HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1972 11 06 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
November 6, 1972
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Miller called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
II.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE Led by Councilman Saltarellio
III.
INVOCATION Given by Councilman Langley.
IV.
ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen: Miller, Saltarelli, Langley,
Welsh.
Absent: Councilmen: None.
Others present: City Administrator Harry Gill
City Attorney James Rourke
Asst. City Admin.-Comm. Devel.
Ken Fleagle
City Clerk Ruth Poe
PRESENTATION RESOLUTION NO. 72-76
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO FRANK MORRIS.
Mayor Miller read Resolution No. 72-76. in full.
Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh that further
reading be waived, and that Resolution No. 72-76
be passed and adopted. Carried by roll call. Ayes:
Mi!lerw Saltarelli, Langley, Welsh. Noes: none.
Absent: none.
After all Councilmen had signed the Resolution,
Mayor Miller presented it to Mr. Frank Morris, along
with a plaque for his service on the Development
Preview Commission.
V.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS 1. APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF THE TUSTIN
PLANNING COMMISSION.
Mayor Miller stated that two applications had been
received, from Cass Hare and George A. McHarris,
for appointment to the Planning Cowmission to re-
place Milton Curtis, whose term expires on November
15. He opened the public portion of the hearing at
7:39 p.m.
Mr. Gfady Henry, President of the Tustin Chamber of
Commerce, stated that the Chamber Executive Board
had endorsed Cass Hare for the position, and enumera-
ted Mr. Hare's civic interests and activities.
There being no further comments or objections, the
Mayor closed the public portion of the hearing at
7:41 p.m.
· Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Langley that, in
fairness to all candidates, the matter of .appoint-
ment of a member to the Tustin Planning Commission
be continued' to the next regular meeting. Carried
unanimously.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 2
~ouncilmen Langley and Welsh were appointed to inter-
view the applicants and make recommendations at the
· next Council meeting.
2. AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE - "DAY CARE
HOMES-CHILDREN"
An amendment to Section 4.2 (the R-1 District)
of Ordinance No. 157, the Zoning Ordinance, as
amended, initiated by the Planning Commission
on its own motion, to add as a permitted use:
"Day Care Homes-Children"
Mr. Fleagle explained 'that this amendment constitutes
a technical change to specify that Day Care Homes
(babysitting) are authorized within the R-1 District,
to clarify the position of the City in enforcement
of regulations. This in conformance with State law.
Mayor Miller opened the public portion of the hearing
at 8:44 p.m., and, there being no comments or objec-
tions, closed the public portion of the hearing.
Moved by Saltarelli, seconded~by Welsh that the
~indin~s of the Planning Commission as contained
xn Resolution No. 1294 be upheld, and that the
City Attorney be instructed to prepare the imple
menting ordinance. Carried unanmmously.
VI.
PUBLIC
CONCERNS 1. SANTA CLARA (NORTH TUSTIN) PARKETTE "
Mr. Robert T. Murphy, 13591 Carroll Way, Tustin,
described a problem he said has been going on for
about 2½ years in the area of the Santa Clara Park-
ette, involving a large number of young people
abusing the park, littering, harrassing younger
children, blocking the street, and parking near
the park ~or long periods of time. He said that
if the situation continues much longer, there may
be a public confrontation. A petition submitted
to the City requesting a 6:00 p.m. closing time for
the park was signed by residents of 98 of about 100
homes in the area.
The following persons spoke in support of Mr. Murphy's
remarks; some also related their own experiences
with the problem:
Mr. Rod Lloyd, '13522 Marshall Lane
Mr. R. M. Scamnes, 13542 Marshall Lane
Mr. Bernard Perry, 13682 Marshall Lane
Mrs. Robert Murphy, 13591 Carroll Way
Mr. & Mrs. Frank Sheldon, 13542 Carroll Way
Mr. Lowell Ehrhardt, 13622 Carroll Way
Mr. Carl Hill, 13662 Fairmont
Some suggestions offered by these speakers were:
"No Parking" signs on Carroll and Santa Clara
because of the safety hazard; homeowners' associ-
ation, to block the area and finance security guards;
civic patrol, to work with the Tustin Police Depart-
ment; fencing, closing, or planting cactus in the
park, or restricting the age of those who may use
it; and closing the park for 30 days for repair
or maintenance.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 3
In Council and staff discussion of the matter, Mayo~
Miller stated that the Council had not really been,
aware of the situation but was committed to relieve
the situation. He suggested imposing an early curfew
in order to give the Police some basis for action.
