HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1989 09 05MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 5, 1989
I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kennedy at 7:03 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance
was led by Councilman Hoesterey.
INVOCATION - The Invocation was given by Alan Waterson, Pastor of
Aldersgate Methodist Church.
_II. ROLL CALL
Council,Present: Ursula E. Kennedy, Mayor
Richard B. Edgar, Mayor Pro Tem
Ronald B. Hoesterey
John Kelly
Earl J. Prescott
Council Absent: None
Others Present: William A. Huston, City Manager
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk
W. Douglas Franks, Chief of Police
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works
Royleen White, Dir./Community & Admin. Services
Lloyd Dick, Building Official
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner
Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk
Approximately 25 in the audience
IV. PROCLAMATION - WILLIAM GRAY, CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION
Mayor Kennedy read and presented a proclamation to William Gray,
Director of Community Programming and Production for Continental
Cablevision, acknowledging his many hours of dedicated service
broadcasting numerous community -wide events and twice -monthly City
Council meetings.
Bill Gray expressed his pleasure in serving a City he loved, the
enjoyment he received from his work and thanked the Council fp
honoring him as well as Continental Cablevision. ?Ix
V. PUBLIC HEARING
1. RECOVERY OF CITY INCURRED COSTS OF ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE
AT 200 EL CAMINO REAL, PACIFIC MEAT COMPANY
Lloyd Dick, Building official, reported the City had let a
contract, after notifying the owners, tenants and other
interested parties, to abate a nuisance and a health threat due
to abandoned meat products following the Pacific Meat Company
fire on July 30, 1989. The owners had failed to clear the site
satisfactorily and the City performed the necessary work at a
cost of $4,036.90.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:11 P.M. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Edgar, secondedby Hoesterev, to assess the
charges of four thousand thirty six dollars and ninety cents
($4,036.90) against the subject property as a special assessment
and lien.
Council/staff discussion followed regarding possible demolition
of the structure. Staff will submit a status report to the City
Council at their meeting of September 18, 1989.
The motion carried 5-0.
2. NEWPORT AVENUE/WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 149
m
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner, reported this application for
annexation was prepared by staff in response to a petition from
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 2, 9-5-89
68% of the property owners in the subject area. The annexation
area was comprised of 7.8 acres and was located adjacent to
Newport Avenue immediately north of the existing City boundary.
Following Council approval of Resolution No. 89-127, staff would
forward the application to the Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCO) for processing and, if LAFCO recommended approval,
Annexation No. 149 would be resubmitted to the City Council to
hold a protest hearing.
Council/staff discussion followed clarifying the annexation
process.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m.
The, following member of the community spoke regarding the subject
annexation:
Dennis Hamilton, 18681 Eunice Place, Santa Ana
Mr. Hamilton questioned how the existing zoning of the property,
as set forth in the North Tustin Specific Plan, would be effected
once the property was annexed to the City.
Laura Kuhn responded that the area was currently zoned for single
family residential use with a Garden Office Overlay, which
allowed development for residential single family use or garden
office use. A garden office project would be subject to a
conditional use permit. If LAFCO approved the application for
annexation, staff would recommend that the City adopt the same
zoning that currently existed on the property and all surrounding
property owners would be notified of any proposed development in
the annexed area. I
There were no other speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing
was closed at 7:22 p.m.
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to adopt the following
Resolution No. 89-127 making application for Annexation No. 149
to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO):
RESOLUTION NO. 89-127 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION FOR THE
UNINHABITED ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS NEWPORT
AVENUE/WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 149
The motion carried 5-0.
X. OLD BUSINESS (AGENDA ORDER)
3. CITIZEN CONCERN: I-5/SR-55.
24
Council concurred to take this item out of agenda order to
accommodate the speaker.
Donna Wilson, 15500-117 Tustin Village Way, Tustin, suggested (1)
a letter be forwarded to the Orange County Transportation
Commission requesting support for additional sound walls and
shrubbery to mitigate flyover sound and (2) removal of stop sign
located at the closed off -ramp at McFadden/Tustin Village Way
and placement of a stop sign at Alliance Avenue.
