Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1975 06 16 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL June 16, 1975 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Saltarelli. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Councilman Sutcliff. III. INVOCATION Given by Mayor Saltarelli. IV. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen: Saltarelli, Edgar, Sharp, Sutcliff, Welsh. Absent: Councilmen: None. Others present: Assistant City Administrator Dan Blankenship Assistant City Administrator for Community Development Ken Fleagle City C~erk Ruth Poe City Attorney James Rourke V. PUBLIC HEARINGS t. SIGN CODE AMENDMENT, PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT An amendment to Ordinance No. 614 (The Sign Ordinance) to allow for a sign on each street frontage in the case where a professional office is located on a corner lot, each sign face area not to exceed 12 square feet, Professional District. Fir. Fleagle gave the background of the proposed Sign Code amend- ment, stating that the present code limits the signs in the Pro- fessional District to one single-face sign parallel to the front- age of the building, with no allowance being made for signing of buildings located on corner lots. The Planning Commission con- ducted a public hearing on the amendment of the Sign Ordinance to authorize a single-face monument or wall sign for each street frontage, after which they adopted Resolution No. 1443, recom- mending to the City Council the amendment of the Sign Code to authorize one sign for each street frontage in the Professional District. The public portion of the hearing was opened at 7:36 p.m. There being no comments or objections, the public portion of the hearing was closed at 7:37 p.m. Mr. Fleagle then responded to questions from the City Council. Moved by Edgar, seconded by Sharp, that the City Attorney be directed to prepare an ordinance for introduction at the next regular Council meeting, amending Ordinance No. 614, as recom- mended by staff. Carried unanimously. VI. PUBLIC CONCERNS NONE~. VII. ~ CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OFMINUTES - June 2, 1975, meeting. 2. RATIFICATION OF DEMANDS in amount of $109,447.28. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 75-32 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 8490. City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page two 4. RESOLUTION NO. 75-31 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECOR- DATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION. 5. EXONERATION OF BONDS AND ACCEPTANCE OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS - TRACT NO. 8088 6. EXONERATION OF PARKSITE IMPROVEMENTS IN TRACT 7813 (MAGNOLIA TREE PARK) 7. RESOLUTION NO. 75-33 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 8760 8. APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSES FOR SUMMER PROGRAMS 9. RESOLUTION NO. 75-34 A Resolution of the City of Tustin APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 75-76. Councilman Welsh requested that items #3 and #8 be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Councilman Sutcliff requested thatitems #4 and #5 be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Moved by Sharp, seconded by Saltarelli, that items #1,#2, #6, #7 and #9 of the Consent Calendar be approved. Carried unani- mously. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 75-32 Councilmen Welsh and Sutcliff expressed their opposition to Tract 8490, with Councilman Sutcliff expressing concern about the density of the units, the length of the street, access and safety hazards, and back yards adjacent to the freeway. Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, that Resolution No. 75-32 be adopted. Carried by 3-2 vote, Sutcliff and Welsh voting no. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 75-31 After staff had responded to questions concerning this item, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, that Resolution No. 75-31 be adopted, as recommended. Carried unanimously. 5. EXONERATION OF BONDS AND ACCEPTANCE OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS, TRACT 8088 After the City Engineer had responded to Councilman Sutcliff's question on this item, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Sutcliff, that the Exoneration of Bonds and Acceptance of Subdivision Improvements for Tract 8088 be approved, as recom- mended. Carried unanimously. 8. APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSES FOR SUMMER PROGRAMS The Parks and Recreation Director, Mr. Biery, responded to Councilman Welsh's questions concerning this item. City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page three Moved by Welsh, and seconded, that the Lease Apreement for Use of School District Buses for Summer Programs be approved as recommended. Carried unanimously. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 653 An Ordinance of the City Council of the.City of Tustin, California, APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNIN- HABITED TERRITORY, DESIGNATED "COLUMBUS TUSTIN SCHOOL ANNEXATION NO. 89" TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN. Moved by Sutcliff, seconded by Welsh, that Ordinance No. 653 have second reading by title onl7. Carried unanimously. The secretary read Ordinance No. 653!!by title. Moved by Welsh, seconded by Edpar, that Ordinance No. 653 be adopted. Carriedby roll call vote. Ayes: Saltarelli, Edgar, Sharp, Sutcliff, Welsh. Noes: none. Absent: none. IX. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 654 An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 157, AS AMENDED, CREATING THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL (CG) DISTRICT AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR PROPERTIES ON FIRST STREET, WESTERLY OF PROSPECT AVENUE. Moved by Sharp, seconded by Sutcliff, that Ordinance No. 654 have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. The secretary read Ordinance No. 654 by title. Moved by Welsh, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 654 be introduced. Mr. Fleagle responded to questions from Mayor Saltarelli con- cerning the list of permitted uses within the ordinance, and the procedure for Planning Commission determination of the com- parability of any use not specifically referred to on that list. Above motion to introduce Ordinance No. 654 carried by roll call vote. Ayes: Saltarelli, Edgar, Sharp, Sutcliff, Welsh. Noes: none. Absent: none. X. OLD BUSINESS 1. APPEAL OF AMALGAMATED RESTAURANTS, INC., RE HERITAGE HOUSE Mac. Fleagle cited the late receipt of an additional customer letter protesting the closure of on-premise food service, from Gloria Cresswell. Mr. Ronald Schwartz, 610 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, attorney and minority shareholder in Amalgamated Restaurants which owns Heritage House, described the scrutiny the Heritage House had been placed under by the City, related to Building and Fire Code regulations, facilities for the handicapped, and parking regulations; and said that the result had been that no City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page four violations of the Building and Fire Codes, other than the tables upstairs, were found; that the City Attorney had deter- mined that the standards fo~ handicapped didn't apply to the original construction, and since no changes were made on the first floor, did not apply now; and that the Public Services Assistant's parking survey conducted between April 29 and May 5 concluded that the matter of parking was not a great problem. Mr. Schwartz presented to Council a petition containing 270 signatures of patrons opposing the closure of on-premise eating facilities, and read a letter from Carol S. Gordon supporting the food service at the Heritage House. Mr. Schwartz then cited the hardship imposed by the Heritage House being deprived Of using the f0odservice, as more profit is derived from the food service than from the package liquor sales; restaurant operations are Amalgamated's area of expertise; and the service was in existence when Amalgamated purchased the business. While he acknowledged that his firm has been remiss in the past in responding to the problems, Mr. Schwartz assured the Council that they are willing now to cooperate, and suggested that safeguards and guidelines be established, such as seating limitation. Mr. William Zink, 4220 Park Newport, Newport Beach, stated he was owner of the Tustin Avenue offices on one side-of the Heri- tage House, and the builder Of all three buildings (Carter Lighting, Heritage House, and his offices). He related some of the history of the development, including the creation by the previous owner, Mr. Tubbs, of common easements for driveways to serve all three businesses. After Mr. Zink had assumed full ownership of the office building, Mr~ Tubbs in 1972 persuaded him to sign a one-year lease of five parking spaces to the Heri- tage House because of parking inadequacies. Since then, because of a lack of responsiveness and cooperation from the management and owners of Heritage House, he and his attorney have not even been able to determine who owned the Heritage House. Because of this lack of cooperation, and the possibility that the tempo- rary situation of low occupancy and low employment in his build- ing could end at any time, thereby increasing his own parking requirements, he was now reluctant to lease any parking spaces to the Heritage House. In reply to a question, Mr~ Zink said that his building has. its own entrance, and a second entrance has a common easement with the Heritage House. To the suggestion of quitclaim of the easements so that people couldn't get to.Carter Lighting's parking and would have to go to the back Of the Heritage House, Mr. Zink explained that the area and configuration of parking arrangements wouldn't permit this; for the same reason, a fence couldn't be constructed along the easement as his tenants need the full width of the driveway to back out of parking spaces. Mr. Zink