Councilman Saltarelli suggested stepped-up Police
patrols and apprehension of so~e of the young offen-
ders and have their parents pick them up at the
Police station. He agreed that a homeowners' associ-
ation might be a good solution, although creating an
assessment district to maintain the park, if it were
converted to a private park, might be too expensive
for some residents to undertake°
Councilman Welsh stated that an initial solution would
be a 6:00 p.m. curfew and restriction of the park to
young children only, with increased Police surveillance.
He acknowledged the need for some constructive activ-
ity for these young people and felt the staff should
make recommendations for a program to prevent this
type of problem from recurring. He opposed the crea-
tion of a homeowners' association as it would take
too much time.
Councilman Langley questioned the staff about dis-
couraging non-residents from being in the area by
requiring some type of identification or justifica-
tion for their presence in the area, and about laws
regulating unlawful assembly and loitering, and im-
posing a 30-minute parking except by permit and
issue permits to residents.
Mr. Rourke stated that there are possibilities of
creating an early curfew, restricting the park to
children of a certain age, possibly accompanied by
a parent, but did not think there was any way under
the law to prohibit people from using the streets
in the area just because they don't live there.
The City of Beverly Hills has adopted a tough policy
of interrogating people and they are apparently
willing to take whatever consequences there may be
with regard to exposure to liability. He added
that it would be unlawful to limit parking on a
public street to residents of the street only.
Mr. Gill added that the Police do investigate pas~
curfew time, and also suspicious vehicles if they
have reason to believe a law is being violated, but
if there is no violation of the law, they are power-
less to do anything.
Mayor Miller felt that residents should not have to
go to extra expense and form associations in order
to get protection, and instructed the staff to take
every step legally possible to solve the problem.
The City Attorney was asked to draft an ordinance
for adoption as an urgency measure later in the
meeting (see page 5), to provide for limiting use
of the parkette to children under 13, and adult
family members accompanying children under 13, an~
public employees on official business. The staff
was authorized to have a chain link fence.constructed
along the Santa Clara side of the park.
The Mayor called a recess at 8:55 p.m. The meeting
reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 4
VII.
CONSENT
CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 16, 1972, meeting.
'2. RATIFICATION OF DEMANDS in amount of.$160,761.94.
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli tha~ both
items on the Consent Calendar be approve~l. Carried
~ ~n~n~mously.
VIII.
ORDINANCES
FOR
ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 556
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
PREZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. PZ 72-136.
Property located on the southeast side of Eliza-
beth Way approximately 150 feet northeast of
Old Irvine Boulevard, to be prezoned to Planned
Communi'ty-Commercial.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 557
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
REZONING PROPERTy ON APPLICATION NO. ZC 72-232.
Rezoning property located on the northeasterly
corner of Irvine Boulevard and Elizabeth Way,
to Planned Community-Commercial.
~ 3. ORDINANCE NO. 558
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
REZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. 72-233 OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECTS, INC.
Rezoning property on east side of Newport Avenue,
bounded by Main and Bryan, to the Planned Com-
munity (PC-Commercial) District.
~oved by Saltarelli, seconded by Welsh that Ordinances
556,557 and 558 have second reading by titl~
The secretary read Ordinances 556, 557 and 558 by
title.
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Langley that Ordinances
~56,557 and 558 be adopted. Carried. A~es: Miller,
Saltarelli, Langley, Welsh. Noes: none. Absent: none.
IX.
ORDINANCES
FOR
INTRODUCTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 560
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
ADDING ARTICLE III TO CHAPTER 20 OF THE TUSTIN
CITY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF FEES
IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS.
Mr. Gill explained that this ordinance is designed
~o reaffirm the validity of the October 16 Council
action adopting Ordinance 559 as an urgency measure,
and to clarify certain sections which were unclear
in administering the ordinance. He added that letters
have been received from Charles Greenwood and John H.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 5
Siegel protesting the imposition of the new tax.
Councilman Saltarelli responded to the letters by
saying that if the fees for commercial and indus-
trial are nominal, as Mr. Greenwood states, the
ordinance should be construed as pro-development,
not restrictive; and in regard to Mr. Siegel's
request for purposes of the revenues derivedr the
ordinance states that proceeds'will go into the
General Fund of the City.
Moved by Saltarelli~ seconded by Welsh that Ordinance
No. 560 have first reading by title only. Carried
unanimously.