Bob Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, responded that the
McFadden/Tustin Village Way stop sign was no longer needed and
staff had initiated the process for removal. He added that staff
would conduct a routine study for placement of a stop sign and/or
red curbing at Alliance Avenue.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edaar, to authorize staff,
after completion of legal requirements, to place needed stop
signs in the subject area.
The motion carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3, 9-5-89
Council/speaker discussion followed regarding Tustin Village Way
homeowners' approval of City letter to Caltrans and lack of time
to distribute the letter among the homeowners in order to obtain
feedback.
Bob Ledendecker suggested that the City provide the homeowners
additional time to review the letter and communicate any changes
to him.
It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edyar, to receive and file
report and direct staff to send subject letter, after receiving
input from the homeowners, to Caltrans with a copy to the
homeowners' association.
The motion carried 5-0. 54
VI. PUBLIC INPUT
1. CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
Diane Welch, 15481 Red Hill Avenue, Tustin, expressed concern
regarding the following: trend of City Council toward tallying
the number of Tustin resident speakers vs. non -City resident
speakers; lack of resident speakers due to uncomfortableness of
addressing a Council in conflict with each other; unprofessional
conduct of Councilmembers; negative newspaper articles on Tustin
and its leadership; the Council majority's fear of addressing all
issues; censoring of agenda items by the Council majority;
Council majority control of and non -recognition of minority
Councilmembers; lack of prompt Council/staff response to citizen
complaints; and frequent City Council referrals to excessive
workload of staff.
2. NOISE FROM GAS -POWERED GARDENING BLOWERS
Bruce Traywick, 14651 Pacific Street, Tustin, voiced his
complaint of excessive noise on weekends caused by commercial use
of gas -powered gardening blowers.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar suggested staff submit a report on how the
noise of an average gas -powered blower compared to standards set
forth in the City's noise abatement ordinance. Council concurred.
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items No. 1 and 9 were removed from the Consent Calendar by
Councilman Kelly and Item No. 7 was removed by William Huston, City
Manager. It was moved by Kelly,seconded by Ed ar, to approve the
remainder of the Consent Calendar.
The motion carried 5-0.
2. APPROVED DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,277,006.28
RATIFIED PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $207,149.08 50
3. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 13746 (AKINS DEVELOPMENT)
RESOLUTION NO. 89-129 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (FINAL EIR
t'^ 85-2, AS MODIFIED BY SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED SUPPLEMENTS AND
ADDENDA) IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROGRAM EIR FOR VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 13746 AND ALL FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES
HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Approved Environmental Determination for the project by
adoption of Resolution No. 89-129; and
RESOLUTION NO. 89-130 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
13746
Approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map 13746 as recommended by
the Planning Commission by adopting Resolution No. 89-136.
99
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 4, 9-5-89
4. RESOLUTION NO. 89-128 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE APPLICATION OF THE
MASTER PROPERTY TAX TRANSFER AGREEMENT TO THE PROPOSED
NEWPORT/WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 149
Adopted Resolution No. 89-128 confirming the application of
the Master Tax Transfer Agreement to the Proposed Newport
Avenue/Warren Annexation No. 149.
5. RESOLUTION NO. 89-132 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING PLACEMENT OF A CERTAIN
STOP SIGN AT THIRD STREET AND PREBLE DRIVE
Adopted Resolution No. 89-132 authorizing the placement of a
stop sign at the subject intersection in the City of Tustir4
6. RESOLUTION NO. 89-133 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND
AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT 85-1 IMPROVEMENTS ON EL CAMINO REAL BETWEEN MYFORD ROAD
AND JAMBOREE ROAD
Adopted Resolution No. 89-133 accepting said work on E1 Camino
Real between Myford Road and Jamboree Road and authorized the
recordation of the Notice of Completion. 86B
\
S. RESOLUTION NO. 89-135 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE AND
ABANDON FAIRGATE DRIVE BETWEEN TUSTIN RANCH ROAD AND THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF TRACT NO. 12870 AND A PORTION OF RAWLINGS
WAY BETWEEN FAIRGATE DRIVE AND A POINT APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET
EASTERLY OF FAIRGATE DRIVE AND TO FIX A TIME AND PLACE OF PUBLIC
HEARING THEREON
Adopted Resolution No. 89-135 declaring the City's intention
to vacate and abandon Fairgate Drive between Tustin Ranch Road
and the northerly boundary of Tract No. 12870 and a portion
of Rawlings Way between Fairgate Drive and a point
q
approximately 150 feet easterly of Fairgate Drive, and settle
a time and place of a public hearing thereon.
10. AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT EQUIPMENT BIDS
Authorized solicitation of proposals for the purchase of new
and replacement equipment authorized in the 1989-90 fiscal
budget. 86
11. REQUEST FOR TREE REMOVALS
(1) Approved requests for tree removals at the following
locations: 17652 Limetree Way, 14551 Cherrywood Lane, 14712
Buckingham Place, Centennial Park and 14662 Cheshire Place and
(2) Denied request for tree removal at the following
location: 13772 Palace Way. 86
12. CALTRANS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. D-12-039
Approved Cooperative Agreement No. D-12-039 for the
construction of traffic signal improvements along Irvine
Boulevard, Newport Avenue and Edinger Avenue, and authorized
the Mayor to execute said agreement. 45
Consent Calendar Item No. 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES, AUGUST 21, 1989,
REGULAR MEETING
Councilman Kelly read the following paragraph from Page 5 of the
August 21, 1989 Minutes: "Councilman Hoesterey found it difficult to
work in the spirit of congeniality when Councilman Kelly accused
Councilmembers; Carl Karcher, a reputable citizen; and Marriott
representatives of being criminals and conducting City business
behind closed doors. Councilman Kelly's actions, irrespective of his
representations or point of view, could contribute to building the
spirit of congeniality." Councilman Kelly then stated he had
reviewed partial transcripts from the tapes. He thought it was very
unethical to charge a fellow Councilmember in this manner and make
an untrue statement. In the spirit of professionalism, he requested
an unconditional apology from Councilman Hoesterey and requested that
the foregoing statement made by Councilman Hoesterey be deleted from
the Minutes.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 5, 9-5-89
Councilman Hoesterey said if statements concerning the Tustin
Promenade project were reviewed, it had been called: a crooked deal
that was done behind closed doors; and "crooked deal" would infer
that the City Council and the principals involved with the project
were involved with "crooked deals" and, consequently, his statements
would stand. He did not object to the statement being stricken from
the Minutes, but he was not in a position to offer an apology at this
time.
Councilman Kelly replied that, if an apology was not forthcoming, he
r wanted the Minutes to stand as written and the partial transcript
from the tapes be included as part of the Minutes. Council
concurred.
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the Minutes
of August 21, 1989, with the inclusion of the transcripts.
Councilman Prescott requested the following correction of the Minutes
on Page 8, last paragraph: "The original motion failed 1-4, Kennedy,
Edgar, Kelly and Hoesterey opposed" should be changed to "The
original motion failed 2-3, Kennedy, Edgar and Hoesterey opposed.
Councilman Kelly was unable to recall his vote in question.
As a substitute motion it was moved b Ed ar, seconded by Kennedy,
to continue the Minutes of August 21, 1989.
The substitute motion carried 5-0.
Consent Calendar Item No 7 - RESOLUTION NO. 89-134 - A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING
PLACEMENT OF STOP SIGNS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY OF TUS73N
William Huston, City Manager, requested this item be removed from the
agenda and no, action be taken.
f'^
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterev, to continue
indefinitely Consent Calendar Item No. 7 - Resolution No. 89-134.
The motion carried 5-0. 94
Consent Calendar Item No 9 - RESOLUTION No. 89-136
Councilman Kelly questioned whether the established policy of placing
a lien or charging a connection fee when undergrounding was
performed on private property was being adhered to in this matter.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, responded that the
action required during this meeting did not pertain to that phase,
but was merely to set the date for the Public Hearing. Following the
Public Hearing and with City Council approval, then each property
owner would be financially responsible for their own conversion.
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to adopt the following:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-136 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, SETTING A TIME AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER THE DESIGNATION AND ADOPTION OF AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY
DISTRICT REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF POLES, OVERHEAD WIRES AND
ASSOCIATED OVERHEAD STRUCTURES WITHIN THE AREA OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
LOCATED ON RED HILL AVENUE BETWEEN SYCAMORE AVENUE AND 580 FEET
NORTHERLY OF WALNUT AVENUE, WHICH AREA IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
IN EXHIBIT "A" AND ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CITY CLERK AND CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
The motion carried 5-0.