explained further that when Heritage House was built for the original occupants, Reese Brothers, they had a catering company in Newport Beach, and a food take-out counter was in the building plans. To his knowledge, there was no intention on the part of the Reese Brothers to operate a restaurant. Mr. Schwartz claimed that Mr. Zink was aware of that use when he built and purchased his building, and therefore assumed the risk for the parking problems, He said his firm should be allowed to continue the operation at a lower density of occupancy. Mr. Zink responded that at the time the office building was con- structed, he didn't know the extent of the problem, and that he City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page five had always encountered problems with take-out customers parking on his side. He knew there were about five tables upstairs, seating about 20 people, but he later learned that walls had been torn out and part of the office space used for additional tables. Councilman Edgar stated his presumption that this is a compatible use of the land if Heritage House is willing and able to comply with all applicable codes, and he would not oppose the use under those circumstances. But he expressed no tolerance for action being taken unilaterallyfour years ago in violation of the codes. Councilman SutCliff agreed. .She said she had attended the Plan- ning Commission hearings on this matter, and felt that ignorance of the requirements is no excuse at this point. In reply to Mayor Sattarelli, Mr. Fleagle indicated that Heritage House has 20 parking spaces available, meaning that they could have a maximum of 39 seats. These 29 spaces are assigned only to the Heritage House, but including the remainder of the second story Offices, now vacant and for lease. He explained further that Heritage House had converted about 800 square feet of office space into storage, which wouldn't have to be accommodated with parking. He said it was possible to.meet the requirements of the City in accordance with the April 14th staff report: 12 spaces for the first floor sales area; none for the kitchen area; 4 for 1,225 square feet of office space; none for 800 square feet of Storage area on the second floor; and 13 for the 1,117 square feet dining area (39 seats) on the second floor. But the estab- lishment cannot meet design requirements for the parking facili- ties; they are not conducive to the convenience of patrons and thereby encourage the use of parking accommodations of adjoining properties~ Mayor Saltarelli felt that the driving habits of the public shouldn't be the basis for putting somebody out of business. If Heritage House modifies operations to fit the code, they should be allowed 'to continue. Although the City requires 30 parking spaces, some modification of the operation could be brought about to bring them into compliance with the 29 spaces available. Mr. Fleagle stated that no permits were issued by the City for structural alterations, and there are no records on file in the Health Department showing that ~the dishwashing equip- ment was ever inspected, He said that there is nothing related to the restaurant operation which meets Health Department and City requirements. Mr. Schwartz stated that there is nodishwashing equipment. Mayor Saltarelli stated that if they cannot bring the business they want to operate into full compliance with all requirements --Health Department, business license, building permits, parking, etc.--they shouldn't be permitted to operate. In reply to Councilman Welsh, Mr. Rourke explained that the requirements for facilities for the handicapped don't apply as they were not in effect when the building was constructed, and he didn't think there were any violations of the handi' capped facilities law. Feeling that City requirements have not been met at this time, Councilman Welsh recommended that the Planning Commission findings be affirmed, and this appeal denied, with reconsideration possible City Council Minutes 6/!6/75 Page six whenever all requirements have been complied with. Following brief Council cormnents, Mr. Rourke responded to a question from Mrs. Sutcliff by stating that the law regarding facilities for the handicapped provides that if a building is added to or reconstructed, the area where that is done must comply with the law; his findings in this case had been that there was no addition or reconstruction in any area. Following further discussion, it was moved by Welsh, seconded by Edgar~ that the findings of the Planning Con~nission ordering the Heritage House to cease and desist restaurant operations, as contained in Resolution No. 1440, be affirmed, and that the appeal of Amalgamated Restaurants, Inc., be denied. Mayor Saltarelli proposed giving .the applicants a certain length of time to come back with resolutions to the problems cited, including parking..'As ~e'establishment is now com- plying with the Order of the City to desist from restaurant operations, it could be given a periodof time within which they would have to comply with all requirements mentioned; if they don't, the Council could then affirm the action of the Planning Commission, and ~f they do, the seating capacity,etc., could be adjusted and the operation allowed. Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, that no action be taken on the appeal. andthat Heritage House be given 45 days to com- ply with all applicable standards,~including Health Department requirements, Building Codes, parking requirements, Occupancy limitations, business license, etc. Carried unanimously. Councilman Edgar requested that staff respond.to.each person who indicated an interest in this matter, advising them of the Council's position that the issue is strictly one of compliance with codes. 2. CONSIDERATIQN! OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh, that this matter be continued to the next regular meeting of July.7, 1975. Carried unanimously. Councilmen Edgar andSharp agreed to act as a committee to inter- view candidates prior to the July 7th Council meeting. 3. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT PREVIEW BOARD OF APPEALS Moved by Sharp, seconded by Edgar, that the appeal function for development criteriabe retained and placed with the Planning Commission; that the City Attorney be directed to prepare an amendment to SectiOn 5.280 of Ordlnance No. 587, creating an appeal procedure to the Planning Commission; and that the staff be directed to prepare letters for the Mayor's signature expressing appreciation to the members of the Development Pre- view Board of Appeals for their willingness to serve the City. Carried unanimously. XI. NEW BUSINESS 1. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND ALLOCATION FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION Mr. Fleagle explained the proposed procedure to give the prop- erty owners within the old town center the opportunity to r City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page seven participate in the street improvement project on a 50-50 matching basis, which would enable the funds ($9,000) to pro- vide twice the amount of improvements and provide the property owners within the area an opportunity to p~rticipate in the proTram. Councilman Edgar said that most of the people in,the area are elderly and not likely to afford even half the cost, and noted that if within a particular block some owners want the improve- ments and some don't, the results will look poor. He recommended an approach whereby particular streets would be selected, "mini- arterials", such as 6th Street, and Pacific Street, and give them priority for constructionof sidewalks and gutters. Mrs. JoAnn Scott, 1761 Roanoke Avenue, Tustin, asked why the Council is using the funds for capital improvements, when Public Law 93383 is directed primarily to benefit persons of low and moderate income. Mr. FIeagle stated that this money was requested and approved specifically for this project. Councilman Welsh expressed concurrence with the position that a 50-50 sharing basis would be a handicap to many individuals in this part of town. In response to Mrs. Scott, Mr. Edgar pointed out that in his personal judgment one of the best things the City could do for the older and less privileged citizens is to spend money to avoid blight and prevent the downtown property from becoming a slum. Mrs. Scott urged the availability of one staff member in City Hall to work with citizen volunteers to find out what the people in Tustin really want and need. Mayor Saltarelli suggested that Mrs. Scott meet with Mr. Blankenship and Mr. Fleagle concerning her specific ideas, and they can pro- vide the Council with a report. Mr. Bill Moses, 649 South "B" Street, Tustin, suggested use of the 1911 Act to construct these sidewalks, and alleviate the financial impact on the property owners by having their payments spread out. Mayor Saltarelliaske~ if something were done on a matching basis, whether payments could be spread over a period of time. Mr. Rourke said this could be done~ if the City has the funds to cover the project initially. The City could advance the money and extend owners' payment time upto five years; or an assessment district could be formed under the 1911 Act or whatever. He said that the thought was to get the most footage out of the use of the Federal funds, and doing it this way is the cheapest for any of the property owners, because there is no interest and the property owners pay only half. Following discussion, Mayor Saltarelli proposed polling the people within the affected area as to their interest in partici- pating on a 50-50 basis. Mr. Fleagle noted that every street that is missing sidewalks and curbs and gutters has been identified. Staff was asked to proceed as suggested and bring a specific recoEmendation back to the City Council. City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page seven 2. FIRE SERVICES LIBRARY AGREEMENT Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the 5ibrary= Agreement