damages caused by negligence or, in= tentional misrepresentations,by its employees, and the employee • 9 RE: Marinapark Leases -2- January 26, 1973 is immune unless he acted fraudulently, corruptly or with actual malice. Government Code Sections 818.8, 822.2. The •misrepresen- tation referred to in the Code applies to interferences with financial or commercial interests. Johnson v. State of Cali- fornia, 69 Cal 2d at 800: The injury must arise from commercial transactions between the plaintiff and the -public entity or from the public entity's interference with the plaintiff's commer- cial transactions. Connelly v. State of California, 3 Cal App 3d 744. To the extent that the City made misrepresentations to the Marinapark tenants, it would seem that these alleged mis- representations concerned commercial matters, which should pre- clude an action for damages upon the misrepresentations. The Rutan opinion notes that the use of state -grant tidelands for leasehold purposes is specifically authorized by Government Code Section 37387. This section was added to the Code in 1949. Having been the formerCityManager of the City of Coronado., you may recall the case of San Diecto,Unified Port District v. Coronado Towers, which dealt with a determination of how to al- low public trust lands to be used,. in that case, the City of Coronado was specifically authorized in their- tidelands grant to lease property for residential purposes. The lease in ques- tion contemplated the construction of six high-rise apartment buildings on filled tidelands. In its opinion the Court cited the case of Marks v. Whitney, 6 Cal 3d 251, which suggested that, sometimes -the greatest enhancement of a public purpose may be to put the land to that use which results in the least change to its character. The Court, in holding that the subject lease violated the trust, stated that: "... so antithetical to the concept and purpose of the public trust doctrine throughout its constitutional, legislative and judicial history, and so inconsistent with any apparent present trend of 'changing public needs,' to use the language of Marks v. Whitney, that to sustain its validity would be to make the law an il- lusion and the public trust an unnecessary burden to potential economic development of tidelands for local municipal advantage.." In a 53-page opinion prepared. for San Diego Assemblyman E. Richard Barnes prior to the Coronado,Towers case, the Attorney General concluded that the subject transaction involved serious doubts as to its legality and that there was a substantial 0 .. RE: Marinapark Leases -3= January 26, 1973 possibility that the lease would be invalidated if tested by adjudication. As it turned out the Attorney General was right in his analysis of the law relative to the use of tidelands for residential purposes. Among 'other cases, the Attorney General cited Mallon v. City of Long Beach, 44 Cal 2d 199, in which it was pointed out that only those residential uses in which there is a general state-wide interest would be,consis- tent with the trust obligation. An example of a permitted use would be a hotel or motel adjacent to a recreational area lo- cated on tidelands which would house overnight transient visitors to the recreation park. In conclusion our legal position can be summarized as follows: (1) Estoppel. may not be. appl:[c'able against the City in this situation'becaixse the tenants were ap- prised of the actual facts. (2) The City,may be�i,immune,from, liability by statute. (3) The law of, what is a proper use of trust property is ehanging and aRlease for private residential purposes such as long-term leases in a trailer park on public tidelands may be incompatible with the intent of the tidelands grant. DENNIS, OtNEIL City Attorney DON dm cc: Mr. Leonard Hampel MEMO RE MARINAPARK FACTS Over a period of several years, the City of,Newport Beach has maintained certain portions of city -owned beach -front property (tidelands) as a private residential area, leasing spaces and other facilities to mobilehomes. These homes have become more or less permanently affixed to their spaces. These spaces have been leased at fair -market rentals, under the provisions of written leases generally providing for terms of two to four years; the written leases include a specific renewal clause. The current leases will expire June 30, 1974. The City has indicated that it will not renew them at that time. Many, perhaps most, of the current tenants of MarinaPar-k enterec.' into their leases with the City and expended considerable sums to purchase and improve their mobilehome sites on the basis: of statements by -municipal officials that the written leases would.be_renewed.on-reasonable terms into the indefinite..future. These representations were made by various city administrative officials, including a prior city manager during his term of office. QUESTION May the City terminate the leases on June 30, 1974 without liability? CONCLUSION AND ANALYSIS The tenants may assert the theory of promissory estoppel against the City of Newport Beach to prevent termination of the leases. Simply stated, most, if not all, of the present tenants of MarinaPark would not have entered into their lease agreements with the City had it not been for the City's repre- sentations that the leases would be renewed indefinitely; nor would the tenants have purchased and improved their leasehold interests, but for such representations. Assuming.these facts are correct, the tenants may argue that it would be inequitable and improper to allow the City to ignore the representations at this late date. To prevail on this theory, the Committee must successfully assert each of six distinct propositions of law and fact. These propositions are as follows: 1. The existence of a course of conduct invol implied or explicit represenrarion officials that the tenants or Mari B_e__aIlowed to remain there inde in leases being successively renewed terms. reasonable The more explicit the statements are, the better. Basically, the Committee must be prepared to demonstrate both that the belief of'the tenants that they would be permitted to reside indefinitely in MarinaPark was reasonable and that it resulted from the actions of representatives of the City. The actions relied upon should include representations made subsequent to the time the current written leases were entered into. Such later representations would avoid the potential problems created by the Parole .Evidence Rule, discussed below. 2. The existence of monetarily significant of position by the tenants, such change enta- ons descr Again, such changes in position should include actions taken subsecuent to representations made subsequent to the signing of the written leases.* Respecting the existence of such "detrimental reliance" by the tenants of MarinaPark, there are three possibilities: (1) the actions of the tenants in entering into their current written leases with the City; (2) the actions of the tenants in purchasing the leasehold interests of prior tenants, and (3) the actions of the tenants in making substantial and long-term improvements to their leasehold interests. To support a claim of promissory estoppel, the reliance must consist of detrimental rather than bargained for actions. See Youngman v. Nevada Irrigation District, 70 Cal. 2d 240, 249 (1969); Healy v. Brewster, 59 Cal. 2d 455, 463 (1963). Thus, the tenants' change of position in entering into a written lease agreement is not detrimental reliance such as to support a claim of promissory estoppel, but rather is a bargained -for action. This results because the action involved was the explicit quid pro quo sought by the City in return for its granting of the current lease. Entering into such a lease cannot, in addition to constituting consideration for the • 1 reement also serve as the substitute for wrib en ease ag , consideration which forms the basis for a promissory estoppel respecting a distinct and separate promise to renew the leases indefinitely. 2. E The tenants' purchases of and improvements to their leasehold interests should constitute a sufficient basis for promissory estoppel. Such activities fall within the classic patterns of action held sufficient. Green v. Brown, 37 Cal. 2d 391 (1951) (oral gift of interest in real property, followed by improvements by promisee held enforceable by virtue of promissory estoppel). •' 3. That, with ect to the re ntal reliance current writt oes not bar t entations and ses, the The Parole Evidence Rule provides that a court may not entertain evidence of prior written agreements, or evidence of prior or concurrent oral agreements, which purport tq modify or alter the terms of a formal written agreement. This rule has, however, been considerably relaxed in California during the past few years. First, it has been held that the rule applies only to written documents which the parties intended to serve as the exclusive embodiment of their agreement. Masterson v. Sine, 68 Col. 2d 222, 225 (1968). Second, parole evidence is now admitted to explain the meaning of a written instrument, so Jong as the -evidence offered is relevant to prove a meaning to which the language of the instrument is reasonably susceptible. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., v. Thomas Drayage Co., 69 Cal. 2d. The effect of these two cases has been to expand considerably the range of oral evidence which is admissible to explicate and give meaning to written agreements. Given this changing state of the law, there is a good chance that the Committee would be successful in attempting to introduce evidence as to oral or written statements of representatives of the City made prior to the current written agreement. In effect, we would be•arguing that, notwithstanding the provisions of the current lease allowing only a single renewal, it was the additional, separate understanding of the parties (the City and the tenants) that both the first and successive renewals would be made available as a matter of course upon reasonable terms and conditions. There is some recent case law supporting such a proposition. Brawthen v. H. & R. Block, Inc., 28 Cal. App. 3d 3. 3.31 (1972) (Employment agreement; oral representations made at time of signing to the effect that contract would be renewed continuously provided plaintiff "does a good job" held distinct from written term prescribing means for renewal and termination, and consequently not inadmissible by reason of Parole Evidence Rule) . 