VIII. ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION - None
IX. ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION
104
1. NO PARKING ZONES ON PORTIONS OF FIRST STREET, IRVINE BOULEVARD
AND YORBA STREETS - ORDINANCE NO. 1028
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 6, 9-5-89
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, that Ordinance No.
1028 have second reading by title only. The motion carried
55=0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No.
1028 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly,
that Ordinance No. 1028 be passed and adopted as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1028 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING AND PRESCRIBING NO PARKING
ZONES ON PORTIONS OF FIRST STREET, IRVINE BOULEVARD AND YORBA
STREETS
The motion carried 5-0. (Roll call vote) 75
B. OLD BUSINESS
1. STATUS REPORT - JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE MONITORING PROGRAM
(JWA), COALITION FOR A RESPONSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTION (CRAS),
AIRPORT SITE COALITION (ASC) AND HELICOPTER OVERFLIGHT PROGRAM
TASK FORCE (HOPTF)
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner, reported that CRAS was requesting
that all member cities consider a $1,000 donation to CRAS for
continuation of their efforts and staff required direction from
the City Council for donation of funds.
Mayor Kennedy noted Kathy Weil's report indicated that the ORAS
Board had changed its vote and would support AS 1830 as amended.
Council concurred to write a letter of support for AS 1830 as
amended.
Mayor Kennedy was in favor of the $1,000 donation because if E1
Toro was used as a joint commercial airport the City would-be
adversely effected.
It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to donate $1,000 to
the Coalition for a Responsible Airport Solution (ORAS).
Councilman Kelly realized there was a possibility that the
conversion or joint use of E1 Toro could have a tremendous impact
upon the City, but he doubted a $1,000 donation would have an
effect. He preferred spending $1,000 towards monitoring the
current noise problem of air traffic over John Wayne Airport.
Mayor Pro, Tem Edgar responded there was no question of the City's
concern with aircraft noise at John Wayne Airport and the City
was expending funds to explore alternatives for noise reduction
at John Wayne Airport. When considering the even greater noise
impact that could occur with E1 Toro converted to commercial, it
was critical for the City to consistently oppose the conversion
and he thought the commitment of a $1,000 donation was a very
relevant expenditure.
Councilman Prescott's substitute motion that the City commit to
participation in a lawsuit to block the commercialization of E1
Toro and refrain from donating $1,000 died for lack of a second.
Councilman Hoesterey said CRAS had been very effective in the
community/region and the current expenditure of $1,000 may offset
spending $100,000-$200,000 in the future. CRAS had been very
influential in promoting legislation, communicating with Congress
and setting Public Hearings with the FAA, as well as the
military, and their vigilance was distancing the possibility of
an E1 Toro conversion.
After a brief Council discussion, as a substitute motion, it was
moved by Prescott, seconded by Hoesterev, to request an
explanation from ORAS as to how the funds would be used and to
clarify if a pledge would be sufficient.
The substitute motion carried 4-1, Kelly opposed.
(Mayor Kennedy withdrew the original motion.) 101
I.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7, 9-5-89
2. CITIZEN COMPLAINT - ALLEY SOUTHERLY OF LINDA LANE AND EASTERLY
OF YORBA STREET AND REMOVAL OF STREET SWEEPING SIGNS ON WESTERLY
SIDE OF YORBA STREET
Discussion Regarding Ally:
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, reported that staff
had determined that the alley was public property and he briefly
outlined .the'process required for vacation of the alley.
Ralph Westrum, 13651 Rosalind Drive, Tustin, addressed the
Council and his comments included: favored vacation of the
alley, misunderstanding by property owners as to ownership of
the alley, his doubt that a 100% property owner consent could be
obtained to abandon the alley, suggested alternative of posting
"Do Not Block" signs in the alley, lack of safety in vehicle
maintenance on Yorba, and he requested removal of "No Parking"
restrictions in the alley.