with the Santa Aria College Foundation on behalf of the City, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. Carried unanimously ~ 3. TAX AUDIT PARTICIPATION Mayor Saltarelli favored participation by the City in the audit of past and present assessment rolls, provided that the County is advised that Tus'tin's share of the audit cost should not exceed Tustin's share of any revenue. Moved by Edgar, seconded by Sutcliff, that the City Council authorize the Mayor ~o transmit a letter indicating the City's intent to participate in the proposed audit under the conditions that the City will pay a pro rata share of the audit cost in proportion to the amount received for the City in relation to a total amount recovered, provided that Tustin's share of the audit cost should not exceed Tustin's share of the revenue. Carried unanimously. 4. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH POLICE ASSOCIATION Mayor Sal~arelli summarized the substance of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Association, which included provisions for~ a 3% salary[increase; a $22.07 increase in City contribution toward the employee and dependen~ insurance cover- age, effective July 1, 1975, and an additional $22.06 towards this insurance coverage effective January 1, 1976; and pro- visions concerning the Educational Incentive Plan, etc. Moved by Welsh, seconded by Sutcliff, tha~ the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Association be approved, and that appropriate resolutions be prepared for presentation at the next regular Council meeting. Earried by roll call vote. Ayes: Saltarelli, Edgar~ Sharp, SUtctiff, Welsh. Noes: none. Absent: none. XII. OTHER BUSINESS 1. PROSPECT/BENETA PARK SITE LEASE City AdministratOr's June llth memo on this received and filed. No action necessary. 2. REVISED LANDING PATTERNS, ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT City Administrator,s June 9th memo on this received and filed. No action necessary. 3. REAL ESTATE OPEN HOUSE SIGNS It was the consensus of the CounCil that the matter of an amend- ment to the Sign Code for "open house" realty signs be agendized for Planning Commission action and reconnnendation. 4. RESIGNATION OF MORGAN HILTON Moved by Saltarelti, seconded by Sharp, that the resignation of Morgan Hilton as Fire Chief effective September 1 be accepted with regret, and that thanks be extended to him for the fine ser~ vice rendered to the City for many years, and that the Council's wishes for a happy retirement be extended to him. Carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 6/16/75 Page eight 5. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM It was announced that notification had been received that, effective June 17, 1975, the City has been accepted into the National Flood Insurance Program, which will allow individual property owners to buy flood insurance at an affordable, Fed- erally subsidized rate. 6. COUNCIL/TRAFFIC COMMISSION WORKSHOP REQUEST The Administrative Secretary was requested to schedule a workshop session of ~the Council and Traffic Commission, based on suggested dates to be provided by the City Engineer. (The Workshop was later scheduled for 4:00 p.m., June 27, in the city Hall Conference Room. ) 7. SUMMARY REPORT, PADS/OSI The City Administrator's June 12th memo on this matter was received by the Council, and it was noted that the PADS Board of Directors on June 18 would consider conceptual approval of the 0SI proposal. Mr. Blankenship noted, in response to the Mayor, that there are a number of questions yet to be resolved in this matter. 8. COUNTY USE PERMIT, 17TH AT LAURINDA Staff was authorized to prepare correspondence for the Mayor's signature urging the Orange County Planning Commission denial of a Use Permit application involving property at the northwest corner of 17th Street and Laurinda Way, pending realignment of Laurinda Way. 9. CONTRACT POLICE SERVICES IN COUNTY AREAS In reference to Orange County Sheriff Gates' proposal for the County to contract with cities to provide police protection to unincorporated areas in order to cut their costs of serving these areas, Chief Kelly was asked to begin discussions with the Sheriff's Office on this matter. Mr. Bill Moses proposed asking Sheriff Gates how much reduction in the County tax rate the City residents should receive for not using Sheriff's services within City limits. Mayor Saltarelli agreed, and said it was encouraging to note that the Board of Supervisors is finally realizing that services are being extended to unincorporated areas at the cost of sub- sidy by City residents. 10. COMPLETION OF CITY CENTER In response to remarks by the Mayor concerning the uncompleted sound system in the Chambers, Mr. Rourke advised that he and City staff would be meeting with architect's representatives later that week concerning uncompleted items. XIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:59 p.m. to an Executive Session and then to the next regular meeting of July 7, 1975. ~ITY CLERK