Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1982 08 02 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OFTHE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL COUNCILCHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way August 2, 1982 CALL TO ORDER e meeting was called to order by ~yor Edgar at 3~37 p.m. II. ROLL CALL ~ ~ Co~cil~rsons Present: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, SaItarelli Co~cilpersons ~sent: None others Present: J~es G. Rocks, City Attorney Willi~ A. Huston, City ~nager Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk ~ke Brot~rkle, C~. Dev. Director Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Royleen ~ite, Com~ity Services Director Dale Wick, Assistant City Engineer Nora Hower, ~affic Eng~eer Monda Buckley, A~nistrative Assistant Approx~ately ~0 in ~e audience PUBLIC CONCERNS J~es Joel Indes, ~942 H~pshire Road, candidate ~ ~e ~stin Uni- fied School District ~ard of Education election on August 24, requested verification of a statement of Co~cil endors~ent for an opponent which appeared in a ~stin neig~orhood newsletter. ~. Indes was infomed that the present City Co~cil did not make such an endorseent, but ~at s~e was ~oted from a resolution of c~- mendation presented to the candidate in 1975. ~e City Attorney stated ~at resolutions of the Co~cil are public record ~d can ~ quoted by anyone in whole or part, and ~cil does not have autho~ ~ ity to prevent anyone from doing so · In response to ~ · Indes ' request for Co~cil reaction to the incident, Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy indicated she was ~comfortable with ~e situation, and other m~ bets had no c~ent. ~. Indes thanked ~cil and stated that he felt the ~ote is ~slead~g. CONSENT CALENDAR ~.~It was moved bl Saltarelli, seconded bX Hoesterey, to approve ~e entire Consent ~lendar. Carried 5-0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ~R~ ~ M~ - July 19, 1982. 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS ~R~ ~ D~S in ~e ~o~t of $1,437,019.93. RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL ~I~ ~ PA~ in the ~o~t of $98,412.59. 58 3. RESOLUTION NO. 82-62- A Resolution of ~e city co~cil of ~e city of ~stin, PPR~ING ~ISED ~TATIVE MCT NO. 11582 Adopt Resolution NO. 82-62 as reckended by the Co~unity Development Depar~ent. 99 4. EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11476 Grant s~ject ~tension to ~y ~8, ~983, as recomended by the Planning Agency. 99 ~ 5.RESOLUTION NO. 82-63 - Resolution of the City Co~cil of ~e City of ~stin, California, PERTA~ING ~ ~E DISABILI~ ~TI~- ~T OF ~IS MO~ISON (SECTI~ 21025, GOVE~M~T C~E) Adopt Resolution No. 82-63. 79 ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 875 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO THE REGULATION OF SECURITY BUSINESSES In accordance with staff's request, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Hoesterey, to continue ~dinance No. 875 to August 16, ~982. Carried ~0. 82 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 8-2-82 VIo ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 872 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO CONVERSION OF MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS TO CONDOMINIUMS It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordinance No. 872 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following the reading by title of Ordinance No. 872 by the Deputy City Clerk, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Eoestere~, that Ordinance No. 872 be passed and adopted and that $750.00 be set as the minimum relocation amount. Roll call vote: AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Eoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli NOES: None ABSENT: None 43 VII. OLD BUSINESS 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION & ORDNANCE NO. 874 PUrSuant to Councilman Hoesterey's suggestion, it was moved by Hoesterse, seconded by Greinke, to schedule a workshop for Monday, Septumber 13, 1982, at 7:30 p.m. to discuss the elements of reestablishing a Planning Commission and to consider the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 874 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING TaE TJSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT, COMPOSITION, JURISDICTION, DUTIES AND TERMS OF OFFICE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TJSTIN The City Attorney indicated he would be present at the workshop in accordance with Council's request. Motion carried 5-0. 