4. That the representations and subsequent acts of detrimental reliance are such as to make the representations enforceable irrespective of the Statute of Frauds. The right asserted by the residents of Mari.naPark, that of having their current leases renewed on reasonable terms into the future for some indefinite pe_iod, is an interest in land and hence falls within the Statute of Frauds. Witkin, Summary of California Law (Contracts § 104). In essence, the Statute of Frauds renders certain agreements unenforceable unless they are evidenced by a sufficient written memorandum of their terms. Since the right the Commission wishes to assert is assumedly based upon oral.representations, nowhere evidenced by a sufficient written memorandum, the Statute will invalidate the interest claimed unless the tenants can estop the City of Newport Beach from asserting the Statute. Under the present California Rule, a person may be estopped from asserting the Statute so as to -invalidate an oral agreement whenever the promisee has detrimentily relied upon an oral promise as enforceable notwithstanding the Statute of Frauds is not required. Witkin, Summary of California Law (Contracts § 111, 113). The actions of the tenants here, in purchasing and improving, their leasehold interests, are of the sort which have generally been held sufficient to take the oral representations out of ' the Statute of Frauds. Carlson v. Richardson, 267 Cal. App. 2d 204 (1968) (In reliance on an oral cortract for sale of real estate, plaintiff purchased temporary housing nearby to facilitate his anticipated construction activities. Held, sufficient reliance to estop defendant from pleading the Statute); Quan Shew Yung V. Woods, 218 Cal. App. 2d 506 (1963) (Entering into possession and making substantial improvements therein sufficient to take oral contract for sale of real estate out of Statute); Green v. Brown, supra. 4. 0 • Although we are well within the general rule as to the sufficiency of our detrimental reliance, there have been cases implying that cities and other governmental entities cannot be estopped from pleading the Statute. The special problems raised by the fact that the lessor here is a municipality are discussed immediately below. 5. That considerations of -public policy do not Preclude the tenants from estoppina the Cit from denvina the truth of its representations. Until recently, the question of whether a municipality or other public entity could be estopped was unclear. Three distinct lines of cases have developed, each largely ignoring the other two.' One line, characterized by decisions such -as Sawyer v. City of San Diego, 138 Cal. App. 2d 652 (1956) and Hilltop Properties v. State of California,'233 Cal. App. 2d 349 1965 , has held that estoppel may e applied against governmental entities where justice so requires. A second line has held that a municipality is never estopped to deny the procedural or substantive invalidity of its own actions. According to this rule, where the mode of entering into a contract is statutorily prescribed, that mode is the measure of the munici- pality's power. Thus, under this view, to allow municipal officials to bind the municipality by their ultra vires actions would kiave the effect of exposing the public wealth to dissipation from the improper actions of its trustees. Finally, as might be expected, there arose a third group of cases which sought a middle ground, allowing estoppel but only where binding the municipality in such a fashion would not violate procedural or substantive provisions limiting the municipality's capacity to bind itself. See, e.g., Youngman v. Nevada Irrigation District, 70 Cal. 2d 240 (1969); Carruth v. City of Madera, 233 Cal. App. 2d 688 (1965). No doubt motivated by the doctrinal confusion indicated by, the above cases, the California Supreme Court has recently seized upon an opportunity to expound at length and clarify the availability of the estoppel doctrine as against public entities. In City -of Long -Beach v.-Mansell, 3 Cal..;1,3d.462, 496-497 (1970), the court decided upon the following synthesis: 5. "After a thorough review of the many California decisions in this area, as well as a considera- tion of various out-of-state decisions, we have concluded that the proper rule governing equit- able•estoppel against the government is the followingµ.,_The-.::-gove•rnmen-t•:may•rbe bound by;:an-L: equifalrle estoppe7� in ah� same manner,,,as- a:pr-ivate. party Kwhen,.the�lements_ requisite to- such. an- estoppel. agains a:_private•-person;;are: present-_ and, ;i -thej con-srdered viev-r-_-of^ a- court of equity the-in;ust5.ce* whichµ-wouldr result_:£rorz:lcu=failure»`to uphold -,-an• estoppel is -•°_of sufficient--dimerisioir =toy justify any effect upon_public•-.interest- -or policy which would. resuLt:cfrom.-,the- raising -'-of' an:`estoppel:-" Although explicitly dicta, insofar as a -finding of estoppel was not a necessary-groiind.for the Court's decision, the thirteen odd pages devoted to estoppel" were clearly designed to bring some measure of consistency and simplicity to.this area of the law.; Of particular interest to the Committee is'the fact that the Court clearly rejected any notion that a municipality cannot be estopped when the result thereby achieved lies beyond the municipality's substantive or procedural powers. Id. at 497. However., it is equally clear that the degree to which applying the doctrine of estoppel will carry the municipality beyond its statutory authority is a highly relevant factor in determining whether public policy will permit,the.estoppel to lie. The test put forth in Long Beach is a balancing of interests approach. In general terms, "the injustice to be suffered if an estoppel were not upheld" is to be weighed against any "dele- terious effect on public policy which would result if the estoppel were raised". Id. at 498. More specifically, althoughy it seems clear from Long Beach that every.case will be decided upon its own particular facts, several relevant factors can be identified: A. The mac-nitude of the injustice which will be visited upon the private party if an estoppel is not raised; B. The existence of a continuing and cumulative courser of conduct by the municipality, which is asserted as the basis for the estoppel; C. Where estoppel would lead to a result which, because of procedural or substantive provisions would not be available by voluntary municipal action, the breath of the precedent thereby set; 6. 0 D. Where only procedural provisions are circumvented by the estoppel, the degree to which such procedural restrictions are safeguards against corruption or favoritism; E. The existence of third -party private interests; and F. Those considerations of public policy which are inherent in the specific facts considered. Although involving equitable estoppel (estoppel to deny the truth of a previously -represented statement of fact, rather than a promise), it seems likely that the approach set forth in Lonq Beach will be applied to cases involving promissory estoppel as well. Identical considerations of public policy, private interests,•and proof are involved in each instance. The only distinguishing feature would seem to be whether a promise or a statement of fact forms the basis for the detri- mental reliance involved. Although laboring under the pre - Long Beach confusion, the court in Hilltop Properties v. State of California, 233 Cal. App. 2d 349 1965), reached this- result. Turning to the specific facts assumed here', it should be noted at the outset that use of state -grant tidelands for residential leasehold -purposes is specifically authorized by Government-Code-§3738T":_':Government Code §37387 provides that tidelands may not be leased for any purposes for a period exceeding fifty.years. Aside from the question of permissible use just disposed of, it seems unlikely that the fact that state -grant tidelands are involved will be of major concern. Indeed, Long Beach itself involved the ability of the City to enter into a title -settling agreement which involved the out- right alienation of significant but indeterminate amounts of tidelands. The City of Newport Beach is a charter municipality. As such, it is not subject to state law respecting "municipal affairs". Although the precise content and scope of the phrase "municipal•affairs" cannot be determined with exactitude, it seems likely that the manner in which a charter municipality deals with tidelands with n its jurisdiction is a municipal affair, at least in the absence of legislation evidencing a statewide concern. "Defendant municipality is a charter city, and until the legislature acts to provide otherwise, the manner in which it,effectuates the purposes of the tidelands trust, in- cluding the manner in which it conducts negotiations for the leasing of the lands is a municipal affair". Silver v. City of Los Angeles, 57 Cal. 2d 39, 41 (1961). 7. r� Aside from the maximum lease term provisions cited above, our research has not uncovered any provisions of state law relating to the tidelands trust which might be held to evidence a "state- wide concern." Turning then to the Newport Beach City Charter, the following provisions are potentially relevant: r Section 405 vests power in the City Council except as otherwise provided; Section 420 provides a maximum term of twenty-five years for the leasing of municipal property without approval by the electorate; Section 421 provides both general and specific grants of administrative authority to the City Manager. Section 1402, which forbids the leasing of municipal shoreline except under certain specific conditions, is not applicable to the land involved here because o� certain "grandfather provisions". See MarinaPark Planning Study, at 5.- Finally, there may well be uncodified ordinances or other Council actions promulgated under Charter 9 504 which contain specific grants of authority to the City Manager, or other administrative city officials, with respect to MarinaPark. Should this matter proceed, a search for such ordinances should, of course, be undertaken. With respect to the balancing -of -interests test under Long Beach, it seems fair to assert that Section 521 above can be characterized as simply a municipal statute of frauds; it is difficult to see what public policy values the requirement of a.' writing can have beyond its well-known evidentiary and form- alistic virtues. Section 405 embodies a more substantial municipal interest, that of assuring a clear and appropriate allocation•of power and responsibility between the various officials and officers of the municipality. Although ana- lytically distinct (see remarks under (6] below), the question of the existence of a proper agency relationship between the city and the various administrative officials who made the representations involved here will probably find its way into the Long Beach balancing test through this section. The Committee can set up Section 405 against this interest, but in the absence of a specific delegation relating to MarinaPark, it seems unlikely that the authority involved here could be predicated on Section 405. The relevancy of Section 420, providing a maximum lease term of 25 years, is not clear. Although the claim of Marina - Park tenants to lease renewals appears on its face to be of indefinite duration (thus raising several potentially trouble- some issues), the Committee should be able to frame its theory of recovery in such a fashion as to side-step this potentially difficult area. Insofar as the equitable claim of the tenants to continued residence rests upon their leasehold improvements and other similar expenditures made by them in expectation of their continued residence, it would seem appropriate to limit their claimed right to lease extensions to a period of time sufficient for them to amortize their investment (e.g., over the reasonable life of the improvements which would be for- feited to the lessor in the event of non -renewal of the written lease). In all probability, such an approach would sidestep the 25 year limit provided in Section 420. In addition to considerations of public policy arising out of the specific Charter provisions alluded to above, we should be prepared to face arguments based upon (1) they City's obligation to utilize the tidelands in a manner bene- fitting all of its citizens, and.