Councilman Prescott was opposed to abandoning the alley because
the homeowners would become financially responsible for the
maintenance.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar stated it had been determined, through
research of County documents, that the alley was public property
and if it was to be abandoned, a 100% consent of the property
owners would be required. He suggested continuing the matter to
poll the homeowners regarding vacation of the alley.
Mayor Kennedy stated now that it had been determined the alley
was public property, the City bore the responsibility of ensuring
emergency vehicle access to the alley at all times.
Following Council/speaker discussion regarding polling homeowners
on vacation of the alley or a parking compromise, it was moved
I by Kennedy, seconded by Hoesterev, to direct staff to poll the
subject area homeowners regarding vacation of the alley and take
appropriate action following the results of the survey.
Councilman Prescott stated he was in favor of regulated alley
parking for the residents.
The motion carried 5-0.
Discussion Regarding Yorba Street:
Ralph Westrum stated, following Council approval on August 21,
1989, the "No Parking During Street Sweeping Hours" signs were
removed on Laura Lane, Linda Lane, Rosalind Drive and the
easterly side of Yorba Street. He questioned why the removal of
signs did not include the westerly side of Yorba Street as was
indicated in the submitted petition and subsequent Council
action.
Mayor Kennedy replied that during the August 21, 1989 Council
meeting it was stated, and the Minutes so reflect, that petitions
for removal of signs be considered by the area as a whole rather
than individual streets, as was done when the original petitions
were submitted for installation of signs. The Council wanted to
remain consistent and remove signs in accordance with the current
policy.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, further clarified
that the original sign installation petition was for the easterly
side of Yorba Street and both sides of Linda Lane, Laurie Lane,
and Rosalind Drive. The request for sign installation on the
west side of Yorba Street was a separate request submitted at a
different time. He noted that there were no residents from the
westerly side of Yorba that had signed the petition submitted by
Mr. Westrum on August 21, 1989; all signatures were from the
easterly side of Yorba Street.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 8, 9-5-89
Councilman Hoesterey suggested staff contact the homes on the
west side of Yorba Street and if an affirmative response was
received, Council would authorize removal of the signs.
Council/staff/speaker discussion followed regarding the exact
location and number of effected houses on the west side of Yorba
Street.
Mayor Kennedy directed staff to contact the homeowners in
question and solicit their response for removal of signs on the
west side of Yorba Street.
Mr. Westrum stated the Council had already voted concerning the
sign removals and he voiced strong opposition to contacting
additional homeowners. He adamantly wanted closure of the issue
by immediate removal of the signs.
Mayor Kennedy explained that the City had removed the signs in
accordance with the installation petition; staff would contact
the remaining .effected homeowners; the problem would be
completely resolved by Friday, September 8; that she, personally,
would contact Mr. Westrum at that time; and the subject Ws
closed to further discussion. /b
3. CITIZEN CONCERN: I-5/SR-55 INTERCHANGE CONSTRUCTION
See Page 2 of these Minutes.
XI. NEW BUSINESS
1. GREEN VALLEY RESIDENTS1 REQUESTS
Royleen White, Director of Administrative and Community Services,
reviewed the four issues of concern submitted by Green Valley
residents: (1) police vehicles parked in red zone (this issue
was resolved by the Police Department at the August 21, 1989 City
Council meeting), (2) petition requesting "No Parking" hours for
street sweeping be changed to 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., (3)
driveway parking variance issued by the County prior to
annexation, and (4) the establishment of a Tustin City Problem
Resolution Center.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar stated that to force street cleaning into
inefficient scheduling was a significant cost factor and he was
not prepared to spend thousands of dollars throughout the City
for street sweeping time. He referenced the variance for parking
and stated the City must be consistent in enforcing the parking
ordinance and could not ignore regulations for certain areas.
He thought the concept of having another group of individuals
address concerns would not necessarily solve problems but there
may be difficulty in some residents recognizing that they each
have an opportunity to speak to the City Council on any issue.
He guaranteed that the Council would be responsive, investigate
every concern and take appropriate action; but to have an
intermediary body that solved problems prior to reaching the City
Council would dilute effectiveness and sensitivity.