81 2. SPEED ZONE MAIN STREET/BRYAN AVENUE & ORDINANCE NO. 873 The Traffic Engineer presented the staff report and recommenda- tion and explained the method of computing speed limits as required by the California Vehicle Code. Following a questior~ and-answer period, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Greinke, to set the speed limit at 35 miles per hour, certify that although the traffic survey indicates 40 miles per hour, due to conditions of a mixed residential/business community, proximity of churches and aschool facility, 35 mile~s per hour is accepted as the 85th percentile speed limit and that same be enforced. As recommended by the City Attorney, the motion by Saltarelli, seconded by Greinke, was WITHDRAWN, and it was then moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Greinke, to continue the matter to the AuguSt 16, 1982, meeting. Carried 5-0. 100 3. CURB, GUTTER & SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION (Downtown Area) Following Council's review of the draft letter prepared by Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded byHoesterey, to direct staff to mail same to downtown area residents. Motion carried 5-0. 92 4. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS RESTRICTING USE OF UNTREATED WOOD ROOFS & REQUIRING RETROACTIVE INSTALLATION OF SMOKE DETECTORS The Community Development Director presented the staff report as contained in the memo dated August 2, 1982, prepared by the Com- munity Development Department which addressed concerns expressed by Council at the July 19 meeting. He then introduced Bob Hennessey, Assistant Chief, Orange County Fire Department. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 8-2-82 Chief Hennessey addressed the wood roof issue, reporting .that Assembly Bill 3797-Robinson, to be heard by the Senate Local Government Committee, is running into considerable opposition focused on the fact that the issue of banning untreated wood roofs should be a local matter and not statewide. Ee continued that there are areas in Northern California that don't have a Santa Ana wind condition, and it is so humid with so much preci- pitation that untreated wood roofs is not a problem as in the Tustin area. The draft ordinance proposes Class C or batter roofing for new construction, and for reroofing in excess of ~0% it proposes replacement with a fire retardant roof covering material of Class C or better. Class C roof covering basically provides protection against slight exterior sources of ignition, and is an adequate level of protection for the Tustin area, as well as other Orange County areas. It is felt there is not a significant financial impact associated with the proposed amend- ment. Chief Hennessey pointed out that a Uniform Code can only be amended for three reasons: topography, geography, and cli- mate conditions, and the draft ordinance is substantiated legally by climate conditions as experienced in the City of Tustin. A guestion-and-answer/discussion period followed. It was then moved bx Kennedy, seconded by Hoesterey, to direct staff to set for public hearing the proposed ordinance pertain- ing to roof covering materials. Carried 5-0. 5I; 81 On the smoke detector issue, Chief Hennessey reported that the retroactive smoke detector ordinance is a draft amendment to the uniform Fire Code which would essentially require smoke~=deteo- tots for multiple-family residences (three or more) within six months from the date of ordinance adoption; single-family resi- dential homes would be required to install smoke detectors upon change in ownership. The Orange County Apartment Owners' Asso- ciation has proposed several sections that deal with issues of maintenance and inspection of smoke detectors. The Fire Depart- ment has recommended adoption of thpse sections to several of its contract cities, which basically state that the apartment owners will install smoke detectors, any apartment tenant that stays for more than two weeks is responsible for testing the detectors, and owners are responsible for posting testing instructions. Further, the inspecting authority (Fire Depart- ment) has permission to random sample smoke detectors by check- ing from 3-5% of apartment units, which would be conducted simultaneously during annual inspection of fire extinguishers in multiple-unit projects. Chief Eennessey stated that the 1973 Edition of the Uniform Building Code required installation of smoke detectors in new construction; therefore, enforcement eforts will be focused on units constructed prior to 1974. The Chief outlined"the enforcement program and assured Council that escrow proceedings would not be delayed when single-family detached property changes ownership and that enforcement efforts in single-family detached property will be very low profile. Primary enforcement focus will be on multiple-family apartment units. Following discussion, it was ~oved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to direct staff to set for public hearing the proposed ordinance pertaining to Smoke detectors. Councilman Hoesterey expressed concern over entering private homes to enforce the ordinance; Councilman Saltarelli indicated he ~ould support enforcement in multi-family units, but not in single-family dwellings, and expressed preference for hard-wired smoke detectors as opposed to battery-operated detectors. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy expressed support of the program in pro- tecting life and property. Motion carried 5-0. 51, 81 The Community Development Director stated he would request the City Attorney to incorporate recommended amendments in the draft ordinance proposed by the 0.C. Apartment Owners' Association. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 8-2-82 VIII. NEW BUSINESS RECONFIRMATION OF ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL APPOINT- MENTS AS reco~ended in the re~rt dated July 26, 1982, prepared by the City Clerk, it was moved b~ Kennedy, seconded by Hoesterey, to reconfi~ ap~in~ents of Phyllis ~ttle, ~apresentative, and Bonnie Gil~an, Alternate, to ~e Orange Co~ty Heal~ Planning Co~cil Ass~ly of Delegates. Motion carried 5-0. 70 2 · WATER SERVICE MANAGEMENT PLAN & SYSTEM ALANLYSIS CONSULTANT SELECTION As requested by Co~cilman Greinke, it was moved b~ HoestereX, seconded by Kennedy, to continue the matter to the evening session. Carried ~0. 45 107 3, SOLID WASTE MANAEMENT GATE FEES - RESOLUTION NO. 82-66 ~e City ~nager reported that s~ject resolution was prepared at the ~yoz's fewest following a League of Cities meeting held the week before. ~yor Edgar highlighted the circ~stances s~ro~ding preparation of the resolution as reported by ~ at the J~y 19 meeting. He continued that adoption of the resolu- tion will provide h~ with ~e authority to join other cities ~ taking appropriate action. It was then moved b~ Greinke, se~ onded by Kennedy, to adopt ~e following resolution: ~S~ NO. 82-66- A Resolution of ~e City Co~cil of ~e City of ~stin, California, ~GISTER~G ITS OBJECTI~ ~ ACTI~S OF ~E BOA~ OF SUPE~ISO~ OF ~E C~ OF O~GE I~ROPE~Y ~OPTING S~ID WASTE ~AGEM~T ~TE FEES ~D AU~O~Z~G ~D DIMCTING ~PROPRIATE ACTION After a brief ~scussion ~riod, the motion carried 5-0. 102 OTHER BUSINESS ~S~ESS 1. CONFLICT OF INTEREST - CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES Co~cilmn Saltarelli requested that in conj~ction with more inspections resulting fr~ ~e proposed smoke detector ordi- nance, staff explore the advisability of preparing an ordinance prohibiting civil service employees from moonlighting while con- ducting on-th~job inspections. 2 · RESIDENTIAL OVERCROWDING Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that staff explore methods of controlling residential ~ercr0wding. 3. I-5/55 FREEWAY TRASH & DEBRIS Mayor Pro Tem ~nnedy requested that staff contact Cal~ans and request that the area along ~e I-5/55 Freeway hterchange ~ maintained free of trash and debris. X. RECESS-EVENING It was moved b~ Hoesterey, seconded b~ Kennedy, to recess at 4:46 p,m. to an Executive Session for discussion of a legal matter~ and thence to ~e 7:30 p.m. session. Carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED 7:30 P.M. MEETING CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Edgar at 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 8-2-82 II, ROLL CALL : Councilpersons Present: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, ' ' Saltarelli Councilpersons Absent: None Others Present: James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Muston, City Manager Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Royleen White, Community Services Director Charles Thayer, Chief of Police Dale Wick, Assistant City Engineer Monda Buckley, Administrative Assistant Approximately 75 in the audience III. PUBLIC ICONCERNS None IV·PUBLIC HEARINGS l. PROPOSED USE OF FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS The City Manager presented the staff report and recommendation · on the proposed use of General Revenue Sharing Funds for Fiscal Year 1982-83 as contained in his memo dated July 28, 1982. Mayor Edgar opened the public hearing at 7:36 p.m. The following persons spoke and requested revenue sharing funds as follows: Nick Ogden and Ida Sternberg - Senior Citizen Center $7,700 Janet Schwartz - Senior Mousing $3,000 Fran McGowan - The Villa $5,000 Cliff Polston and Valetie Driscoll - Boys Club of Tustin $4,000 Carol Lind - Assessment & Treatment Services Center $10,000 Elmer Holthus - Christian Temporary Mousing Facility $5,000 sarah Coleman - The LP Repertory Company $2,500 There being no other speakers, the Mayor closed the public hear- ing at 8:00 p.m. Senior Citizen Center - It was moved b~ HoestereX, seconded by Edgar, to allocate $7,700 in revenue sharing funds for the Senior Citizen Center. Council discussion followed. In response to Council concerns, the City Manager emphasized that prior to disbursement of reve- nue sharing funds, a form of an agreement would be prepared between the City and any funded organization outlining in detail how funds will be used. The motion carried 5-0. 