(2) the City's general interest in maintaining control over its propriety functions. Although the cry of "public use for public property" has a certain superficial appeal, it ignores both Government Code § 37387 alluded to earlier and the fact that the municipality as a whole derives benefit from the revenues arising out of its current use-, -As for the City'-s interest in exercising control over its proprietary functions, that asserted public . interest results solely from the City's purely private characteristics. Consequently, it should not be given too great a weight. 6. That the City is bound by the acts of its employees in this matter. Like the qusstion of estoppel, the existence of a sufficient agency relationship between the City and its employees, so as to bind the City by'their acts, involves two analytically dis- tinct issues: (a) Whether the employees' authority may be shown despite the Statute of Frauds, and (b) whether the City - is bound by the acts of its agents. With respect to the latter issue, the fact that a municipality is involved will again cloud the issue and make its resolution more difficult. 2 4 Civil Code § 2309 provides that an agent may not bind his principal to a contract which is required by the Statute of Frauds to be in writing, unless the agent's authority is itself evidenced by a writing which satisfies the Statute. There are, however, two possible ways around this barrier: First, it is possible on the basis of the actions of the principal (here the City Council) to estop the principal from denying the authority of its agent (here the City Manager and other adminis- trative officials) to bind the City. Sunset-Sternay Food Co. v. American Almond Prod. Co., 259 F. 2d 93 (1958); Karl v. JeBein, 231 Cal. App. 2d 769 (1965).. Second, an argument can be made analogizing the position of the City, which is a municipal corporation, to that of private corporations. The officers of such private corporations, having responsibility for the conduct of day-to-day affairs, are held to have an implied authority to bind the corporation, arising out of their position. Jeppi v. Broc;:man Holding Co., 34 Cal. 2d 11 (1949); Monteleone v. Southern Ca. Vending Corp., 264 Cal. App. 2d 798 (1968 . There are cases which, although not considering'the issue directly, have estopped local government agencies on the basis of the actions of administrative employees. Thus, i_n Palo Alto Investment Co. v. County of Placer, 269 Cal. App. 2d 363 (1969 a trial cour•t's verdict for the plaintiff, estopping the County on the basis of actions of its County Planning Staff, was affirmed. See also Hilltop Properties v. State of California, 233 Cal. App.•2d 349 1965); People e�.: rel Department of Public Works v. Voltz, 25 Cal. App. 3d 480 (1972). CONCLUSION It should be borne in mind that this memo relates only to promissory estoppel as a basis for relief against the City. A number of other theories may also offer prospects for success. Among those would be inverse condemnation. It should also be borne in mind that this memo does not reflect all of the exhaustive research undertaken herein. The cases presented herein are for purposes of illustration and do not include all of the authorities we have considered. It should also be pointed out that we have•not considered the manner in which the issue should be raised, that is, whether it should be raised in an action undertaken by the tenants or the tenants should await some action taken by the City and raise the included authorities by way of defense. Many possibilities exist including the possibility of a class action. 10. F1��C CITY OF NHNPORT BEACH PARKS, BEACIMS F, RECREATION DEPARTSINT September 18, 1972 TO: PB $ R COMMISSION FROM: PB & R Director SUBJECT: 1,I4RINAPARK REDESIGN HISTORY AND RECOM ENDATIONS In August of 1971, the City Council directed the staff to investigate possible use alternatives for the Marinapark site. A staff committee was formed including the Departments of Community Development, Public Works, Harbor and Tidelands and PB & R, under the Chairmanship of the Assistant City ?,tanager. This Committee identified an extensive list of potential uses and then studied the advantages and disadvantages of each use. As a result of this study a land use plan was created and finally a package was formulated which included the study data and a proposed development design. This package was entitled 1vlarinapark Planning Study, A Unique Opportunity For Public Shoreline". On June 20th, 1972 the Parks, Beaches F, Recreation Commission held a Public - Hearing on the redevelonment plans at which time many people spoke on the pros and cons of the Plan. After discussion, the Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the Marinapark be used for public park and recreation purposes when the existing leases expire in 1974. The Public Hearing was continued to July filth at which time the design element was discussed. After discussion, the Commission approved the proposed design in concept with several amendments and comments. On Monday, September llth, the City Council received the proposed redevelopment plans and also received a proposed plan that was prepared by the Marinapark Association. After a brief Public Hearing, the Council referred the matter back to the PB F, R Commission with the following instructions: 1. Review the plan submitted by the Marinapark Association: 2. Consider the Association's request for an additional two year extension which would correspond with the American Legion lease which expires in 1976. 3. Consider a Development Master Plan which would include the American Legion lease site. �y . -2 . The PB f, R staff has reviewed the plan submitted by the Marinapark Association and offer the following comments: 1. The plan does not offer a vista to the bay that would be desirable. 2. The tennis courts are too spread out to be effective in good land use planning and in conducting tennis instruction programs and tournaments. 3. Parking for public use of the facility is not provided. 4. Public access to the bay is not improved over the present condition. S. The three volleyball courts as shown ~could greatly reduce the use of the beach for sunbathing purposes. The PB f R staff still recommends the development plan that has been approved by the PB & R Commission. There may be merit, however, in extending the Marinapark leases for two years. Some advantages are: 1. No haphazard installations would be made as suggested in the Association Plan. 2. The total area could be master planned including the Legion site. 3. Revenues for the next four years from the Marinapark leases could be deposited in a fund that is earmarked for the . redevelopment. (This has been suggested by several sources.) 4. The Marinapark tenants would have an additional two years to amortize their investments. 5. Finally, and most important, the timing would allow the City Council an opportunity to go to the voters to determine their views on the proposed redevelopment of Marinapark for public recreation. Approval by the voters would give guidance and sunport for a City Council decision. Therefore, I recommend the following: 1. That a two year extension be granted to the Marinapark leases. (New expiration date June 30, 1976.) 2. That no additional improvements be made to the site in the interim. 3. That all net revenues from Marinapark for the next four years be deposited in a fund earmarked for Marinapark redevelopment. 4. That the City Council be encouraged to place on the ballot as soon as practical, the subject of opening the Marinaparlc and Legion sites for public park and recreation use. CALVIN C. YART CCS:dn M • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER September 11, 1972 Agenda Item C-4 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: MARINAPARK PLANNING STUDY. PUBLIC HEARING. RECOMMENDATION: Open public hearing; receive initial statements of staff and interested parties, and if desired, continue hearing until October 10, 1972, at 7:30 p.m.; and refer alternate proposal submitted by residents of Marinapark to Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission for review and comment. DISCUSSION: Situation. In August 1971, the City Council commissioned a master planning stuffy of the Marinapark in order to establish official city policy regarding future use and disposition of this 4.34 acre parcel of publicly owned property. The present individual mobile home park leases expire June 30, 1974. In June of this year, the City staff completed a master plan study entitled "A Unique Opportunity for Public Shoreline," which recommended the creation of the Newport Peninsula Tennis and Aquatic Center upon expiration of the existing trailer leases. The study explored the advantages and disad- vantagesfof alternate land uses and presented data indicating that the property could better serve,the interests of all of the people of Newport Beach by -being utilized as open space and a public park on the harbor. Parks Belches and Recreation Commission. A public hearing was held before the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission on June 20, 1972. Trailer tenants opposed creation of the park and expressed their views to the commission through,their-counsel. It was the commission's unanimous recommendation to the City Council that the Marinapark be used for public park and recreation purposes when the present leases expire. On July 24, 1972, the commission held a further public hearing into the specific design elements of the proposed Tennis and Aquatic Center Plan. An amended plan based,on community input and comments from individual commissioners at the June meeting was presented. After considerable discussion an -'amended design plan was recommended to the City Council for implementation. The design plan now presented to the City Council has not been amended since being approved by the commission after public hearing. - 2 - Communit Association Action. As of this writing, the Tennis and Aquatic Center Plan as been endorsed by the Central Newport Beach Community Association and the Balboa Peninsula Point Association. However, the support of the two community associations appears to be predicated on a reduction of the holding capacity of the public parking lot contemplated within the park complex from 110 cars to 50 cars. The Central Newport Beach Community Associ- ation is conducting a mail sampling of association membership regarding the land use issues raised by this study to present to the Council on September 11. The Balboa Improvement Association has suggested that, ". . . Appropriate City Hall and other personnel thoroughly study an alternate proposal (presented by Marina - park tenants), to determine if it might be a wise course to follow, at least for the next four to five years." Park Tenants Position. The City Council has received three official communications on behalf of the park tenants since the master planning study was presented. These include: 1. A May 17, 1972, letter requesting the City to adopt a policy of ten-year leases for park tenants and opposing the creation of the public Tennis and Aquatic Center. 