Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1985 10 10 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 10, 1985 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was called to order by Mayor Greinke at 7:01 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. Councilwoman Kennedy led the Pledge of Allegiance. The Invocation was given by Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli. ! II. R0LL CALL Councilpersons Present: Frank H. Greinke, Mayor Donald J. Saltarelli, Mayor Pro Tem Richard B. Edgar Ronald B. Hoesterey Ursula E. Kennedy Councilpersons Absent: None Others Present: William A. Huston, City Manager James G. Rourke, City Attorney Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Donald D. Lamm, Com.. Development Director Robert S. Ledendecker, Dir. of Public Works Royleen A. White, Di r. of Com. & Admin. Srvcs. Approximately 50 in the audience III, PROCLANtTION 1. FIRE PREVENTION WEEK - OCTOBER 6-12, 1985 Mayor Greinke read a proclamation designating October 6-12, 1985, as "Fire Prevention Week." Battalion Chief Whitesman accepted the proclamation and thanked the Council. 84 ; 2. THSTIN LIONS CLUB - "WHITE CANE DAYS" A proclamation acknowledging Lions White Cane Days was presented by Mayor Greinke to Lions member and former Mayor/Councilmember Tony Coco. Mr. Coco thanked the Council. 84 IV. PUBLIC INPUT Sherri Lynn Miller, 131 Hall Circle, #54, spoke in favor of the pro. posed ordinance to regulate smoking in public places and places of employment which Council will consider on October 21. Ms. Miller requested that the Director of Community and Administrative Services contact cities with effective ordinances on the matter, particularly Irvine's Assistant City Manager. The Director indicated staff has al ready been in contact with same. Ms. Miller added that her employer will be relocating to Tustin. She noted that she has a petition with 39 co-workers' signatures in favor of the proposed ordinance. 88 V. PUBLIC HEARING 1. MAJOR THOROUGHFARE & BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM (MT & BFP) FOR THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS - RESOLUTION NO. 85-102; ORDINANCE NO. 948; RESOLUTION NO. 85-103 The Director of Public Works presented the staff report and recom- mendation as contained in his inter-com dated October 2, 1985. The Director added that the meeting with the other members (seven cities and County) of the proposed Joint Powers Authority has been set for October 18, 1985. He commented that the actual Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) is an additional document to be considered should Council decide that Tustin will participate in the program. He noted that there are five agencies within the area of benefit that have adopted the JPA, so it is a recognized authority at this point. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 10-10-85 The Director of Public Works and the City Manager responded to Council questions. To date, Anaheim, Orange, San Clemente, Yorba Linda, and the County have approved the JPA. Ken Smith, Manager of Transportation Planning, County of Orange Environmental Management Agency, stated the City of San Juan Capistrano has adopted the enabling ordinance to allow them to adopt the MT & BFP but has continued the hearing to adopt the fee program itself to later in October/November. Irvine has a hearing scheduled on October 15 and is expected to adopt the program. Mayor Greinke opened the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Bill Speros, commercial property owner in Tustin, resident of Irvine, and Chairman of the Committee of Seven Thousand (C.O.S.T.), spoke in opposition to the program. C.O.S.T. has circulated the initiative position which deals with citizens' right to vote on freeway projects to be funded Similarly to the MT & BFP. Mr. Speros stated that the proposed fee structure can be changed at any time and as often with no limitations. The' only way to dissolve the JPA is by a majority vote of the members or 2/3 vote of the State Legislature (which he feels is impossible). Mr. Speros noted that if new development slows, the amount of fee income could drastically stop, and bonds would have to be sold. In that case, who would insure the bonds, and what would the City's liability and risks be? If a member exits the JPA it must continue to collect fees for four years, but there is no indication Of lia- bility upon exit. Mr. Speros felt there must be more direct responsibility to the electorate on the JPA. Lastly, he noted that in the past, all roads were built with gasoline tax dollars. Prom those gasoline tax dollars, Orange County receives a dispropor- tionate share/percentage of what it generates, and the MT & BFP would worsen that situation. Mr. Speros responded to questions from Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli. Daniel O'Connor, 1681 Loma Road, Santa Ana, spoke in opposition to the program stating that the fees are usurious, punitive and a simple form of special taxation. He noted that there is currently a Federal tax on gasoline sales for road maintenance and construc- tion which now goes into the General Fund. Since the passage of Prop 13 in 1976, agencies at all levels are imposing a variety of creative assessment fees and increasing service charges that are excessive, prohibitive and inflationary. Mr. O'Connor recognized that while some fees are reasonable and necessary, theirnet effect can be detrimental to the community good, especially in blighted areas, where fees can make the difference as to whether the project goes forward or not. Matt Nisson, 14462 Red Hill Avenue, spoke in opposition to the pro- posed fees. He stated that instead of penalizing those who build, upgrading should be encouraged on remaining undeveloped parcels within Tustin. He noted that the Eastern Corridor will encourage more building in Riverside County and generate more traffic through Tustin. He recommended that Council at least exclude from the pro- gram all Tustin properties west of Browning Avenue. Tony Coco, no address given, expressed concern regarding the fund- ing, dissolution restrictions, and flexibility to change the fee structure from that initially approved in the JPA. Mr. Coco stated his political philosophy that users should pay, not the general public, and suggested funding major corridors via electronic meter- ing or "stopless toll billing." Bill Moses spoke in opposition to the program, and cautioned the Council to proceed carefully. He requested Council delay taking any action for approximately 30 days or more to study the matter in depth, and asked the Council to submit the matter to a vote by the people. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 10-10-85 There were no other speakers on the matter, and the public hearing was closed at 7~55 p.m. Councilman Hoesterey noted the pros and cons of joining/not joining the Joint Powers Authority. Councilwoman Kennedy stated she is not sympathetic with developers, because any tax or fee is passed on to buyers. She noted that whether or not TuStin joins the JPA will not halt freeway develop~ ment. Her main interest in whether to join the JPA is if it will give Tustin input on the proposed freeways. Staff responded that each member city of the JPA will have one vote, regardless of popu- lation or size. If Tustin does not join the JPA, it will have no say regarding the location, scope or nature of the three corridors. Councilman Edgar stated that traditional sources of funding have been wiped out. The JPA represents a mechanism for a new funding source that is radically different. He was in favor of joining the JPA and felt Tustin can have positive influence on the Eastern Corridor location. Mr. Smith, County EMA, responded to Councilwoman Kennedy's ques- tions. Council/staff discussion followed. Bill Moses rebutted comments by Councilmembers Edgar and Kennedy, and again urged Council to proceed with caution. Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli stated that the established area of bene- fit and formula for payment are unfair. Tustin has unsuccessfully fought both. However, something must be done about traffic - it is intense, the noise level is high, there are many accidents, and it is destroying the quality of life. Tustin is in the geographic center of Orange County, and traffic must be diverted around Tustin. In reference to the Bottleneck Study, he stated that the Council and residents of North Tustin must take a firm stand to stop the extension of the Garden Grove Freeway through Tustin and the unincorporated area north of Tustin. Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli requested a continuance of the matter to introduce an ordinance that would be acceptable to the other JPA cities which would allow Tustin to exempt projects that are taxpayer-subsidized. He felt exceptions should be made for businesspeople and residents to grant waivers to some' degree of subject fees so that there would be no disincentive for them to improve their properties. Mayor Greinke commented that there has been mare growth in the unincorporated area north of Tustin than in Tustin itself. He recognized the extremely difficult decision Council must make to take action one way or another. It was then moved by Greike, seconded by Hoesterey, to continue the Major Thoroughfare & Bridge Fee Program and consideration of the following items to October 21, 1985: RESOLUTION NO. 85-102 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED AREA OF BENEFIT AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PRO- GRAM ORDINANCE NO. 948 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ADDING SECTION 2800 TO THE CITY CODE ADOPTING A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM RESOLUTION NO. 85-103 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ESTABLISHING THE AREA OF BENEFIT AND THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM FOR THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANS- PORTATION CORRIDORS The motion carried 5-0. 100 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 10-10-85 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. I was removed by Kennedy. It was moved by Edgar, seconded b~ Saltarelli, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0. 2, APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $532,270.85 RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $124,445.33 50 3. RESOLUTION NO. 85-100 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 8451 (South of Dow Avenue, West of Tustin Boundary, North of Moulton Parkway) Adopted Resolution No. 85-100 as recommended by the Community Development Department. 99 4. NO PARKING SIGNS FOR STREET SWEEPING ON CLOVERBROOK Authorized the installation of signing prohibiting on-street parking during the hours of street sweeping between 6:00 a.m. and 12 noon on Monday on both sides of Cloverbrook Drive as recommended by the Engineering Division. 75 5. DECLARATION OF SURPLUS VEHICLES Found that ten vehicles, motorcycles and equipment as detailed in subject report are not required for public use and declared them surplus items as recommended by the Director of Public Works. 87 Consent Calendar Item No. I - Minutes of September 16, 1985, Regular Meeting - Councilwoman Kennedy referred Council to Page 7, Report No. 2, in subject Minutes. She stated that "unanimous informal consent" did not represent the 2-2 Council split during discussion of the car- pool lane idea, She added that while she and Councilman Edgar spoke of the necessity to at least consider HOV lanes, Councilmembers Hoesterey and Saltarelli were opposed to the idea. Mayor Greinke then attended the Corridor Operation Advisory Committee meeting and voted against HOV lanes, which reflected amajority view with his vote. However, he was not present at the September 16 meeting to vote on same, and she felt it was not handled properly. Councilman Edgar noted that "unanimous informal consent" was to receive and file the status report, and there was no formal vote on the HOV lane matter. Mayor Pro Tem Saltarelli stated that what transpired was the consensus of Council at the September 16 meeting. Mayor Greinke reported on the meeting of the Operation Advisory Committee. He stated that he voted as Mayor of Tustin against the HOV lane, and noted that the consensus was 3-2 (Edgar and Kennedy opposed). Councilwoman Kennedy stated she would be more precise in the future on such matters. It was then moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to approve the follow- ing: 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 16, 1985, REGULAR MEETING The motion carried 4-0, Greinke abstained. 38 VII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION None. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 1. REVISION TO BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE FOR COLLECTION OF PENALTY FEES - ORDINANCE NO. 943 It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 943 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 943 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordi- nance No. 943 be passed and adopted as follows: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 10-10-85 ORDINANCE NO. 943 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2521 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE, RELATIVE TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES Roll call vote: AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli NOES: None ABSENT: None 31 2. ZONE CHANGE 85-9 - ORDINANCE NO. 946 It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 946 have second reading by title only. Motion carried 5-0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 946 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordi- nance No. 946 be passed and adopted as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 946 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REZONING THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF CARFAX AVENUE, WESTERLY OF SCHOOL ROAD FROM PLANNED MANUFACTURING AND MANUFACTURING DISTRICT (PM&M} TO PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT (P&I}, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A" Roll call vote: AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli NOES: None ABSENT: None 110 3, ZONE CHANGE 85-11 - ORDINANCE NO. 947 It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance N. 947 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 947 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 947 be passed and adopted as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 947 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REZONING 1782 NISSON ROAD FROM DUPLEX RESIDEN- TIAL DISTRICT (R-2) TO MOBILE HOME PARK DISTRICT (MHP) AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A" Roll call vote: AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli NOES: None ABSENT: None 110 IX. OLD BUSINESS None. X. NEW BUSINESS 1. AWARD OF CONTRACT - MAIN STREET WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT IMPROVE- MENTS --' As recommended in the inter-com dated October 1, 1985, prepared by the Engineering Division, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, to award the contract for subject project to Schuler Engi- neering Corporation, Anaheim, in the amount of $153,003. The Director of Public Works responded to Councilwoman Kennedy that the replacement line has been located to one curb side, and staff does not anticipate any traffic problems on Main Street during con- struction. He noted that the old water line will be abandoned and drained once services have been converted to the new line. The new line has been upgraded in size to accommodate a potential well site in the west end of the City. The motion carried 5-0. 107 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 10-10-85 XI. REPORTS 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 The Community Development Director noted that the applicant for Variance 85-5 (Ruby's Care) has filed an appeal which will be on the October 21 agenda. The City Clerk also noted that an appeal was filed this date on Use Permit 85-20 (satellite dish at 13201 Silver Birch Drive) by the applicant. It was then moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to ratify the entire Planning Commission Action Agenda of September 23, 1985. Carried 5-0. 80 2. ROUTE 55 COSTA I(SA FREEWAY - CORRIDOR OPERATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT Councilmember Edgar and Mayor Greinke debated the pros and cons of carpool express lanes. Councilman Edgar felt the carpool lane will provide efficient utilization of the freeway. Mayor Gpeinke stated he was in favor of carpooling, However, he is opposed to the HOV lane because it is paid for by all taxpayers, yet the majority of those taxpayers will be denied the use of that lane. Councilman Edgar responded that the HOV lane is numerical engineer- ing and will allow efficient movement of vehicles. It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Saltarelli, to declare a posi- tion of opposition to the carpool express lane, and support a general purpose lane to be used by all motorists who pay taxes to support that lane. Councilwoman Kennedy rebutted that everyone in a car is helping to support the freeways. They may be paying the driver and helping pay for the gas. If we move more people on the freeways, we will decrease emissions from stalling automobiles, and eliminate the necessity to build more roads. After further discussion and debate, the motion carried 3-2, Edgar and Kennedy opposed. 54 XII. OTHER BUSINESS 1. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION The City Manager requested a Closed Session following the Redevel- opment Agency meeting to consider Personnel Matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. 2. UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS Councilwoman Kennedy acknowl edged receipt of a notice from the Com- A munity Development Department regarding a public workshop on the First Street Specific Plan to be held on Thursday, October 24, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. She was informed it would not conflict with the City of Tustin TGIT which is to be held on Tuesday, October 29, in City Hall. 3. TUSTIN TILLER DAYS Mayor Greinke announced Tustin Tiller Days to be held October 11- 13. He invited everyone to participate in the events and joy of celebrating the harvest season and the traditions of Tustin's heri- tage. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 10-10-85 4. TUSD TEACHERS STRIKE SETTLED Mayor Greinke commented that he was happy to have both the teachers and students back in the classrooms. He invited everyone to attend the October 11 football game in support of Tustin High School vs. Orange High School. XIII. RECESS - REDEVELOPMENT - CLOSED SESSION; ADJOURNMENT At 8:49 p.m. the meeting was recessed to the Redevelopment Agency, thence to a Closed Session for discussion of personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957; and thence adjourned to the next Regular meeting on October 21, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. by unanimous informal consent. MAYOR