HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1971 08 16 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
August 16, 1971
I.
CALL TO
ORDER Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Coco.
II.
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE ~ed by Mayor Coco.
III.
INVOCATION Given by Councilman L. Miller.
IV.
ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen: Coco, C. Miller, Marsters,
L. Miller, Oster.
Absent: Councilmen: None.
Others present: City Administrator Harry E. Gill
City Attorney James Rourke
Asst. City Admin., Comm. Dev.
Ken Fleagle
Recording Secretary Kathy Morrison
PRESENTATIONS
a. RESOLUTION NO. 71-45
A Resolution of the City of Tustin, Calif-
ornia, COMMENDING ROLLIN J. MAHONEY.
Mayor Coco read Resolution No. 71-45 in full, and
with unanimous consent of the Council, presented
the Resolution and a City plaque to Mr. Mahoney.
b. MERCURY SAVINGS AND LOAN
Mr. Fleagle announced that Ms. Dixie Hatton, Assistant
Vice President of Mercury Savings and Loan, was present
to accept the commendation.
Mayor Coco presented Ms. Hatton with a Proclamation in
recognition of Merdury Savings and Loan's civic contri-
bution.
V.
PUBLIC
HEARINGS 1. PZ 71-129 PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED
(ORANGE COAST CONSTRUCTION COMPANY)
Request to prezone subject property, located on
the northeasterly side of San Juan Street, approx-
imately 330 feet northwest of Utt Drive, from the
County R-4 (Suburban Residential) District to the
City of Tustin PC-R-3 (2,000) (Planned Community,
Multiple-Family, 2,000 square feet of land area
per unit) District.
Mayor Coco announced that this hearing had been con-
tinued from the last Council meeting and that a request
had been received just prior to this meeting from
Gertrude Means asking for a return of this matter to
the Planning Commission. The Mayor opened the public
portion of the hearing at 7:39 p.m., in order to per-
mit comment by interested parties on the request to
return the matter to the Planning Commission.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 2
Mr. Nelson Bake~, 1252 Andrews Street, T~stin,
representing homeowners ~n Tustin Terrace, summarized
the progress of their discussions with the developer
subsequent to the original continuance on July 17.
During the first week~ the developer offered nothing
in the way of a compromise and ignored residents' sug-
gestions. A continuance was granted at the 8/2/71
meeting on the basis of a new proposal by the developer,
Which was later found to consist of a minimal reduction
· n density and was unsatisfactory to neighboring resi-
dents. On August 1D, the residents offered the devel-
oper a compromise by which they would accept 2,500
foot density if a 75-foot setback were established on
the residential buildings. There has been little
comment on this from the developers~ and no prior
communication that~he developer would request return
to the Planning Commission for consideration of a re-
vised plan. A recent survey of Tustin Terrace resi-
dents indicated that about 50% prefer 3,000 sq. ft./
dwelling unit density; the other 50% would be willing
to compromise on density if an adequate setback from
the property line could be maintained.
Mr. Stanford Burrows, 1322 Andrews Street, Tustin,
submitted to the Council a copy of a story appearing
in the 8/3/71 Los Angeles Times relative to revisions
in zoning in the cities of Huntington Beach and
Fountain Valley resulting ~n less acreage available
for apartment construction. According to the article,
these changes occurred as a result of strong opposi-
tion to apartment construction by single-family home-
owners' associations.
There being no further comments or objections, Mayor
Coco closed the public portion of the hearing at
7:48 p.m.
Moved by Oster, seconded by C. Miller that Gertrude
Means' letter be accepted as a withdrawal of Prezone
Application No. 71-129. Carried unanimously.
Mayor Coco stated that when brought up again, the
matter will be noticed and will go before the Planning'j
Commission.
2. APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER TO THE TUSTIN PLANNING
COMMISSION
Mayor Coco announced that several applications had
been received, and opened the public portion of the
hearing at 7:50 p.m~
Mr. Robert Horne, 14821 Hillsboro Place, Tustin,
stated that he had submitted a letter in application
for the position, and outlined his qualifications:
a. Tustin residentsand homeowner for three years;
as such is very interested in tax picture.
b. Married and has three sons, and is therefore
interested in education and park and recreational
facilities.
c. Owner of Hickory Rib House on Newport Avenue,
which involves him in Tustin's affairs as a
businessman.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 3
Mr. Horne said that, if appointed, he wou~d do his
best to continue the progress that the Planning
Commission has shown in the past.