29 The Villa - In reference to the request from "The Villa," Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy stated that without staff monitoring of statis- tics on use of the facility by T~stin residents, the request for funds could not be considered at this time. Assessment & Treatment Services Center (ATSC) - It was moved b Hoestere~, seconded by Kennedy, to allocate $5,000 in revenue sharing funds for ATSC. Councilman Saltarelli stated that statistics of Tustin cases referred to the ATSC juvenile diversion program warrant a higher funding level. The motion was modified by Moesterey, seconded by Kennedy, to allocate $8,000 in revenue sharing funds to ATSC. Motion carried 5-0. 29 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 8-2-82 Senior Housing - In response to Mayor Pro Ten Kennedy, MrS. Schwartz stated that she believed the $3,000 request for legal fees would be for the City's attorney- The City Attorney clari- fied that preparation of articles of incorporation and bylaws by his office would be a matter of a couple hundred dollars- The City Manager suggested that Council ask the group to prepare a definitive program stating their goals. Action was deferred on the request until there are more specifics. Bo~s Club of Tustin - Following Councilman Greinke's supportive comments of Boys Club functions, it was moved by Greinke, sec-- onded by Kennedy, to allocate $4,000 in revenue sharing funds to the Boys Club of Tustin. Motion carried 5-0. 29 The L.P. Repertory Company - Sarah Coleman, Managing Director, clarified her request for theatrical lighting. The Community Services Director responded to Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy that aside from the L.P. Repertory Company, she could not think of any regular-type user for theatrical lights; staff normally con- tracts for such equipment to cut fixed costs when the need arises. She added that if the City had a facility that ~lent itself more to some permanent platform or stage, it would be very beneficial to have this sort of equipment in the,future. ChriStian Temporar~ Housing Facility - Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy reiterated that without staff monitoring of statistics on use of the facility by Tustin residents, the request for funds could not be considered at this time. It was then moved by Kennedy, seconded b~ Greinke, to approve the allocation of $444,240 for items submitted by staff as con- tained in the staff report dated July 28, 1982, with the condi- tion that each item come back to Council for subsequent approval. Motion carried 5-0. 29 2. FISCAL YEAR 1982--83 BUDGET The City Manager summarized the final preliminary budget as con- tained in his staff report dated July 28, 1982. Mayor Edgar opened the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. The following person spoke on the matter: Kathy Weil, 1702 Summerville, Tustin Meadows Homeowners' Assc-- ciation, requested that funds be included to allow for installa- tion of traffic signalling equipment at Pad Hill and Walnut. Mayor Edgar noted that staff's recommendation does include sub- ject project in the budget. There being no other speakers, the Mayor closed the public hear- ing at 8:55 p.m. In accordance with Councilman Saltarelli's suggestion, Council deferred budget discussion to consider the following item. NEW BUSINESS l. HEATHERFIELD PARKING COMPLAINTS The Assistant City Engineer presented the staff report and recommendation as contained in the memo dated July 27, 1982. Warren Bttleman, 14262 Heatherfield Drive, representing approxi- mately ten families, suggested red curbing alongside driveway entrances, and expressed dissatisfaction with Police enforcement of parking regulations. Mr. Ettleman responded to Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy that the excess cars are from the apartment complex at 1777 Mitchell Avenue and reported that some of the end units are utilizing their carports as patios. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 8-2-82 The ASsistant City Engineer responded to the Mayor that staff should prepare a plan for additional red curbing before proceed- ing on any suggestion. Police Chief Thayer stated that methodical ticketing tends to upset homeowners because they are generally the first to receive them. He Offered suggestions which might help alleviate the parking problem. In accordance with the staff report dated July 27, 1982, pre- pared by the Director of Public Works, and the Police Chief's recommendations, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the following: 1) Post Heatherfield Drive between Mitchell Avenue and Sandwood Place for "No Parking During Street Sweeping Operations" between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and Noon on Mondays; 2) Red curb arcs of curbs at southeast and southwest corners of Heatherfield and Mitchell and northeast corner of Heather- field and Sandwood; 3) Public Works Department to check red curbing on Mitchell for unauthorized painting of City curbs by private property owners; 4) Contact residents of 1777 Mitchell via mail and request that they not park their vehicles on Mitchell; 5) Staff to look into blatant violations of misuse of parking spaces (carports used for patios); and 6) Reconsider the matter at the August 16, 1982, meeting addressing red curbing alongside driveway entrances. Councilman Saltarelli stated his interest in preferential park- ing. The Police Chief responded that he has explored preferen- tial parking and does not favor it primarily because administra- tion of it is a nightmare - it is impossible to determine which cars belong to guests, and the State-adopted hearing law on con- tested towings requires about two hours per hearing by a three- member bard, which the City must usually pay for along with the towing bill. Royce Purcell, 1912 Mitchell Avenue, spoke in favor of "No Park- ing on Street Sweeping Days" signing on the portion of Mitchell between Heatherfield and Browning. The motion carried 5-0. 74 The Council focused its attention beck to discussion of the Fiscal Year 1982-83 Budget. ' IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2, FISCAL YEAR 1982-83 BUDGET- RES. NO. 82-64 & RES. NO. 82-65 (Con't.) Councilman Saltarelli stated he would like to reinstitute a hir- ing freeze, and suggested promoting an employee incentive pro- gram for major cost-saving ideas. Councilman Hoesterey voiced his support of an employee incentive plan and suggested that future budgets contain a contingency plan when revenues decrease as well as increase. Councilman Greinke offered constructive criticism on budgetary procedures. Mayor Edgar stated he is comfortable with the dollar figures; however, he feels it is essential that the budget contain a project timetable and historical data, and clarification of the Redevelopment bel- ance. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy stated she feels staff has met the challenge in these trying economical times, and offered compli- ments to City staff. Councilman Saltarelli also complimented City staff and suggested the City consider user fees (trash col- lection) to offset decreased revenues. It was then moved by Hoesterey, seconde~ by]Kennedy, tol adopt the following:RESOLUTION NO. 82-64 - A ResolUtion of the City Council of the City of Tustin, ADOPTING THE CITY BUDGET & APPRO- PRIATING REVENUE OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1982-83; RESOLUTION NO. 82--65- A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, ADOPTING THE WATER FUND BUDGET & APPROPRIATING REVENUE OF THE FUND FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1982-83. Carried 5-0. 29 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 8-2-82 AFTERNOON ITEM VIII. NEW BUSINESS 2. WATER SERVICE MANAGEMENT PLAN & SYSTEM ANALYSIS CONSULTANT SELECTION AS recommended in the staff report dated July 28, 1982, prepared by the City Manager, it was moved by Boesterey, seconded Kennedy, to confirm selection of Boyle Engineering Corporation to provide engineering services for the Water Service Management Plan & System Analysis for a fee of $45,700; and authorize the Mayor to execute a consultant' s agreement for said services · In response to Councilman Boesterey, the City Manager clarified that this is for both phases of the study. Mayor Edgar added that the time element of 6 weeks for Phase I and 14 weeks for Phase II puts target dates at September 20 for Phase I and January 3 for Phase II in terms of Council meetings, and he requested that these dates be met. The motion carried 4-0, Greinke abstaining. 107 VI OTHER BUSINESS COUNCIL MEETING DAYS Councilman Saltarelli requested that Council meeting days be discussed at the workshop scheduled for September 13, 1982. 2. OCTOBER COUNCIL MEETING RESCHEDLED pursuant to Mayor Edgar' s recommendation, it was moved bX Hoestere~, seconded by Kennedy, to reschedule the second meeting in October to Wednesday, October 20, due to Councilmembers' attendance at the League of California Cities Conference · Carried 5-0. 38 VII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Soesterey, seconded by Greinke, to adjourn at 9:40 p.m. to the next regular meeting on August 16, 1982. Carried 5-0. MAYOR