Councilman Prescott wanted the Council to reserve all judgment
for 45 days until staff submitted their report on the Problem
Resolution Center. He said he had received complaints from
residents required to move their vehicles at 6:00 a.m. when the
streets were not swept until 10:00 a.m. and suggested considering
a unilateral change throughout the City of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
for street sweeping hours. He requested the change be agendized
for further review and consideration. Council concurred.
Councilman Kelly stated he was eagerly anticipating the staff
recommendation, scheduled for agendizing in approximately 45
days, regarding the Problem Resolution Center.
Mayor Kennedy clarified that (1) street sweeping hours would be
agendized and (2) staff report regarding the Problem Resolution
Center would be agendized in 45 days as recommended by staff.
Regarding the driveway parking variance, she asked that parking
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Sage 9, 9-5-89
enforcement be fair, every City resident receive identical
treatment, and certain areas not be singled out.
The following member of the audience spoke regarding the Green
Valley concerns:
Berklee Maughan, 14331 Green Valley, Tustin
His comments` included: noted that Mayor Kennedy had suggested
to him during a separate conversation that residents should be
surveyed regarding their views on a Problem Resolution Center and
he submitted a sample letter/survey form; staff's lack of
supportive facts and reasons for 6:00 a.m. to 12 noon street
sweeping hours; and suggested the only solution to the driveway
parking variance was to relocate the sidewalks and extend the
driveways.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, replied that his
department had not had an opportunity to respond to the driveway
parking issue and relocation of the sidewalk appeared to be a
viable solution. In referencing street sweeping, he stated that
with the direction given by the City Council, staff would
investigate approximately 40-45 locations throughout the City
with parking restrictions for street sweeping and agendize for
the October 2, 1989 Council meeting. He agreed with residents
that 6:00 a.m. was an inconvenient hour to move automobiles.
Mayor Kennedy noted previous comments concerning the City's
opportunity, following annexation, to consider the sidewalk
relocation solution but it was financially possible for the City
to correct shortened driveways that had been approved for a
developer by another jurisdictional agency. She requested staff
research what had occurred regarding the Green Valley driveways
after the annexation had been completed. 86
2. EQUIPMENT PURCHASE REQUEST
It was moved by Kelly, seconded by Edgar, to approve the
following:
(1) That the City Council rescind their authorization to
purchase a one -ton valve truck from Guaranty Chevrolet as
authorized at the June 5, 1989 City Council meeting; and
(2) Authorize staff to readvertise and solicit additional bids
for the purchase of a one -ton valve truck in fiscal year
1989-90.
The motion carried 5-0.
3. CODE OF ETHICS RESOLUTION
FP
Mayor Kennedy commented that the Council was making a valiant
effort to work cohesively together and retain their independence
and personalities. She suggested the Council review the sample
Resolution from the City of Anaheim and make a new commitment to
begin working for the City as a cooperative but independent body
of five.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar felt that he had a personal responsibility
to do everything that was written in the sample resolution with
or without a formal Resolution and for that reason, it was
redundant and unnecessary. The Procedures and Rules of Order
samples were formal and he would be extremely reluctant to
formalize proceedings to that extent. The informal mode in which
the Council had operated was a very positive one and he wanted
to retain it.
Councilman Kelly said the sample Code of Ethics did not reflect
what was needed in Tustin and he wanted a Code of Ethics that
demanded mandatory rotation of the Mayor's position. He
commented on Item No. 7 of the Resolution which stated "refrain
from disclosing any information received confidentially
concerning the business of the City or received during any Closed
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 10, 9-5-89
Session and he wanted that statement eliminated from the
Resolution. He thought there were certain Redevelopment Agency
subjects that were labeled confidential that should be available
to the public. The intentions of the Resolution were good and
there was hostility circulated on the Council as evidenced by his
earlier failure to receive an apology for an untrue statement and
he thought that was sad and unethical.
Council discussion followed regarding the Brown Act and reasons
for City Council confidentiality.
Councilman Hoesterey noted past Council discussion of ordinances
that were unenforceable and this appeared to be one, and there
were other laws related to revealing closed session discussions
that were released that proved it. In the first eight years he
was'a Councilmember, there was never a need for a Code of Ethics
and, in the spirit of congeniality, he was willing to abide by
majority vote because he did not believe it would have a material
effect.
