HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1972 03 06 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
March 6, 1972
CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Coco.
II.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Coco.
III.
INVOCATION Given by Councilman C. Miller.
IV.
ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen: Coco, C. Miller, Marsters,
L. Miller, Oster.
Absent: Councilmen: None.
Others present: City Administrator Harry Gill
City Attorney James Rourke
Asst. City Admin.-Comm. Devel.
Ken Fleagle
City Clerk Ruth Poe
XI.
NEW
BUSINESS 2. PROPOSAL FOR DEDICATION OF EL CAMINO
COMMUNITY BUILDING TO POW/MIA CONCERN.
Mayor Coco announced that this item would be
taken out of order to accommodate representatives
of POW/MIA International who were present. He
explained that the City has been asked to consider
dedicating a building to POW/MIA'S during their
"Week of Concern", March 26 to April 1, 1972; the
Civic Center Community Building on E1 Camino Real
has been proposed for this consideration. He noted
that Mrs. Mary Helber was present to answer questions.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by L. Miller that
dedication of the Civic Center Community Building
on E1 Camino Real to POW/MIA'S during POW/MIA
"Week of Concern" from March 26 to April 1, 1972,
be approved, subject to concurrence of Mercury
Savings and Loan, donors of the building. 'Carried
unanimously.
Mrs. Helber added that such dedications would be
taking pla6e throughout the U. S. during the
National Week of Concern.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS 1. CONSIDERATION OF STREET NAME CHANGE
That portion of Village Drive located within
the City limits of the City of Tustin, and
lying west of Yorba Street to Heights Drive.
Mr. Fleagle stated that .no comments opposing the
name change had been received.
Ma~or Coco opened the public portion of the hearing
at 7:42 p.m.
Mr. I. O. Witte, 14501 Heights Drive, Tustin,
stated that the designation "Village Drive" has
been misleading to persons looking for Heights
Drive. Renaming of this portion .to "Heights
Drive" would eliminate such confusion.
Council Minutes
3/6/72 Page 2
There=being no further comments or ob~
M~yorCoco closed the public
hearing at 7:44 p.m.
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by Oster that
"Resolution No. 72-15, CHANGING DESIGNATION OF
THAT PORTION OF VILLAGE DRIVE LOCATED WITHIN THE-
CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND LYING
WEST OF YORBA STREET TO HEIGHTS DRIVE, be read
by title only, and passed and adopted.. Carried.
Ayes: Coco, C. Miller, MarsterS, L~ Miller'~7'
oster. Noes: none. Absent: none.
Title of Resolution 72-15 read by secretary.
2. ESTABLISHMENT OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY
DISTRICT NO. 1 - Within Red Hill Avenue
south of Sycamore Avenue.
Mayor C6co opened the publicsportion of the
hearing at 7:46 p.m. There being no comments
or objections, he closed the~public portion of
the hearing.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by Oster that
Resolution No. 72-16, ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND
UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1,'~ve first reading by
title Only. Carried unanimously.
Title of Resolution No. 72-16 read by secretary.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by Osterthat
further reading be waived and Resolution No.
72-16 be passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes:
Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, L. M~?ler, Oster.
Noes: none. Absent: .none~ ·
VI.
CONSENT
CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 22, 1972,
..... 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in amount of $97,458.49
3. TRACT NO. 7332, LOTS 1 THROUGH 32
Acceptance of improvements adjacent to Lots
,1 through 32, in Tract ~332 and extension of
Subdivision and ~Monumenting Agreements to
December 31, 1972, with none of the subdivision
bonds being exoneratedat this time--as
recommended by the City Engineer.
.... 4. STREET IMPROVEMENTS - YORBA STREET FROM
NORWOOD PARK PLACE TO 250 FEET SOUTHERLY
Acceptance of the work and authorization Of
.... ~'~' ~' ~'~ payment of $5,893.25 to be charged to AccOunt
No. 961-12, which represents 90% 6f the .~6tai
contract amount. Assuming that no liensor
other claims are filed within the next 35
days, the final 10% of $654.81 be paid at
" that time--all as recommended by the City
Engineer.
~' 5. STREET IMPROVEMENTS - "B" STREET FROM
FIRST STREET TO SECOND STREET.