Mrs. Lee Wagner, 174 East Main Street, Tustin, who
had indicated'through the Chamber of Commerce a de-
sire to serve on the Commission, withdrew her appli-
cation as she felt she could accomplish more by
working outside the Commission, and wished to give
someone else the Opportunity to serve.
Mr. Bill Moses, 649 South "B" Street, Tustin, said
that as a local taxpayer who would like to see some
balance on the Commission, an ideal candidate would
be one who has his home and business here, such as
Mr. Horne. He suggested that more business orienta-
tion is needed at the City level.
There being no further comments Or objections, Mayor
Coco closed the public portion of the hearing at
'7:56 p.m.
Councilman Marsters stated that after careful-review
of the applicants, he favored Lowell Dukleth, who
originally applied in 1965 and has been interviewed
for previous vacancies on the Commission, in view of
his continued interest in serving and his qualifica-
tions as a consulting civil engineer and land planner.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by C. Miller that
Resolution No. 71-50, APPOINTING LOWELL DUKLETH TO
THE TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION be read by title only.
Councilman L. Miller suggested that while Mr. Dukleth
is very ~ualified, consideration should be given to
the businessman and homeowner in the community for
a position of this nature.
Councilman Oster favored giving Mr. Dukleth an op-
portunity to serve on the Planning Commission, and
asking Mr. Horne to serve on the Development Preview
Commission as the at-large member.
Mayor Coco said that he leaned toward replacing Mr.
Mahoney with another Chamber of Commerce member, and
since Mr. Dukleth's training is in line with the re-
quirements of the Development Preview Commission, he
should be encouraged to apply for the DevelOpment
Preview Commission.
A short discussion followed covering the types of
vacancies on the Development Preview Commission,
Chamber ~epresentation on the Planning Commission,
and Planning Commission attendance and term expira-
tion dates.
Councilman C. Miller pointed out that in the past,
consideration has been given to representation of the
various portions of the City. There is now already
a representative from Tustin Meadows, but there is
no representation from the area bounded by Seventeenth,
Irvine Blvd., the Newport Freeway, and Prospect Avenue.
Mr. Dukleth lives xn this area.
Above motion to read Resolution No. 71-50 by title
only resulted in the following.roll call vote:
Ayes: C. Miller, Marsters, Oster. Noes: Coco,
L. Miller. Absent: none.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 4
Lacking a unanimous vote to read by titla only,
Resol/ution No. 71-50 was read by the clerk in
its entirety.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by C. Miller that
Resolution No. 71-50 be passed and adopted. Carried.
Ayes: Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, L. Miller, Oster.
Noes: none. Absent: none.
Councilman L. Miller stated that his vote against
the first motion was not against Mr. Dukleth as an
individual, but in consideration of his qualifications
for the Development Preview Commission.
Mayor Coco agreed.
3. AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 435 - ZORRO INVESTMENT
COMPANY
Application for amendment to Ordinance No. 435,
Section 2b, in conjunction with PZ 69-117,
which rezoned subject property to the Planned
Community District subject to conditions:
2. b) That a block wall 6'8" in height be
constructed along the northerly prop-
erty line.
Site fronts approximately 150 feet on the north
side of Irvine=Boulevard and approximately 465
feet on the west side of Yorba Street.
Mr. Fleagle summarized the nature of the request,
outlining background on the matter as reflected in
Staff reports.
Mayor Coco stated that there are actually two matters
to be considered: the particular problem of Zorro
Investment Company, and that of an ordinance which
calls for construction of a wall regardless of the
existing situation on the property line.
In response to questioning by the Mayor, Mr. Fleagle
stated that written~concurrence of the three adjacent
property owners was not'a suggestion for amendment of
the Zoning Ordinance. This recommendation deals pre-
cisely with the ordinance which created the prezoning
(Ordinance No. 435), not as a general amendment to
Ordinance 157. Without a requirement for a developer
to construct a block wall between his property and
residential property, there is no guarantee that the
property will be buffered.
Mayor Coco stated that as the Ordinance is written,
it does not address itself to the possibility that two
" walls may result from its enforcement. He hoped that
a recommendation on'~amendment of Ordinance 157 would
be forthcoming in the near future.
The Mayor opened the public portion of the hearing
at 8:26 p.m.