Councilman Prescott suggested including the Ten Commandments in
the Code of Ethics. He stated that when a Councilmember was
elected, an Oath of. Office was taken promising to well and
faithfully discharge the duties of office, to support and defend
the Constitutions of the United States and California.
Councilmembers should adhere to their Oaths of Office and
Robert's Rules of Order and politicians should not be allowed to
devise their own set of ethics.
Mayor Kennedy said the Council would have to forgive and forget
everything that had happened previously and begin anew from this
night forward. She was very willing to start over and thought
a Code of Ethics was a good idea because the majority of
politicians were honest, sincere people. She wanted unkind
remarks to cease, energies directed toward City issues, and
personalities to remain quiet and she encouraged the other
Councilmembers to follow.
Mayor Kennedy's motion to support the entire Resolution died for
lack of a second.
It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that the Council heed
the Mayor's remarks and begin working together for the good of
the City.
Councilman Kelly wanted an apology from Councilman Hoesterey
before starting anew and, if not, would take personal legal
action. He then clarified the difference between the words
collegiality and congeniality.
The motion carried 5-0. 38
XII. REPORTS
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - AUGUST 28, 1989
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to ratify the Planning
Commission Action Agenda of August 28, 1989.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar commended the Planning Commission for the
numerous complex issues managed during the August 28, 1989
meeting.
The motion carried 5-0.
80
2. CMS ENHANCEMENTS
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0.
51
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 11, 9-5-89
3. STATUS OF INSPECTION OF PROPERTY AT 13271 WOODLAND
It was moved by Hoesterev, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0.
4. SALE OF SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
M
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
notice of sale of surplus, Police Unit 3402, as provided for in
Ordinance No. 871.
The motion carried 5-0. 86
5. INFORMATIONAL UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE WIDENING OF I-5 AND
SR -55 AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE I-5/SR-55 INTERCHANGE
Mayor Kennedy asked for staff comment on how the widening of the
I-5 from I-405- to SR -55, Jamboree Road, would effect City
residents and businesses.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, reported the new
interchange would provide the same movements but in a modified
plan with easier access onto the freeway and would provide six
travel lanes for Jamboree Road. The interchange was scheduled
for completion by the Fall of 1990.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar commented that the I-5 widening would include
replacement/construction of the bridges at Red Hill, Newport
Avenue, Main Street, First Street and Fourth Street and would
have a serious impact on traffic movement. The details of that
construction, with estimated timelines for completion and
alternate routes, needed to be provided for residents.
?'^ Robert Ledendecker replied that this report was for informational
purposes and the detailed report would be submitted in
approximately 3-4 weeks.
Councilman Prescott suggested that over the next 3-4 years the
Tustin Today quarterly be used as a regular update for citizens
as to reconstruction phases and avoidance of street closures.
It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0. 54
6. WARNER AVENUE BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION STATUS REPORT
A brief Council/staff discussion occurred regarding a complete
time schedule for completion and agreement with Caltrans to
provide a detailed estimated time table.
It was moved by Edgar seconded by Kennedy, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0.
7. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM MR. BRUCE TRAYWICK
54
The following member of the community spoke regarding this
subject:
Bruce Traywick, 14651 Pacific Street, Tustin
His comments included: funding available for bicycle lanes,
reduction in lanes on Yorba Street would reduce traffic, combined
automobile parking/bicycle lanes, stop sign placement on Yorba
Street and decreased through traffic on Yorba Street.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, responded that
Yorba Street was classified as a secondary arterial highway and
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 12, 9-5-89
staff felt that combining bike lanes with on -street parking was
dangerous and this had been City policy for 15 years.
It was moved by Hoesterev, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0. 100
XIII. PUBLIC INPUT
1. I-5/55 INTERCHANGE REPORT/COUNCIL DECORUM
Donna Wilson, 15500-117 Tustin Village Way, Tustin, requested a
copy of the I-5/55 Interchange reconstruction status report and
encouraged the Council to work cooperatively together.
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS
1. CLOSED SESSION
James Rourke, City Attorney, requested a Closed Session to
consider a matter in litigation.
2. FINANCIAL WARRANTS REPORTED BY
Councilman Kelly requested the financial monthly warrants be
reported by department rather than by vendor.