(See next page)
Council Minutes
3/6/72 Page 3
Acceptance of the work and authorization
of payment of $7,080~56 to be charged to
Account No. 971-02, which represents 90% of
the total contract amount. Assuming that
no liens or other claims are filed within
the next 35 days the final 10% of $786.73 be
paid at that time--all as recommended by the
Parks and Recreation Director.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that all
items on the Consent Calendar be approved.
· Carried unanimous ly.
VII.
ORDINANCES
FOR
ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE N0. 537
· An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, Calif-
ornia, ENDING ARTICLE V, SECTION 80 OF
THE TUSTIN SIGN ORDINANCE, NO. 438, PERTAIN-
ING TO REAL ESTATE SIGNS IN RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS.
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by C. Miller that
Ordinance No. 537 have second reading by title
o onlAF. Carried unanimously.
Title of Ordinance No. 537· read by secretary.
Moved b~ C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that
-Ordinance No. 537 be adopted. Carried. Ayes:
Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, L. Ml~'f~er, Oster.
Noes: none. Absent: none.
VIII.
ORDINANCES
FOR
INTRODUCTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 538
An Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Tustin, California, PREZONING PROPERTY
ON APPLICATION PZ 72-132 OF GEORGE AND THELMA
STOLTE.
Property situated on the west side of Prospect
Avenue, north of Seventeenth Street and south
.of Laurie Lane.
Moved by Oster, seconded by L. Miller that
Ordinance No. 538 have first reading by title
only. Carried unanimously.
Title 0f Ordinance No. 538 read by secretary.
IX.
RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 72-12
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Tustin URGING THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES AND THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS' ASSOCIA-
TION OF CALIFORNIA TO MODIFY THE RULES
ESTABLISHED BY PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
CASE NO. 8209 FOR UNDERGROUNDING EXISTING
UTILITY LINES.
2. RESOLUTION NO. 72-13
(See next page)
Council Minutes
3/6/72 Page 4
A Resolution of the city Council of the City
of Tustin, Urging the League of California
CITIES AND THE COUNTY SUPERVISOR'S ASSOCIA-
TION OF CALIFORNIA TO SUPPORT AN INCREASE
IN THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS NOW BEING SET ASIDE
FOR UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING UTILITY LINES.
At the Mayor's request, the secretary read the
titles of Resolutions 72-12 and 72-13.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that
Resolutions 72-12 and 72-13 be passed an~ adopted.
Carried. Ayes: Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, L. Miller,
Oster. Noes: none. Absent: none.
The CounCil commended the staff for follow-up
work on th~se resolutions.
OLD'
BUSINESS 1. PROPOSAL FOR ACQUIRING SURPLUS PROPERTY
AT BENETA WAY. Continued from 2/7/72.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that the
City Council accept the County proposal, and
enter into the lease-option agreements with the
County and Tus~in Elemehtary School District
for the acquiSitiOn Of the respective surplus
property, with financing to come from Park
Bond funds.
Mr. Gill-explained that the initial payment was
expected to come from Park Bond monies, although.
the Parks and Recreation Commission had recommended
that the $100 annual payment come out of the
General Funds. The Council may determine which
fund will provide the future payments.
Councilman Oster stated"that the motion does
provide a determination at this time as to the
source of~funding
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by L. Miller that the
above motion he amended to provide that all cash
payments with the exception ofthe S100 annual
payment come from Park Bond funds.
Mr. Don Allison, 1208 Bryan, TuSti~, a member of
the Parks and Recreation Commission, strongly
urged use of General Fund monies, as acquisition
of surplus land was not anticipated under the Park
Bond issue, and is therefore not in the Park.budget.
Councilman Oster noted that interest earned on
Park Bond monies will cover the costs of this,
and this source of funding is appropriate since
the property is contiguous to a planned park
site and will be a part of that park.
Mr. Allison stated that this interest will be
absorbed by higher land costs as a result of
delays in acquisition. He stated, however, that
if there were no other source of funding available,
he would be in favor of use of Park Bond funds for
this purpose.
Mr. Oster stated that hewould be opposed to the
acquisition unless funding was by means of Park
Bond funds, and called for a vote on the original
3/6/72 Page 5
motion which included a provision for financing
this acquisition entirely through Park Bond funds.
9riginat motion carried unanimously.
XI.