Mr. George, Argyros, 17291 Irvine Boulevard, Tustin,
stated that at the time of prezoning, he was not aware
that there was an existing wall on the property line.
Rather than consnruct a 6'8" wall two inches from the
existing wall, additional trees with rapid growth
potential were planted at the suggestion of the
Development Preview Commission.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 5
Mr. Lewis Zeigler, 17282 Roseleaf, Tusti~, whose
land adjoins the Argyros development, stated that
it would be redundant to have two walls there, and
proposed that an 8' wall be established along his
rear property line by Mr. Argyros' adding on to the
existing wall. He felt that the trees,. even at 15
feet, would be inadequate as a buffer.
Mr. Argyros presented photos of the area in question.
He suggested. his paying to have Mr. Zeigler's wall
raised to 6'8" from the highest elevation, and that
an ordinance abandoning the need for another wall be
adopted with the phrase "with the written concurrence
of adjoining property owners" stricken.
In response to questioning, Mr. Fleagle stated that
the building ~nspector reported to him verbally that
adding on the existing wall can.be done.
Mr. Zeigle. r expressed concern over liability should
some problem arise in the future with the addition to
the wall due to faulty construction.
Mr. Rourke stated that to avoid misunderstanding in
the .future, if the property owner does not wish to
assume liability for the wall on his property, some
sort of written agreement should be established be-
tween the two parties before construction takes
place, whereby Mr. Argyros would undertake responsi-
.bility to keep the wall in proper repair.
Mr. Argyros stated that it would be unacceptable --
to be obligated for an indefinite period of time.
He felt that this would be unnecessary anyway if
the addition is built to proper standards and
approved by the City.
The Council granted Mr. Argyros a few minutes to dis-
cuss the matter with Mr. Zeigler.
After a short interval, Mr. Argyros stated that he
had agreed to increase the height of Mr. Zeigler's
block wall to 6' 8" and to pay for five years any
increased insurance costs that might be incurred
by Mr. Zeigler as a result of the addition.
A discussion followed among the Council relative to
amending Ordinance No. 435, forestalling the possibi-
lity of the other two adjoining property owners re-
questing the same consideration, and possible wording
of the amendment.
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by C. Miller that
the public hearing be closed and that the City Attorney.
be directed to draft the necessary ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 435. Carried u~animously. --
VI.
CONSENT
CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 2, 1971, meeting.
2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS an amount of $90 r083.68.
3. RELEASE OF SURETY BOND FOR ACCESS THROUGH TUSTIN
MEADOWS ROBERT Ho GRANT CO. - Authorization for
the exoneration of the $4,000 Surety Bond #621775
of the Grant Co. as recommended by the City Engineer.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 6
Councilman L. Miller stated that he would'abstain
on Item #3. ~
· Councilman Ost~r asked that Item #2 be removed
from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that the
minutes of the August 2, 1971, Council meeting be
'approved. Carried unanimously.
After a few questions about the Demands which were
answered by the Staff, it was moved by Oster, seconded
by L. Miller that the Demands in the amounn of
$90,083.68 be approved. Carried unanimously.
Moved by C'. Miller, seconded by Oster that Consent
Calendar Item #3, Release of Surety Bond for Access
through Tustin Meadows - Robert H. Grant CO. be
approved. Carried. L. Miller 8bstaining.
VII.
ORDINANCES
FOR
ADOPTION 1. ORDINANCE NO. 515
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
PREZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. P.Z. 71-127
INITIATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Request for a prezone change from the Orange
County P-A (Professional Administrative) District
35 to the City of Tustin Pr (Pro-
fessional) District.
Site fronts approximately 100 feet on the south-
east side of Red Hill Avenue and approximately
140 feet on the northeast side of Mitchell Avenue.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 520
An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California,
PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGA-
TION BONDS OF SAID CITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,200,000.
Ordinance titles read by clerk.
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by Oster that further
reading be waived and that Ordinances 515 and 520
be adopted. Carried. Ayes: Coco, C. Miller,
Marsters, L. Mi'~r, Oster. Noes: none. Absent:
none.
VIII.
ORDINANCES
FOR
INTRODUCTION None.
IX.
RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 71-46
A Resolution oR the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE WIDENING OF MAIN STREET
AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 7
2. RESOLUTION NO. 71-47 ~
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, California, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE S.I.P. 68 STORM DRAIN
EXTENSION AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS.