The secretary read Ordinance 560 by title.
RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 72-75
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, ORDERING THE CANVASS
OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 1972 TO BE MADE
BY THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN.
Moved by Langley, seconded by WeLsh that Resolution
No. 72-75 be read by title only. Carried unanimously.
The secretary read Resolution No. 72-75 by title.
Moved by Langley, seconded by Welsh that Resolution
No. 72-75 be passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes:
Miller, Saltarelli, Langley, Welsh. Noes: none.
Absent: none.
PUBLIC
CONCERNS ORDINANCE NO. 561
(Continued)
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, PROHIBITING CERTAIN
PERSONS IN NORTH TUSTIN PARKETTE ALSO SOMETIMES
KNOWN AS THE SANTA CLARA PARKETTE.
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli that Ordinance
No. 561 be read in its entirety. C. arried unanimously.
The secretary read Ordinance No. 561 in full.
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli that Ord-
lnance No. 561 be adopted as an urgency measure.
Carried by roll call. Ayes: Miller, Saltarelli,
Langley, Welsh. Noes: none. Absent: none.
XI.
OLD
BUSINESS 1. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE TO
THE DEVELOPMENT PREVIEW COMMISSION.
Moved by Saltarell!, seconded by Langley that Mr.
Rex E. Rehnquist, AIA, be appointed to fill FEank
Morris' unexpired term as Alternate Men~er on'th~
Development Preview Commission, Eerm to expir~
September 5, 1973. Carried unanimously.
2. MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE (See next page)
Council Minu~es
11/6/72 Page 6
AGREEMENT FOR MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE FOR
MARINE CORPS-IRVINE ANNEXATION NO. 71-A AREA.
.M. oved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarel]~ that the Mayor
and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Master
Plan of Drainage Agreement with the County of Orange.
Carried unanimously.
2. TRAFFIC INTERCONNECT SYSTEM AGREEMENT -
COUNTY OF ORANGE.
.M. oved by Welsh, seconded by Langley that the Mayor
and City Clerk be authorized to execute Agreement
{~ith the County of Orange for Red Hill Avenue Signal
Interconnect S~stem. Carried unanimously.
XIII.
OTHER
BUSINESS 1. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
The Council discussed Tustin's Sphere of Influence
as related to the School District boundaries.
Councilman Sal tarelli publicly contradicted comments
in a letter from Gerard Fane, president of the Foot-
hill Home Owners' Association, about a lack of inter-
action between the City of Tustin and recognized
organizations of residents in unincorporated areas.
The City has extended offers of assistance on concerns
about its policies. He said that any dialogue should
be in a rational and businesslike manner, which the
City has offered, and he had explained to Mr. Pane
that there is no attempt to annex North Tustin to the
City, and that LAFCO had requested that the City file
its Sphere.
Mr. Gill concurred in these remarks.
Mr. Frank Greinke, 1011 Laguna Road, Tustin, a
North Tustin resident (19622 Country Haven Lane),
stated that Mr. Fane does not represent the major-
ity of people in the North Tustin area in his anti-
Tustin stance, and does not consult Association
membership about their thinking on this matter.
Mr. Greinke noted North Tustin's economic and
social ties to the City, and felt that Mr. Fane's
position should be challenged by the Council.
2. .WATER SERVICE TO IRVINE ANNEXATION AREA
.Mayor Miller referred to the October 31st letter
from Mr. Lansing Eberling, President of the Irvine
Ranch Water District Board of Directors, requesting
a rapid decision on the proposal discussed with the
Mayor the previous week, for wa~er service to the
Irvine annexation area. He noted that Mr. William
}~urst, IRWD Manager, and Mr. Frank Hughes, Irvine
Company, were present.
Mr. Gill stated that there would be an in-hou'se
meeting on Wednesday, November 8, to discuss this
issue, and that after that he would be happy to
set up a meeting with IRWD to reach an ultimate
agreement.
Mr. Frank Hughes stated that the concept proposed
was that the area would remain within IRWD, served
by IRWD until the City of Tustin acquires the Tustin
Water Works, at which time the IRWD lines would be
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 7
deeded to the City at no cost, subject to IRWD
providing wholcsale water to the City at the rate
prevailing throughout the District. The present
rate is $64/acre foot.
There was some discussion among the Council as to
whether this concept is in conflict with past Council
action (Resolutions establishing a City water system
and designating Tustin Water Works as the supplier
of water to the City).