2. A July 19, 1972, letter alleging that the City Council and City staff have inferred or implied to the park tenants that the leases would be extended for an unspecified period of time beyond their present expiration date. 3. An August 28, 1972, letter containing an alternate proposal for the construction of additional public facilities within the Marinapark district, while at the same time leaving all existing tenant trailer spaces intact and extending the existing leases at least through 1976. The staff has received no instructions from the City Council to comment on these three Communications. Cost Data. On July 24, 1972, the master plan study was set for public hearing before the City Council for September 11. The staff indicated at that time that revised drawings of the commission -endorsed Tennis and Aquatic Center Plan would be presented and preliminary cost estimates for plan implementation would be developed. There are two major elements in the plan - the proposed park facilities on the existing Marinapark parcel and the proposed city sailing center located partially on existing city -owned property upland from East Bay Avenue between 18th and 19th Streets. For study purposes, these are very preliminary cost estimates of plan implementation. any would, of course, be subject to design confirmation. In the case of the sailing center, additional land acquisition would be required. Preliminary Cost Analysis for Creation of Newport Peninsula Tennis and Aquatic Center Including Site Preparation and Facilities Construction and/or Installation Contract Demolition of Existing Facilities 209,000 sq. ft. asphalt and walk @ $ 15 = $31,350 . . . (say) $32,000 Buildings (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000 $ 37,000 Installation and New Construction AC Parking - 58,750 sq. ft. @ $.40 . . . . . . . . 23,500 Concrete walks - 20,730 sq. ft. @ $.80 = $16,584 . . . (say) 16,500 Curbs - 1,000 ft. @ $3.00. . . . . . . 3,000 Restroom Building - 1,250 sq. ft. @ $30.00 . . . . . . 37,500 Lighted Tennis Courts - 4 @ $16,000. . . . . . . . . . 64,000 Tennis Shelter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000 149,500 City Forces Installation Landscaping and Sprinklers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000 Play Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000 25,000 Land Acquisition and Facilities Construction Sub -Total 211,500 (say) 215,000 10% Contingency 21,500 Total $236,500 City Sailing Center Land Acquisition 100' x 70' (not substantiated by appraisal). . . . . . $125,000 Installation Building - 4,000 sq. ft. @ $30.00 . . . . . . . $120,000 Pier and Floats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000 130,000 Sub -Total 255,000 10% Contingency 25,500 Total $280,500 v -4- All costs appear to be eligible for funding under either special user and lesson fee trust funds and/or from Property Development Tax revenues. The lighted tennis courts, for instance, by City policy, would be constructed from an apportionment of City tennis lesson fee revenues paid by tennis players and not general City taxes. As with any master planned facility, construction of the various amenities can, of course, be phased over a period of years consistent with financing convenience and ability. Should the project be implemented, it would also be advisable to underground all utilities within the project area should utility company undergrounding funds be available based on an advancement of existing priorities. Unless requested by the City Council, the staff has no additional comments to offer at this time. We have fulfilled a responsibility to present to the Council constructive alternatives for the utilization of public property in the public interest of residents of the City. ROBERT L. WYNN RLW/PFB:sh Attachment c: Marinapark Association Sam Miller, Pros. Jack Wassal, Vice Pros. Board of Directors Bill Dillman Dee Fields Arf Gronsky Ed Hobo) George Perlin Homer Smith Phil Tozier Coy Waffs 801 E. BALBOA BLVD. BALBOA, CALIF. 92661 lseptftbe t S, 1972 Newpo&,t beach Nayot and City Cou wVV, 33oo Newpo tt Md., Newpo&t beach, Ca. 92660 Subaeet, Cittj ComcU meet&% Sept. II, l o72, Na&iyrapank gedevedopement. Centtemen; On quty 17, 1972 we wrote you a lettz7, iWCo1wAKdiv%q! -the continued cede of Na-tinapaak as day (copy of tettet attached). Simw that tufe, we have &euiewed an aLte r wte ptopodd, c &ratted by .the r9a&,F a atk Aiaoodation. She adtet-wte p.topoaal has manq good jea&4tea; /) .r t a a. dea.iyw.ed go& the a" of tocat ae&WwtJ. 2) 9mpaoued accecl4 to a g'bw baygaont beach. Np&e Newpoat Beach people wiU be able to uza the beach. 3) No additional awtomobite p .is &eVUed. Wevtce, rw dvww�d t4uaggac on the Peninawla. 9t zd. not the beat ae.J.ident4 who camz ova t.taggic jaw& avid pahki.ay, p�toblema. A 14 the VZA oas, who Aive heite to ttq to a." .the'gaci,Gi tint. avWtable to the pubd ic. 4) Cont&"ed netiable .wa&ce of 2euenue g�toa Naaivrapatk. S, j Coat of new f air Li i e ,& wd 11 be ruw A d owe t than complete tedeveLope- fftent ptopo,Jal. We hedpeet uVq augyzat that app'top7,iate C•i,ty /daU avid oth" peiodonnet t%o&ouyhly atu4 the atte&xate paopoaat, to detewdine-4 it miGht be a w.LJ.e eoutde to gottow, at least got the nv `go" o2 live ye"d. 51r1/0 ,Ln lt� J�itea.ident r!Ads ,ri,1 `•_ = ice, r =3 I I:SzI G •,:ge Perlin .._ N STIli1 3i v;1 am e. BAIeoA Bc,o. - �..— BAIBOA. CALIF. 9:551 Newpo,tt ;°each /%layo/t and City Cm"C'i1, 3700 Newport &u4, Newpo-tt heaah, Ca. 92660 nut' y 17, 1972 cSubJ eace',; C:Lty Council m-eating, qu4 24 1972, !%lcti4=, a kr JZedeuelopewwit. GentLerzn; . ghe Satboa ,9r'p2ouestert r7d.a.ociation (3oa&d o� bi&,ecT..oa.� and rw,,Pbe&4, voted ri a J-avo t o� co tbia.i f the v4e o� 1:,1atwtapwtk a..t..i it ias Jhe p&opo"d gacit.Lty L. &z vy- etteytt one, but �oit it to make e a;:y de�, ,Lt r tut hcwe the ..,.c!-l�,t ionaL pa&lwic,�, whuh i i Z-x ded .in the ptav4 9-t w.i tt ctttaet rto/ce v i..i to-".+..o the pe,�i.sv'&ta and j t&t-he . aacvzeva a the io.,pod. AIte -t-tgf i,e &i tat'i on, ((!e a/ce agr.iru t wt ir4 angthdn p7 that w,Ll)- atttaet rco/ce uia to&4. emit aorae& njc .L L done to xedctee the r,%ay -fade -o? ,the prxobZaet. (ale a&e not in. aeon o� the GL`u/ be-i. ' do eorzpe-tition with private enfie-tp2- ,L"O ad �t .i d. with the wr.obite fore parr., IjcIT •ti:z ru&' n't 's L twit -ion ha,, wo&ked ,ueLL got euetqbodL/ ,irwo•tued �o-t e,,a,,y teary and we would not chatu�e it bwltzt <.orzhuu cart be done aba,t the tar p s is pkob.P er,,. 9h+i a. coez t d4 a,' actson will pe&ait ta!zinq. advrmuaye o� •the iteadq eovcce of &eu&aw, and not irtcicease :the taXpcu�eius buhden with rrto to deuetoperFent and r/aLntan=ae coat.,, (Ve &wae--t- vul -Lt r,.ight be g'eadib)-e to corAtzuct a ?ew rote tenaziA- coat& in the paadent atea. 0,-,e LZVceA-tir�. �uggzatAn r, ade at ova rteatincr, was that avu/%h inc. io c�rt2 to chonaz /7aly atk, 13ay St. eiight be vctendzd (Heat to 18�c fit.... `Jhid iwpegt&. . eoutd 98;t ad. fiivree btLoc--i to doLuinV� ouh ttaf f is paobtza 'L4 a veay Ctit- .LCwI. aheas �Ptj&d t tt-4 i Ul / a3d��JS Y� PC]�3�:J al :-' Just trl ! SV ASHIN CTON' CA _ itl City Parks are peopleiess i„l r these days, but 'lot princi- •.Pally because of fear of crime, a study for the g o v e r n men_t in Thursday. Parks just- are not as much fun for people as they should be, !t said The stud, ' 3. y done for the Department of Housing !; and urban Development t said: "The perception of crime plays an unknown role in keeping nonusers ' away from parks but it does not appear to be the most significant develop- : went in usage decision." • It said the majority of the parks are esthetically im_poteet, "most are sterile i Yazd incapable of giving pleasure to the people who - would use them- If more people used parks, or en- joyed them more, they might have less fear of vi- plent' crime in their ts: arks• t• The report _prepared by F' Harold Lewis Malt Associ= ates of Washington,. was based on a study pf 64 parks in 16 cities. The stud y Bald facilities , n' were thy designed for en -age males. Teeri-age 4 g--shave nothing, the eld- e*IY lzve little and share is almost a total lack, Of in_ ovative 01) ortuni-• ties for adult , ir. said. 1. NGCiOGa tL�..�,zSL�p_ i 1 The Honorable Mayor Donald A. McInnisY and the Councilmen of Newport Beach s � August' 31, 1972 6 `y 4 s i RE: Marina Park Mobil Home Park, 1770 West Balboa, Newport Beach, CA. ALTERNATE -PROPOSAL to Marina Park Study of P.B.&R. Department to allow con inue occupancy of the hB r•c.; id(,nts. Sirs: C4 Referring to the Marina Park Planning Study prepared by the P.B.&R. Dept. at the request of'the City Council on August 19'71 which will be presented to the Council September 11, 1�)72, we at Marina Park wish to offer an Alternate Proposal affecting our future occupancy and use of the Park and the surrounding area. Submitted for your consideration are several letters written by Marina Park residents regarding their feelings supporting their desire to continue as tenants in the Park. We believe the citizens of Newport Beach will benefit greatly by implement- ing our Alternate Plan. We submit -that all these improvements can be accomplished within one year from this date and the cost of these added facilities and conveniences will be paid by granting the Marina Park residents a 2-year lease extension. This Alternate Proposal affords an opportunity of freer and open accesses to the already public beach: the addition of 5 tennis; courts to the existing 2 now installed, as well as additional. toilet facilities, walkway - bicycle paths and storage. We are also in favor of the proposed municipal sailing center and sail boat docks on l9th Street. We are requesting that our existing 2-year lease option expiring June 30, 1974, be extended two more years to.terminate June 30, 1976. We favor the opening of negotiations now covering the existing period as well as the 2-year extension with reference to terms, conditions, rentals, services and accessibility to 'various public areas. We also believe that, although our Alternate Plan has been well thought out and discussed, it surely may be improved by the 'various agencies charged with this type of,responsibility. We submit that, working together with the Planning Board, the P.B.