NEW
BUSINESS 1. ORANGE COUNTY COORDINATED LAW ENFORCEMENT
RADIO SYSTEM - JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that the
Joint Powers Agreement relative to Orange County
Coordinated Law Enforcement Radio System, be
approved. and the Mayor and City Clerk authorized
to execute said agreement. Carried unanimously.
2. PROPOSAL FOR DEDICATION OF EL CAMINO REAL
COMMUNITY BUILDING TO POW/MIA CONCERN.
This item was taken out of order. See page one.
XII.
OTHER
BUSINESS 1. REPOWERING OF SEAGRAVE PUMPER TRUCK
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that bid
for repowering of Seagrave 100 G.P.M. Pumper
Fire Truck from gasoline to Cummins diesel engine
power be awarded to the low bidder, Lawless Detroit
Diesel, in the amount of S11,799.17, in accordance
with staff recommendations. Carried unanimously.
2. AGREEMENT WITH FIRST WESTERN BANK
Moved by Oster, seconded by L. Miller that the
Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute
agreement with First Western Bank for their
acceptance of City's bonded indebtedness in
connection with annexation of their property to
be developed by Andrews Development Company.
Carried unanimously.
3. TRASH COLLECTION SERVICE SPECIFICATIONS
Mr. Gill announced that the bid specifications
on trash collection services in the City had
been distributed to vendors, and favorable feed-
back was being received. Maximum coverage through
the Chamber 0f Commerce and the press is being
sought, and the specifications are available for
review at City Hall. The specifications should be
finalized and a bid opening date set at the next
Council meeting. He commended Mr. Blankenship's
efforts in preparing these specifications.
4. MATTERS OF COUNCIL CONCERN: STREET ADVERTISING
Mr. Fleagle gave an account of numerous staff con-
tacts with the owner of a Red Hill Avenue barber
shop engaged in unauthorized.street advertising;
these efforts to obtain compliance with the Sign
Ordinance have been ignored.
Following a brief discussion, it was move~__~.b
Marsters, seconded byC. Miller that t'~C[ty
Attorney be authorized to proceed with legal action
against the barber shop owner. Carried unanimously.
Council Minutes
3/6/72 Page 6
5. FIREWORKS
~ ·
should not be outlawed, inaSmuCh'as they constitute
'a tradition, non-profit organizations realize sub-
stantial revenue from the sale of fire_works, and
proper.-supervision would minimize the possibility
of injury or property damage.
Mayor Coco stated that he would vote accordingly
onthis issue at the~March 9 League of Cities
Executive Meeting.
6. STAFF MEETING MINUTES
CouncilmanOster urged continuing'distribution
of Staff Meeting minutes to the City COuncil.
7. PARK NAMING
MaTor Coco announced that suggestions for namigg
of the First and "_C, Street park will be accepted
until March 17, 1972.
8. DISTRIBUTION OF SALES TAX
Council discussed aResolution of the Norwalk
--City Council requesting the State Legislature to~
revise the'manner in which sales-tax revenues are
distributed. The Council agreed that the suggested
distribution system wouldbe less beneficial to
the City of Tus~inthan the present system.
9. PROPOSAL FOR REAPPORTIONMENT COMMISSION
The Council briefly discussed a Senate Constitutional
Amendment, SCA 2, recently introduced in the State
Senate by Arlen Gregorio, which would establish an
independent nonpartisan reapportionment commission.
The Council took no action on the proposal.
10. AGENDA MATERIALS TO BE PROVIDED CANDIDATES
Mr~ Richard Dorabrow, 14928 Newport Avenue, Tustin,
a candidate for City Council, asked that the
staff reports and other backup material related
to agenda items be provided to Council candidates.
Ma~or Coco spoke strongly in favor of the proposal.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by L. Miller that
distribution of City Council and Planning Commission
agenda material to Council candidates be approved.
Carried unanimously.
During discussion which followed, it was decided
that these packets would be available at the Police
.,Department on Friday evenings, and that minutes of
-Staff meetings would also be furnished.
11. CITIZEN COMMENTS: PAUL SNOW
....... Mr. Paul Snow, 430 West Main Street, Tustin,
commented on citizens' tax burden, and expressed
particular interest in education costs.
The staff was directed to obtain figures on annual
cost per student from various school districts, and
.... forward the information to Mr. Snow, who represents
the Tustin Taxpayers Association.