3. VOLUNTEER ASSISTANCE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS
Councilman Kelly noted senior citizens in the area needed
volunteer assistance in maintaining their properties. .He
suggested high school students be utilized to aid senior
citizens.
Royleen White, Director of Administrative and Community Services,
responded that senior citizens were welcomed and encouraged to
contact the Tustin Area Senior Center staff for assistance.
4. FIRE INSPECTION REPORT - BARN RESTAURANT, TUSTIN GARDENS
Councilman Kelly questioned the status of the fire inspection
report on the Barn Restaurant and Tustin Gardens.
Staff responded that the report would be submitted at the
September 18, 1989 City Council meeting.
5. SIGN REPAIR - SEVENTEENTH STREET/YORBA STREET
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar reported a broken sign on Seventeenth Street
near Yorba Street and requested replacement by staff.
6. SUCCESS OF CAR POOL LANE ON SR -55 FREEWAY
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar noted that the car pool lane on SR -55 was
utilized by more people per day than any lane of freeway in
California.
7. PURCHASE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING VIDEO TAPES
Councilman Prescott requested the Council consider enactment of
a Resolution mandating the City Clerk to purchase video tapes of
City Council meetings from Continental Cablevision.
William Huston, City Manager, stated he believed that had been
previously approved by the City Council and would investigate.
8. USING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER TO DETERMINE ACCURACY OF MINUTES
Councilman Prescott said he saw conflict arising between
Councilmembers Hoesterey and Kelly pertaining to validity of the
Minutes. He noted Robert's Rules of Order, Article V, Paragraph
36, which said the remaining three Councilmembers would determine
what was stated and vote accordingly. When the Minutes in
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 13, 9-5-89
question were submitted at the next meeting, he wanted the
referenced paragraph from Robert's Rules of Order to be included
in the agenda material.
9. GRAFFITI - FARADAY'S RESTAURANT
Councilman Prescott reported graffiti on the back wall of
Faraday's Restaurant and requested staff contact the owner
regarding removal.
10. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PLAN
Mayor Kennedy requested, for the October 16, 1989 Council
a meeting, a status report on the City's disaster preparedness
plan and subject coordination with the school district.
11. CONFERENCE OF ORANGE COUNTY HISTORYp SEPTEMBER 23-241 1989
Mayor Kennedy shared that the Conference of Orange County History
would be held September 23-24, 1989. Tustin area residents,
Richard Vining, Carol Jordan, John Sauers and Bob Edgell would
speak at the event on "Preservation Success Story in Tustin".
12. STREET NAMING COMMITTEE
Mayor Kennedy requested a status report on the Street Naming
Committee.
13. AREA CAT SLAYINGS
Mayor Kennedy believed the City needed to be very responsive to
the recent cat slayings and the possibility of human involvement.
She asked that the subject be handled in public with great
courtesy to concerned citizens.
14. EDINGER AVENUE DESIGNATED "SUPER STREET" - SOUND ATTENUATION
Mayor Kennedy stated Edinger Avenue has been designated as a
Super Street and requested staff aggressively pursue available
funding for sound attenuation for the residents along Edinger
Avenue.
15. PARKING OF LARGE TRUCKS ON CITY STREETS
Mayor Kennedy stated she had witnessed increased parking of large
trucks on City streets and requested the Police Department renew
their efforts to keep the streets clear of large parked trucks.
XV. CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Kennedy announced the City Council would recess to Closed
Session. Litigation had been formally initiated to which the City
was a party. The title of said litigation was Krelle vs. City of
Tustin, Case No. 566236. Said Closed Session was held pursuant to
the authority of California Government Code Section 54956.9(a).
Because the necessity to take this action occurred after the
publication and posting of the agenda, it was moved by Edgar,
seconded by Prescott, to adjourn to the foregoing Closed Session.
The motion carried 5-0.
XVZ. ADJOURNMENT
At 9:58 p.m., the meeting recessed to the Redevelopment Agency, then
to the above Closed Session, then adjourned to a joint meeting with
the Parks and Recreation Commission on September 12, 1989, at 5:30
p.m. and then to the next Regular Meeting on September 18, 1989, at
7:00 p.m. CV
MAYOR PR EM
CITY C RK