&R. Dept., the local citi--ens groups and ourselves, the end product will be acceptable to all concerned. In this spirit we anticipate that the use of the whole area by all the citizens, will be enhanced, and that this can be accomplished in a timely fashion with the cost of conversion being paid by our continued occupancy. We at Marina Park pray for your favorable consideration and trust our Alternate Plan will be acceptable to the Council as well as the residents of Newport Beach. MARINA ARK ASSOCIA ION w� � y�v(� 7 e .bert Jil .lams v f7 17'70 West Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach, CA. 714/673-6545 HW:rh .ti August 28, 1972 ALTERNATE PROPOSAL OF MARINA PARK STUDY BY DEPT. OF P,B, & R, SUBMITTED BY THE RESIDENTS OF MARINA PARK HISTORY - This 412 acre site located between 15th & 18th Streets on Balboa B— vas originally a camp ground until 1955 when the site was converted to the existing use as a mobil home permanent trailer residency, The City of Newport Beach has granted leases 'varying in length from year to year to the now current lease of 3 years with a 2-year option extending thru June 30, 1974. CURRENT STATUS - There are 58 mobil homes in Marina Park, fronting on 924, of pu is each. The residents have invested in their mobil homes collec- tively in excess of $1,000,000 of which its estimated $750,000 could be considered "lease hold value" and the balance of $250,000 above ground mobil home value. Approximately 40% are permanent full time residents with the balance, summer and week -end use. Most have cabanas permanently fixed to the site and all are maintained to the highest standards. The Park is divided 1/2 adults only and 1/2 adults and children. Over half of the residents have been in the Park 10 years or longer. The rear of the Park has public facilities for children's Tot Lot, 2 tennis courts, open green space, girl scout house and office building for the P.B.&R. Dept. The total site is approximately 390 feet deep of which the front 85' is public beach, the center 208' is mobil homepark, and the rear 100' for public recreation use. The trailer park occupies approximately the middle 1/2 of the total site. It is the only 5-star rated park in the area not having its own recreational building. MASTER PLAN PROPOSAL - There is presently a proposed master plan to eliminate the mobil home park at the expiration of the present lease of 30 June 1974, to be replaced by a tennis and aquatic parka This proposal shall be presented before the City Council at their September 11, 1972, meeting. Involved in the plan are additional tennis courts, enlargeing the swimming beach, more public parking, rest rooms, 'volley ball courts, basket ball courts, trees, and bicycle path. This study by its very nature does not consider any other factors outside of the purpose of its assignment nor is the study concerned with displacement of existing families, property values, income, or cost of construction. The study states that its only concern is that of the proposed use of an aquatic and tennis site as if nothing existed on the present site, and no financial considerations were taken in account. The study excludes the adjacent city owned American Legion whose lease expires in 1976 and the bowling green whose lease expires in one year. Both of these properties comprise approximately 1/3 additional land adjacent to the Marina Park for consideration. INTEREST IN PUBLIC REGIONAL USE PARKS - We at Marina Park also believe in the need for additional pu is acilities and the use of existing beach and bay frontage by the general public. For this reason, we have proposed an alternate plan to be utilized NOW and still maintain the residency of the 58 mobil home owners as well as conTinue the income generated by the Park in excess of $114,000 gross per year. ALTERNATE PROPOSAL (SEE MAP AND OVERLAY) To utilize the soon -to -be -vacated ow ing green 5y installing 2 tennis courts (or parking) with room for bicycle racks. Add a 3rd tennis court adjacent to the now existing 2 courts r.Alternate Proposal of M na Park Study by ugust 28, 1972 Dept, of P B, & R. submi ed by the Residents Page 2 of Marina 'ark along Balboa Blvd, leaving 60, of green area for tables and public uses. Widen the walkway -bicycle path to the beach between the Marina Park and the American Legion to 10' from 611, and open the access thru.the side of the existing Tot Lot, to be aligned with the existing crosswalk presently on Balboa Blvd. Continue the walkway -bicycle path along the front of the Park on the existing public beach. Construct toilet facilities approximately at the location indicated. Install bicycle parking for children riding their bicycles to the beach. Provide 3 volley ball courts on beach area. Utilize the corner of Balboa and 18th Street for the 4th and 5th tennis courts (or parking). COST - We estimate that the 5 tennis courts will cost $15,000 each including =ts; the toilet facilities at $25,000; the walkway -bicycle path $10,000; moving the Mana er's trailer and miscellaneous additional expense at $10,000; for a total of 120,000. By granting the residents of Marina Park the addi- tional 2 years we anticipate that our rental more than pays for these improvements. CONCLUSIONS - We believe these alternate plans would accomplish more regional Use of the new facilities and not cause an increase of additional people, cars and outside use by other than local people, who will mainly walk or bicycle to these facilities. The existing bay front beach would be opened up to more use by widening the south entrance and making it more visible. The tennis courts (or parking) would be installed on existing empty or soon -to -be -vacated city owned land and the use of the corner of Balboa and 18th for an additional 4th and 5th court (or parking) would provide the full suggested number of courts or parking facilities as proposed in the P.B.&R. plan. All this would provide almost everything the City Parks have recommended for the public use, without displacing the existing mobil home park residents. It appears logical that this alternate plan going into effect NOW could then be augumented 4 years hence when the balance of the bay front becomes avail- able to be included in a total comprehensive study. We believe the City Council should give our Alternate Plan the same con- sideration and deliberation that has gone into the study conducted by the P.B.&R. Department. Our opinion is that, given these alternatives, the Council can now judge the merits of both sides as presented to them. - We at Marina Park solicit your immediate comments and ask for your support in our efforts. MARINA SPARK ASSOCIATION �r By � ;- We—r-bert Williams 1770 West Balboa Blvd. Newport Beach, CA. 714/673-6545 HW:rh V V, IN I JQQ �,N A ni A .1 , '4" , I I . , ,, 1 A� A-� A, A A k4 M\N- ;-N `Klthl 11 -VNNNNN,� SON mom M \N�A, I k\N Xtv. 8AN,, NN.�N NNI 11-.. IN, I A AN x IA � \ -�, \�� I V N4Iu sqcv� N INN\ I� "Q N 1W"IN 1\ 0\� I� I \1I\NN' Ill A ZZ NN\ N\'M'.�NNN"N' ,\N� I A,��, N, A N I ZINO Qv. �.�N N, kA,, , V "I \1 N\' 11* 1 \NI1V\1lIl.I I V V, ?V IN 'fin;), IlF4\)S„aor„•n"' IX, AMW ri f "N WIN, In I lo� ,A A V- A, N- IN C, IN I A I I— IN lV V \IN11II V I, IN A` u A Awl I IN A IN RO, � i N. I A, \1 I I I j ""IN , -III 'INS', 1'::V �,ANN�\ N 1 .1 ll�, Ni �: IN � I I'l 1. 4 � ' " I, \ '-" �, I �A, N\\ V, I'\ I, IN: I, I "N" A A N� TO, 0 Io. INVAIA 11 IN. Q! A A ... .. . I.. I IN .1lINlIV1l1NI,.,NN--",\ ON, IN IN NN, N "Al �A A A, VI IN IN F.V '-NV A - IN YN\ I'NVII MOM u N\ N," —IR 3, N, IN N, V Wil,Q f "'A I I �,N N. IN IN �,--,Nl �-,�-.NA -114N I ova on A­� 11 N A .1 "t IN 1, , V AN , .1, 1 , � IN I A,\, IN x is, all y"My, t Vol• 0 v-'N' IN Qko 401 IN', N;N, A�' 0, C�, ,A V�, N N,1 �l \\I NIV .11NN\1 V, v,i �Pj I �\Np: N,, N, IN -A 11, 1 Q� \�J\ *,\\� \ \ NNN N,I,N V'V 11" jaw- V, IN ... . ...... .... A I'M 1, 11N, 1%1%, IN 11\1 tvl 1` x, NM Wn, 1 w 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA April 12, 1972 Dear Marinapark Resident: City Hall 330D W. Newport Blvd. Area Code 714 673-2110 There are several items of interest to Marinapark tenants which I would like to report to you: 1. Lease Renewal. Your July 1, 1969, rental agreement with the City of Newport Beach for Marinapark trailer pads provides as follows: "TERM AND RENEWAL OPTIONS. The term of this lease is for a period of three years, commencing on the 1st day of July, 1969, and ending on the 30th day of June, 1972. Lessee shall have the option to extend this lease for two years following the expiration of the initial term, upon the same conditions herein contained. If Lessee elects to exercise this option, he shall notify Lessor in writing not lace than cixty 60 days nrior'to the expiration date of said If you desire to extend your lease for two years beyond June 30, 1972, would you please complete the attached Notice of Intent to Extend Lease Period form and file it with the office of the Marinapark Manager by May 1, 1972. 2. Rental Rates. Your July 1, 1969, lease with the City also provides for a $10.00 increase in monthly space rental rates effective July 1, 1972. The Los Angeles National Office of Economic Stabilization has advised the City that rents in the Marinapark can only be increased by 2.5% over the present rates regardless of the contract lease provisions. Therefore, the following rental rates were approved by the Newport Beach City Council on April 10, 1972, by action of Resolution No. 7670 and will be in effect July 1, 1972: -2- Contracted Space Present Lease New Monthly Rate Monthly Rate Location Rate Agreement Under Phase II Increase A $ 160.00 $ 170.00 ) $ 164.00 ) $ 4.00 6.75% ) 2.5% B 160.00 170.00 ) Increase 164,00 ) Increase 4.00 F 160.00 170.00 ) 164.00 ) 4.00 C 135.00 145.00 ) 138.00 ) 3.00 7.41% ) 2.22% D 135.00 145.00 ) Increase 138.00) Increase 3.00 E 135.00 145.00 )) 138.00 )) 3.00 NOTE: The above NEW MONTHLY RATE is for space rental only and the flat rate gas fee of $6.00 per month should be added to this amount. (Example: "A" spaces total rent is $170.00 per month.) 3. Marinapark Stang ffi. As you may know, the park is now provided with a level of services above that of the industry for comparable parks. Since thi's facility is owned by the people of the City of Newport Beach and it is our responsibility to provide them with a reasonable economic return on public property held in private use, the City Manager's Office has proposed some staff reductions in the 1972-73 operating budget that will soon be submitted to the City Council. Even with these reductions, however, we believe our landlord respon- sibilities can still be adequately met at a level of parity with the industry. 4. Sealcoatin . The City will be sealcoating the streets in Marinapark urin� The City's contractor will distribute written notices, stating when his operations will start and end, to alert you of tem- porary inaccessibility to your residence. Normally the contractor's operations will inhibit vehicular access to your residence for three to six hours. This work will improve and protect our internal street system. 