Council Minutes
3/6/72 Page 7
12. DEVELOPMENT IN IRVINE ANNEXATION AREA
Mr. Don Saltarelli, 14702 Danberry Circle, Tustin,
~aised the following questions about the progress
of the Irvine annexation, which were generated by
a recent Development Preview Commission meeting
which he attended:
a. What timing and procedures are to be accomplished
before development begins;
b. Can the Council involve itself in the determina-
tion of equitable community association fees,
which appear to be inordinately high in relation
to the cosc of the units (based on information
provided by Mr. Akins of South Coast Development
Company);
c. What is the Development Preview Commission's
function, and are they and the City Council
sufficiently aware of all the facts surrounding
the progress of these plans?
Mr. Fleaqle replied that the Development Preview
Commissi6n's function is twofold. Its advisory ....
role involves preliminary review to determine
whether or not buildings fit the land and whether
enough area has been designated for landscaping,
etc., for~ the guidance of the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission then reviews and considers
all details of the plan, and may give final approval
of the concept or refer it to the Council for final
approval. .The DPC'S final role, which follows
final approval by the Planning Commission or City
Council, involves determination of precise trees,
shrubs, colors, rooflines, .traffic circulation,
parking layout, and also final control through the
development phases after the plan has gone through
all other legislative requirements.
With regard to Mr. Saltarelli's question, the DPC
Chairman had been advised that their function at
that meeting was to give a preliminary review of
Roundtree plans prior to going to the Planning Com~
mission, in order to determine the feasibility of
the project within the land dimensions~ and that
this was not the final review.
Returning to the issue of commuhity association fees,
Mr. Saltarelli stated that exorbitant fees could
result in failure of residents to pay them and
subsequent aesthetic deterioriation of the develop-
ment.
Replying to Councilmen's questions, Mr. Rourke
stated that the City has always reviewed CC &R's
as part of its approval of developments, but he
was not aware of any limitations as to the amount
of assessment that could be made. He thought that
such provisions could be included, although it
would be beyond the usually understood position of
the City to try to evaluate ehe economic viability
of the development.
Mr. Fleagle stated that the overall design concept
plan will be presented to the Planning Commission
at their March 13 meeting; if acceptable', the
developer can proceed with preparation of tract
maps, in conjunction with which copies of the
CC.& R's must be submitted to the City and to the
State Real Estate Board. These are subject to
.~ ~- ~ Council M~nut
3/6/72 Page 8
review at ~'st~7~~times bythe Plan~lng
~.. ~,Commissio~ and finally by the City Council.-The
=~ ~'CounCil i~'~being k~ptI~i'hf~rmed of~"~"Progre~I~°n
these developments.
Mr.,j~seph~LangleX~_!!4782 Hillsboro, Tustin, asked
about ~he p0ss~b~y of allowing the developers
excessive flexibility to make changes in the
development.
Mr. Fleagle explained that the City Council.
required de'veIlopment in three stages to assure
that the units will be marketed. The first stage
will be developed exactly as specified by ordinance;
if a better design can be incorporatedin later
stages as a result of experience with the first
stage, a change in the ordinance can be effected
by means of a public hearing before the Council.
.~__ Mayor Coco pointed out that~he pu~Qse of develu
oping in stages-is to pr0te~ ~h~i~yand its
citizens, rather than to allow flexibility to
the developer.
Mr. Fleagle confirmed this, and added that the
developer is fully aware of this.
Replying~to further questions by Mr. Langley,
Mayor Coco stated that wherever an ordinance is
applicable, its provisions c~nnot be C~anged by
the CC & R's or homeowners' association. Provisions
within the CC & R's can be amended by a specified
percentage of the homeowners.
Mr. George Ritsi, a member'of the Parks and Recrea-
tion Commission, stated that plans relative to
p~rk land and open space should be reviewed by the
Parks and Recreation Commission to assure that
they meet City standards, and that the Commission's
findings as a result of such review should be made
binding by any agreement made in regard to develop-
ment.
..... Following further discussion about parks in
Roundtree and Ayres developments, Mayor Coco sug-
gested that it might be helpful 'If the Parks and
Recreation Commissioners attended the Planning
Commission meeting on March 13, and also received
inpue on Ayres' subdivision plans.
XIII~
ADJOURNMENT Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that the
meeting be adjourned. Carried unanimously. (9:'08 p.m.)
'~R