Mr. Rourke stated that the Irvine Company attorneys
are familiar with those Resolutions, and he did not
see any problem with them.
Moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Langley. that the
staff be auEhorized to meeE with IRWD to explore
the concept proposed by IRWD. Carried unanimously.
3. FIRST STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION
The Council discussed the City Engineer's November
3d report concerning acquisition of right-of-way
in connection with First Street AHFP Project #649
(Phase II), and containing recommendations regard-
ing the following parcels:
Parcel #4 - Northeast corner ~f First and "C"
(Tustin Auto Clinic)
Parcel #5 - North side of First eas~ of "C"
(Tustin Auto Parts)
Parcel #6 - West side of First east of "C"
(Tustin Lumber Company)
Parcel #7 - South side of First west of "B"
(Medical Office Suites, Drs. Bond
and Ness)
Parcel #9 - Southeast corner of First and "A"
(Farmers Insurance Office)
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Saltarelli that the
Council concurs with the City Engineer's recommenda-
tions regarding acquisition of Parcels 4, 5, 6, and
7, and that Parcel ~9 be deferred for further stafk
studX. Carried unanimously.
4. MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCILS--City Administrator
Mr. Frank Greinke strongly urged a "public expose"
of the matter of Municipal Advisory Councils and
their ramifications, and complete access by the
press to information on the subject.
The Council concurred in the Mayor's recommendation
that this be brought to the attention of the Orange
County Division of the League of California Cities,
and that copies of the City Administrator's November
3d report be distributed to all in attendance at the
November 9th League Executive Meeting.
5o EIS CONFERENCE
Moved by Welsh, seconded by Langley that two members
of the Planning Commission be authorized to attend
a One-Day Conference on Environmental Impact StateL
ments to be held November 17, 1972, at the Orange
County Medical Association Building, and that the
fee of S40.00 per person be allocated. Carried
unanimously.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 8
6. DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES
· No Council action required. Mr. Gill stated that
he would set up the procedures recommended by Mr.
Brown and endorsed by the Planning CommisSion
utilizing present staff members.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SUPERVISOR CLARK
The Council requested that a letter of appreciation
be directed to Supervisor Ralph Clark for his efforts
on behalf of the City resulting in deferral of the
matter of relQcation of the County Volunteer Fire
Station to Red Hill and Irvine in the City.
8. FIRST STREET, NEWPORT TO RED HILL
Council directed that the matter of removal of the
section of First Street between Newport and Red Hill
from the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways be
advertised for public hearing by the Planning Com-
mission at the earliest possible date.
9. JAYCEES COMMENDED
Councilman Welsh congratulated the Tustin Jaycees
for a fine job in planning and promoting the
Tiller Days Parade and festivities this year.
10. CITIZEN COMMENTS: SOLOMON SHAPIRO'
Mr. Solomon Shapiro, 14222 Mimosa Lane, Tustin,
addressed the Council about retaining recorded
tapes of Council meetings for a longer period of
time to enable citizens to prove statements made
during past meetings; this was in regard to com-
ments made at a past Council meeting in regard to
the Hester development, which apparently were not
adhered to. Mr. Shapiro also objected to treat-
ment by t~e DPC of Enderle Gardens representatives
during a recent meeting, and their review of the
Hester development, particularly the ten-foot setback.
It was explained that tapes of meetings are retained
for only six months due to cost and storage problems.
Mr. Fleagle explained the misunderstanding between
one of the Commissioners and Enderle Gardens repre-
sentatives at the DPC meeting mentioned above, and
described the tree arrangement within the ten-fooE
open area, and said that he determined, with the
City Attorney's concurrence, that the ten-foot set-
back area must remain an open area and that patio
roofs and trellises would not be authorized.
Whether a concrete slab or a fence Ks permitted has
not been resolved and may require Council determina-
tion. The CC & Rs provide that the Association
has the right to assure the maintenance of that
area, but the property owner of the adjoining unit
has rights superior to anybody else within the tract.
Mr. Shapiro stated that the CC & Rs should also pro-
tect those ~n Enderle Gardens by requiring maintenance
of the area as common ground, and not for use as a
playground.
Council Minutes
11/6/72 Page 9
XIV.
ADJOURNMENT Moved by Welsh, seconded by Langley that the meetin~
be adjourned. Carried unanimously. (lo:48 p.m.)
MAYOR
CITY CLERK