5. Master Planning Studies. In August of 1971 the City Council commis- sioned the City staff to prepare a master planning study of the Marinapark. This facility was originally developed as an interim use of City -owned property until a higher and better use of more direct benefit to our City taxpayers evolved. The findings of the planning studies will be made available to the City Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission for public hearing and comment by June 1. Very truly yours, NORBERT REINHART Marinapark Manager 1 r 0 April _, 1972 Mr. Norbert Reinhart, Manager Marinapark 1770 West Balboa Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Subject: Notice of Intent to Extend Lease Period Dear Mr. Reinhart: The undersigned is a lessee of Space in Section No. of the Marinapark pursuant to a July 1, 1969, rental agreement. "TERM AND RENEWAL OPTIONS. The term of this lease is for a period of three years, commencing on the 1st day of July, 1969, and ending on the 30th day of June, 1972. Lessee shall have the option to extend this lease for two years following the expiration of the initial term, upon the same conditions herein contained. If Lessee elects to exercise this option, he shall notify Lessor in writing �; +„ tin nave nv;nv +n tha axmratinn date of said Pursuant to Section 10, Term and Renewal Options, of the subject agreement, the undersigned hereby notifies Lessor, the City of Newport Beach, of his intent to extend the existing lease under the same terms and conditions until June 30, 1974. Filing of this Notice of Intent to Extend Lease Period does not change Lessee's rights to terminate the subject lease at an earlier date at his sole option. Lessee understands that Lessor has no obligation, either expressed or implied, to extend any Marinapark leases beyond June 30, 1974. ssee Permanent Mailing Address: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CALIFORNIA +ua September 30, 1970 Mrs. Marilyn Cummins 1770 West Balboa Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92660 Dear Mrs. Cummins: city Sian 8800 Newport viv(L (714) 678-2110 `{lWfj It is understood that the City is contracting for your services in the capacity of Marinapark Attendant to provide relief coverage for the administration of Marinapark during the absence of the manager and his wife. The principle times when your services will be required are during the absence of the Marinapark Manager and Clerk during vacation periods which shall occur for a two week period each quarter year. Other occasional relief work may be required as may became necessary and determined by the Marinapark Manager. Your principle areas of responsibility during these relief periods will be to: 1) Collect rentals and keep accurate records of payment for all accounts; 2) Deliver to the City Finance Department rental monies with records of same at least once each week; 3) Maintain 8:00 A.M. to '5:00 P.M. office hours, answer telephones, tenant problems or requests on a seven day week basis; 4) Check that entrance and grounds are properly maintained and well policed; 5) Regularly check washers and dryers to ensure that they are working properly and that the laundry and shower "rooms are kept in a clean and orderly manner; 6) Know of and contact appropriate personnel in the event of ,any emergency; 7) Maintain good tenant relationships and use good judgement in,any other duties that may become necessary and are reasonable and fair; and 8) Be prepared to assist in any emergency at any time. 70 4`, 4' Mrs. Marilyn Cimmmins September 30, 1970 Page Two In return for your services, the City will provide you with the full-time use of a City -owned trailer, utilities included, at Marinapark. It is under- stood that your occupancy commenced effective September 1, 1970, and that your attendant duties will commence on or about October 1, 1970. Both parties agree to give thirty (30) days written notice prior to termination of this agreement. The terms of the agreement will be administered by the Marinapark Manager for the City of Newport Beach. Bxecution of this agreement by your signature be- low will acknowledge that you understand and agree to all conditions of this contractural relationship. Please sign.and return to me all copies except one which may be retained for your file. Very truly yours, HA[,VEY L. HURLBURT City Manager September 30, 1970 ByNoY ert C. Re rt Marinapark Manager I agree to the terms set forth in'..'this letter of agreement. 0 QPINIQI� RESEAEC� Ql CALIEQRNIA PUBLIC OPINION A N O BUSINESS SURVEYS CORPORATE OFFICER--1232 BELMONT AVENUE -LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA-434-6716 MOM[ OFFIOE-800 SANTIAGO AVENUE -LONG BEACH. CALIFORNIA-GENCVA 6-3930 PALM BPRINGR 714-328-6960 METHODOLOGY This Study is based on information gathered in three hundred personal "in home" interviews with residents of Newport Beach, California. The field interviewing for the Study was conducted on March 13 and 14, 1969. The'sample design allowed for the selection of sample areas by probability method, with systematic techniques used in the final selection of the respondent. The interviews were conducted by twenty OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA interviewers, working under the immediate direction of five OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIF- ORNIA senior field supervisors. The field supervisors were charged with the supervision of daily work schedules and verification of interviews. The overall conduct of the Study was under the direct supervision of a Senior Associate'of OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA. All working papers, data decks, and computer output from this Study are available for inspection and use in the OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA office by the client for a period of eighteen months after completion of the Study. el ME CITY OF NMFONT BUM \ -- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey THE RESPONDENTS In this section, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA examines the demographic backgrounds of all respondents who took part in the survey. Respondents were grouped by sex, age, residential area, educational experience, annual family income, and length of residence in Newport Beach, as follows: 1) The distribution of respondents according to sex is shown in the table below: Male 51% Female 49% 2) The following table shows the sample distribution by age: 21 to 29 21% 30 to 39 17% 40 to 49 30% 50 to 59 17% Over 60 15% The mean age of the survey respondents is approximately forty-three years. Female respondents are somewhat younger as a whole -1- I '; an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey than are male respondents. Residents of Area II are younger than residents of either of the other residential/ geographical Areas. Not surprisingly, a respondent's age tends to increase as his length of residence in the Newport Beach area increases. 3) The proportional distribution of the sample according to the geographical location of residence is shown below. Area I 33% Area II 27% Area III 40% 4) The following table shows the educational back- grounds of survey respondents: 0 to 8 years -0- 9 to 11 years 3% High school graduate 15% Some college 37% College graduate 29% Post graduate work 16% Male respondents have, on the whole, received more formal education than have female respondents. Respondents in their thirties have more educational experience than those in any other age group. Area II respondents are -2- N an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey better educated than are respondents in Areas I or III. There is a tendency for those who have lived in Newport Beach for less than five years to have received more formal education than those who have lived in the area a longer time. 5) The following table shows the sample distribution by annual family income: Less than $5,000 4% $5,000 - $10,000 12% $10,000 - $15,000 22% $15,000 - $20,000 19% $209000 - $25,000 13% More than $25,000 21% Refuse to state 9% The large percentage of respondents indicating annual income in excess of $25,000 would suggest that the mean income of respondent families is above a relatively high $179400. Respondents who are in their forties have a higher annual income than those in any other age group. Area II respondents have the highest annual income; those in Area III the lowest. Respondents who have resided in Newport Beach for from five -to -ten years have the highest annual income; y -3- 3 • • an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey those who have lived in the area for less than -one year year have much the lowest. 6) The following table shows the pattern for length of residence in Newport Beach of survey respondents: Less than one year 19% 1 to 5 years 35% 5 to 10 years 20% 10 to 20 years 16% More than 20 years 10% The mean length of respondent residence in Newport' Beach is approximately six years. The mean length of residence based on a respondent's sex is almost identical for both sexes. Not surprisingly, the length of residence in Newport Beach tends to rise as a respondent's age increases. Area II respondents have resided in the Newport Beach area for a marginally shorter time than those in the other two residential/geographic Areas. In the next section, the image of Newport Beach among the city's residents is examined. µ_. an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey THE NEWPORT BEACH IMAGE In this section, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA examines the attitudes and feelings of Newport Beach residents toward living in the area. General questions are asked about respondent beliefs and feelings without engaging in dialogue about specific problems. Respondents were asked initially about their impressions of Newport Beach at present: "How would you describe Newport Beach?" 1) Eighteen percent of all respondents, the largest single group of respondents answering this question, describe Newport Beach as a recreational community. Male respondents, respondents in their forties and fifties, Area III respondents, and those who have lived in the Newport Beach area for from ten -to -twenty years are particularly likely to give this answer. 2) Thirteen percent of all respondents make a value judgment of Newport Beach, mentioning such things as its being a nice community, attractive, a typical beach area, et cetera. 3) An additional thirteen percent describe Newport -5- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA suave possible response, the number two the strongest opposition. III Charge fees for private uses of tidelands 1 Lease tidelands to private developers for boat' repair yards 1 (2) Disapprove ovide public marinas and oring areas on tidelands the Upper Bay 1.33 strict use of private ers in residential areas adjacent property hers 1.45 Respondents were also asked about a specific instance PM of tideland use, as follows: -44a- an OPINION .RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey group. Among no group does less than seventy percent approve such development. 2) Public parks and recreation: Yes 81% No 16% Don't know 3% Here again there is overwhelming respondent support for this type of development from all respondent groups. 3) Business: Yes 15% No 80% Don't know 5% Opposition to the development of business adjacent to the bay reaches a level similar to the level of approval for the previous two kinds of'development. Among no respond- ent group does opposition fail to substantially outweigh support. 4) Public beach facilities: Yes 75% No • 21% Don't know 4% -46- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey Favor 55% Oppose 36% Don't know 9% Although there is some variation in emphasis from respondent group to respondent group, all groups with a single exception support such additional construction. (The single exception occurs among respondents who have lived. in Newport Beach for more than twenty years, among whom opposition outstrips support by about three -to -one.) HARBOR DEVELOPMENT Respondents were also asked a series of questions about Newport Beach harbor development, as follows: "It would be desirable for the community to develop a new harbor on the Newport Beach coastline." Strongly agree 12•,6 Tend to agree 14% Tend to disagree 32% Strongly disagree 36% Don't know 6% There appears to be strong respondent resistance to the idea of new harbor facilities in the Newport Beach area. -50- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey Respondent opposition to the increasing use of the harbor for boat storage, at the expense of recreation, is overwhelming among all groups of respondents. r Finally, respondents were asked about the placing of more restrictions on boat size in the harbor, as follows: "There should be greater restrictions on the maximum size of boats permanently moored in the harbor." Strongly agree 13% Tend to agree 19% Tend to disagree 29% ; Strongly disagree 20% Don't know 19% BY and large, most respondent groups tend to reject the idea of greater restrictions. However, exceptions occur among respondents in their fifties, who tend to support greater restrictions; Area II respondents who are evenly divided on this question; and those who have lived in Newport Beach for less than one year, who are marginally supportive of the idea of greater restrictions. BEACH DEVELOPMENT In this section, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA turns -52- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA syrvay of present policies of beach development. 3) Respondents who live in Area I and II are more likely than other respondents to support further develop- meat and improvement of beach areas. Area III respondents are much more supportive of coastline preservation. 4) Respondents who have lived in Newport Beach for less than one year or from five -to -ten years show less support for coastline preservation than do other respondents. Those who have lived in the area for from ten -to -twenty years express heavier support for the preservation of natural coastlines. It should be noted that among all respondent rou , whatever the above -described variations, more respondents support natural coastline preservation than a_y other sinszle alternative for beach development. Respondents were next asked about further beach development on the !LaV. Respondents were asked to express the extent of their agreement/disagreement with the state- ment -that: Bay." "More public beach area should be developed on the -56- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey 0 Strongly agree 3l/0 Tend to agree 29% Tend to disagree 21% Strongly disagree 17% Don't know 2% When the development of additional beach facilities is tied neither to use by the general public nor to possible alternative uses of the beach areas, and limited to the Bay, respondent support for such development is substantially increased (compare responses to the last three questions). Respondents in their forties and over sixty, and those who reside in Area I are decidedly more supportive of the above proposition than- respondents as a whole. Those in their fifties, Area III residents, and respondents who have lived in the Newport Beach area for from five -to - ten years are less supportive - Finally, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA asked res- pondents about their feelings regarding the accessibility and convenience of the beach facilities already in exist- ence, as follows: STAB a resident of Newport Beach, are you generally -57- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey satisfied or dissatisfied with your access to the ocean beaches?" Satisfied 84% Dissatisfied 15% Don It'know 1% Respondents among all groups overwhelmingly express themselves as satisfied with beach access. In the following section, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA deals'with a problem closely related to that Of area development. The problem referred to is that of control of the environment. -58- an OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA survey BEAUTIFICATION In this section, OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA examines respondent attitudes toward the quality of the Newport Beach environment. Involved here are questions of city programs in landscaping and beautification. In addition, respondents were asked about what they consider to be the proper attitudes toward problems of environmental pollution. OPINION RESEARCH OF CALIFORNIA first asked about the importance of beautification, as follows: "Could you please give me the number on the scale which corresponds with your opinion of how important a beautification program is to ouia community?" (The number one represents the greatest possible importance, the number seven the least_) One 42% Two 16% Three 13% Four 13% Five . 7% SLX 2% Seven 3% Don't know 4% -59- r �_ 0 WWC:mec 9/28/59 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING A REVISION OF PARAGRAPH 16 IN THE LEASE RENTAL FORMS FOR MARINAPARK WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach approved a lease form for use in leasing the spaces in Marinapark by Resolution No. 4520 on July 23, 1956; and WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of the City Council that Paragraph 16 of said lease should be amended to authorize changes in the form of the lease as appear necessary for the proper administration of Marinapark; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves amending the form to cause Paragraph 16 to read: 1116. OPTION. Lessee shall have the option to renew this lease upon the same terms and conditions herein con- tained, or upon the terms and conditions that appear in a lease form hereafter adopted by the City Council to replace this form and be used for leasing the trailer spaces in Marinapark, with the exception of rental price. Said rental price upon renewal shall be determined at the discre- tion of the City Council of Newport Beach, but will be com- parable to rentals for similar trailer sites in the immediate vicinity within the Newport Marinapark. Lessee must give to lessor notice in writing of his intent to exercise his option at least sixty (60) days before the expiration date of said lease." This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach at a regular meeting on the day of IA'- , 1959, by the following vote, to wit: ATTEST: AYES, COUNCILMEN: NOES, COUNCILMEN: ABSENT COUNCILMEN: City Clerk Mayor CITY OF NEKPORf BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER June 9, 1969 E - 3(d) TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: NEW MARINAPARK LEASE AGREEMENT RECONMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt by resolution the attached new lease agreement for the tenants of MarinaPark proposed to be effective July 1, 1969. DISCUSSION: The existing lease agreement between the city and each of the 58 tenants at MarinaPark will expire June 30, 1969. During the past year a number of proposed changes in the lease agreement have been discussed with the City Council, including an adjustment in rates and a transfer fee to be imposed on any lessee proposing to assign a space to any new lessee approved by the city. During the past six months the staff has had several meetings and di§cussibns with a resident committee selected by the tenants of Matinapark for purposes of working out mutually satisfactory provisions for the new lease docu- ment. We are pleased to report that the lease agreement proposed and attached hereto has the unanimous. approval of the city staff and the entire resident committee representing the tenants of MarinaPark. The principle changes contained in the new lease document as they differ from the existing lease agreement are outlined as follows: 1) The new lease agreement provides for a flat rate of $6.00 per month for gas service provided to the individual trailer spaces.. The existing lease has two different rates for gas service - $4.00 per month to those tenants who occupy the park on weekends only and $6.00 for full-time residents. This variable rate structure has been somewhat difficult to administer. In addition, the flat $6.00 rate will cover any minor anticipated increase in the gas -rate. 2) The new lease provides for payment of a $200.00 transfer fee by the lessee when he assigns his space to another tenant acceptable to the city. This charge is designed to cover the administrative and miscellaneous expenses incurred in conjunction with changes in occupancy of the MarinaPark complex. s) The term of the new lease is for a period of three years with a provision to extend the lease for a period of two additional years following the City Council - 2 - June 9, 1969 expiration of the initial three-year term if the lessee notifies the city in writing not less than sixty days prior'to the expiration of the three-year lease which term- inates June 30, 1972. The current lease document was written on a three-year basis with an option to extend upon the terms and conditions determined by the city but for no specific period of time. The resident committee initially requested that a seven-year lease be granted to the residents(df.the park to commence July 1, 1969 and expire on June 30, 1976, on the basis that this property is similar in nature to the American Legion property under lease from the city which is scheduled to expire on June 30, 1976. While recognizing that the MarinaPark property is some- what similar in nature, the staff felt that it was not appropriate to bind the city for a seven year period at this time, particularly considering other possible uses of the property owned by the city in this area which may be discussed in the summary report of the Newport Tomorrow Goals and Objectives Study. The staff would agree that a three-year lease with an option to extend for two additional years would probably be a satisfactory arrangement considering the other leases and uses of the property contiguous to MarinaPark. This would also afford the necessary feeling of stability sought by the tenants of MarinaPark. 4) The lease payment schedule affixed to and made a part of the proposed lease agreement sets forth•a monthly space rental of $125.00 to $150.00, depending upon size and location in the park, This initial rate is $30.00 per month more than the rates presently being paid by most tenants of MarinaPark for the first year of the lease. This rate structure, however,'has remained the same during the past three years. The- new initial rate structure is exactly the same as that authorized by the City Council at its meeting of June 10, 1968 which has applied to each of the several new lessees who have moved into the park during the past twelve months. The proposed rate structure also has a provision for a $5.00 monthly adjustment for each subsequent year of the three-year lease agree- ment, with an addqtional $10.00 monthly adjustment for each of the subsequent two years for those lessees who choose to exercise the option to extend for this addi- tional two-year period. Over an eight -year period ending June 30, 1975, this will amount to an average monthly increase per year of $7.50, or an average percentage increase on the monthly space rental of six per cent per year. This will accomplish the city's objective of bringing into line the appropriate rate structure which should apply to the individual spaces under lease and make the rate structure com- petitive with other luxury mobile home park facilities of a comparable nature in Southern California, While the resident committee was in agreement with the basic rental rate to apply as of July 1, 1969, it had initially proposed a three-year moritorium on this rate, with a $5.00 monthly adjustment per year to apply on the lease after the first three years. However, the resident committee is -now in agreement with the space rental rate structure now being proposed, as incorporated into the attached lease document. Other provisions of the proposed lease agreement are essentially the same as those in'the existing document. Again, all changes in the new lease agree- ment have been carefully considered and approved by both the city staff and the resident committee of MarinaPark. It is believed that the-- new lease document will be acceptable to all tenants of MarinaPark and will provide for a reasonably good rate of return to the city. The attached lease agreement is therefore recommended for Council acceptance at this time. If approved, the new lease will be distributed to the tenants this week with an accompanying memorandum explaining how the provisions City Council - 3 - June 9, 1969 of the new lease document were formulated and an explanation that the new agreement is mutually acceptable to the city and the resident committee who represented the tenants of MarinaPark. HARVEY L. FMBURT by \ T JAMES P. DE CHAINE Assistant City Manager HLH/JPD:sr Attachment CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I late_ TRAILER PARK 0"r RENTAL AGREEMENT AND REGULATIONS The City of Newport Beach, hereinafter referred to as "lessor", does hereby lease to the undersigned lessee the trailer space number , which is more particularly shown on a map entitled "MARINAPARK PLOT PLAN AND RENTAL FOR SPACES", attached hereto and made a part hereof, in the City's trailer park, referred to as "NEWPORT MARINAPARK"', Newport Beach, California, for the term and at the rent, and upon the terms, conditions and regulations as are hereinafter set forth, to wit: 1. LESSOR.- MEANING. It is mutually understood by the parties here- to, for the purposes of enforcement of the provisions of this lease, the word. "lessor" means the City Manager of Newport Beach, or his duly designated agent, 2. TRAILERS AND CABANAS. All trailers, cabanas and any other struc- tures or enclosures shall comply with state and local laws and shall be kept in good repair. No improvements of any kind shall be made by lessee without first submitting plans and obtaining the written approval of such plans by lessor. In addition to architectural features, such plans shall show color schemes. 3. LOT MAINTENANCE. Lots will remain under direct control of the lessor. Patio furniture and one storage chest are the only items permitted outside the trailer. No laundry shall be hung outside of trailers. All landscaping, planting and fencing of yards shall be only with lessor's prior written approval. Fencing and planting left by preceding tenants shall belong to lessor. Lessee shall be responsible for the orderly maintenance and upkeep of his trailer lot. 4. RESPONSIBLITY. The lessor is not responsible for loss -due to fire, power failure, theft or accident, Q ncluding any act of God. 5. ASSIGNMENTS AND SUBLEASES. Trailer spaces are non -transferable, except where in the judgment of the lessor permanent type improvements have been constructed on the site. Lessor may, at its option, agree only in writing to an assignment of the lease covering such trailer space, Trailers may not be sublet without written permission of the lessor. • 6. USE. The leased premises shall be used solely for trailer park purposes. Lessee agrees to comply with all laws, regulations and ordinances of the city, county, and state affecting the leased premises and improve- ments thereon, and lessee's trailer and other property. 7. GUESTS, The trailer space is herein leased for not to exceed persons and for each person in excess of said number lessee agrees to pay lessor $ per day or fraction thereof. 8, UTILITIES, Lessee shall make arrangements and pay for electric and telephone service directly with the utility companies furnishing the same. Lessor shall furnish water to lessee for use on the trailer lot, Should lessee use an abnormal amount of water or waste water or permit water to be wasted by occupants or guests of his trailer, a reasonable charge, the amount of which shall be determined by lessor, may be charged lessee for such water. Lessee shall pay to lesso a flat amount per month for gas service provided to the trailer lot covered by this lease. (a) If occupancy of the trailer occurs on weekends only or less often, lessee shall pay a flat rate off Four Dollars ($4.00) per month to lessor for gas, (b) 11n all other instances, lessee shall pay a flat rate of Six no- ^" (g 4.,-.) Dollars ($6,0) per month to lessor for gas. 9. TERM. The term of this lease is for the period of , commencing on the day of , 19,, and � doming ) on the day of , 19_. 10, AMO UNT OF LEASE. During the term of this lease, lessee agrees to pay to the lessor as rental for said premises, the aggregate sum of $ , including gas, payable in equal monthly installments in the amount of $ per month, commencing on the day of , 19 , and thereafter on the day of each month throµghout the term of this lease. Lessor acknowledges receipt of the sum of $ --___— as rent and gas for the first month's rent of the term hereof, or $ as rent and gas for one year's rent paid in advance., % �11. TAXES. Lessee agrees to pa� when due all taxes assessed upon -2- ti u 0 his personal property. 12. REGULATIONS. Lessee hereby �a�gre�es� to bide by and be bound by the regulations hereinafter set forth as well as those specified'by the h� "y �Q� Marinapark Manager. (a) Children - Adult Section. Marinapark is divided into an adult section and a children's section as is particularly shown on the attached map of the Park. Permanent residency in the adult section is limited to adults only. Children, persons under eighteen (18) years of age. are per- mitted in the adult section only as visitors and only on a temporary basis (not more than a few days at a time.) Lessee shall not permit children to occupy the trailer or space hereby leased in the adult section except as hereinbefore specifically permitted. In the event one or more children become members of lessee's immediate family during the term of this lease,�iessee is located�in the adult section, then this lease and all lessee's rights hereunder shall terminate at the end of the month during which such event happens. ._\ a. c%.adto.. /J..tz.. p.,.�„-•.... �E �"h""°^"3 p-- -^" v` (b) Lessee's Liability Property Damage. Responsibility for the acts of children or guests of lessee rests with lessee. Lessee agrees to pay for any damages to City property or property of other tenants caused by the negligent act or willful misconduct of himself, his children or hi8 gueQ (d1 C ddit:f -p'avc(w).� �'')- (c) A dit oval Regulations. In addition to the foregoing regulations, this lease is expressly made subject to all of the Rules and Regulations of Marinapark promulgated by lessor, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Lessee agrees to obey and abide by said rules and regulations and any failure to do so shall constitute a breach of this lease. Said rules and regulations may be revised, amended or altered by lessor from time to time during the term of this lease as conditions require. Any such revision, amendment, or alteration of said rules and regulations shall be effective when posted in the office of Marinapark. 13. USE OF NAME OR ADDRESS OF PARK. This park or its name or address shall not be used for the purpose of advertisement or sale of automobiles, trailers or merchandise, or for any other commercial purpose -3- except with the specific written consent of the lessor. 14. REMOVAL OF TRAILER. Trailers are not to be removed without first securing the written consent of the lessor. 15. DEFAULT. Upon failure of lessee to comply with any of the covenants, conditions, rules and regulations hereof, then lessor may at its option, but without being obligated therefor, do or perform any act to correct any default, and the reasonable costs thereof shall'be immediately due from lessee to lessor as additional rent hereunder. 16. TERMINATION, If lessee or any other occupant of lessee's trailer site fails to comply with the terms, covenants, conditions, rules and regulations as herein set forth, lessor shall have the right to ter- minate this lease by first giving lessee three (3) days' written notice thereof, It is agreed that placing or posting of any notice to lessee at any place upon the leased trailer space shall be equivalent to personal notice upon said lessee. In the event it is necessary to engage the services of an attorney to enforce any of the terms and/or conditions of this agreement, lessee agrees to pay lessor reasonable attorney fees and costs. 17. ABANDONMENT OF IMPROVEMENTS. Any and all improvements, in- cluding cabanas, left remaining on said trailer site at the expiration or termination of this lease.shall belong to and be the.property of the lessor. A 18, OPTION. Lessee shall have the option to renew this lease upon the same terms and conditions herein contained, or upon the terms and con- ditions that appear in a lease form hereafter adopted by the City Council to replace this form and be used for leasing the trailer spaces in Marinap ark. °mow (y t Rental price, upon renewal, shall be determined at the discretion of the tt C �M„y'°,�'r� nLessor, but will a comparable to rentals for similar trailer sites in the immediate vicinity within the Newport Marinapark. Lessee must give to lessor notice in writing of his intent to exercise his option at least sixty (60) days before the expiration date of said lease. DATED , 19 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By. Manager, MARINAPARK "Lessor" -4- "Lessee" OL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MARINAPARK PLOT PLAN AND RENTAL FOR SPACES MINIMUM RENT FOR EACH SPACE LABELED "A" AND tB" SHALL BE $120.00 PER " MONTH - MINIMUM " MINIMUM RENT FOR EACH SPACE LABELED C" "D � y AND E" SHALL BE 95.00 PER MONTH2 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF "E" SPACE IN SECTION 7. MINIMUM RENT FOR SUCH "E" SPACE SHALL BE $130:00 PER MONTH. � NEWPORT BAY PUBLIC BEACH 1 I SECT 1 ON 1 SECION 1 SECTION 1 SECTION ON SECTION i SECTION i SECTT ION i SECTION II SECTION I SECTION 1 SECTION I SE C'1' I ON 1 1 I 2 I 3 i 1 S I II I 12 T A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B A B C D C D C D C D C D C, D. E C D C D C D C D C D E E E E E E E E E E E DRIVE ADULT'S SECTION DRIVE CHILDREN'S SECTION UTILITY BUILDING