3. RESOLUTION NO. 71-49
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, CalifOrnia, COMMENDING QUENTIN W.
FLEMING.
The titles of Resolutions 71-46 and 71-47 were read
by the clerk at the request of the Mayor.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by C.. Miller that further
reading be waived and Resolutions 71-46 and 71-47 be
passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes: Coco, C. Miller,
Marsters, L. Miller, Oster. Noes: none. .Absent:
none.
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that
Resolution 71-49 be read by title only. Carried
unanimously.
Resolution title read by clerk.
Moved by Oster, seconded by Marsters that Resolution
No. 71-49 be passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes:
Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, L. Miller, Oster. Noes:
none. Absent: none.
Moved ~y C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that a City
plaque be awarded to Quentin Fleming in recognition
of his service to the City. Carried unanimously.
Mayor Coco read Resolution 71-49 in its entirety.
Xe
OLD
BUSINESS 1. DEVELOPMENT PREVIEW COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
(Continued from 8/2/71)
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by C. Miller that
appointments to the Development Preview Commission
be delayed until after August 30 in order to allow
time for review of the Development Preview Commis-
sion evaluation questionnaires.
Mr. Fleagle stated that a report on the evaluation
is being typed and will be furnished the Council
by August 20.
In view of some objections among the Council to
a "fifth Monday" meeting this month, the Mayor
suggested that edCh Councilman contact Mr. F'~agle
about their reaction~ to the report, and that the
Planning Commission be advised that there will not
be a 3oint meeting on August 30.
After further discussion, it was the consensus of
the Council that no meeting with the Planning Com-
mission be held on August 30 unless communication be-
tween Staff and Planning Commission indicates a prob-
lem existing which would require the consideration of
both Bodies.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 8
NEW
BUSINESS 1. ESTABLISItMENT OF TAX RATE AND NECESSARY REVENUE
a. RESOLUTION NO. 71-48
A Resolution of the City Council of the City
---- of Tustin, FIXING AND DETERMINING THE AMOUNT
OF REVENUE REQUIRED FROM PROPERTY TAXES TO
CARRY ON THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN AND FIXING THE RATE OF TAXES ON THE
TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUSTIN TO
CARRY ON THE WORK OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 1971-72.
b. ORDINANCE NO. 521
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City
of Tustin, FIXING AND DETERMINING THE AMOUNT
OF REVENUE NECESSARY TO BE RAISED BY TAXATION
UPON THE TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF
TUSTIN AND THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE NECESSARY
TO CARRY ON THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF THE
SAID CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1971-72.
Mr. Gill referred to reports concerning the tax rate,
t~e Budget, trash collection, and programs--revenues
and expenditures--that can or cannot be adjusted. He
4 noted that based on the last Council workshop prior to
adoption of the Budget, the revenue shown was based on
a $1.00 tax rate; with the new A. V. increase, a $.97
.-~ tax rate would raise the same amount of revenue. With
a $.97 tax rate, an estimated net of $112,000 in Gen-
eral Fund reserves would result by the end of the
fiscal year. In addition, a $.1365 Park Bond tax rate
will be required f6r the 1971-72 fiscal year.
Councilman Oster stated that he would like to maintain
a $.95 tax rate because of the $.1365 rate increase
due to the Park Bonds. He suggested that this be ac-
complished by straight cuts from _the Budget amounting
to $9,187 (difference in the amount of revenue genera-
ted by a $.95 versus a $.97 tax rate), or by decreasing
the General Fund reserve by that amount. In reference
to trash collection fees, Mr. Oster opposed any furthe~
increase in the taxpayer's burden, recommended Staf~f
implementation of one of the above alternatives to
maintain the tax rate, and study during coming months
of the trash collection charges.
Moved by Oster, seconded by Marsters that Resolution
71-48 be read by title only, with the inclusion of
a $.95 tax rate in lines 15 and 17.
Mr. Gill stated that the a~ount of $539,193 (amount
of revenue required) should be inserted in line 11--1/2
of Section 2.
Councilman Oster ask d whether the tax rate and the
P"~B'~se'F~e expense should be included in the
same Resolution, andswhether they would be separated
on the tax bill. He~said he did not want to disguise
the cost of the Park,~Bonds by "lump-summing" it with
the tax rate. ~
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 9
Mr. Rourke stated that he did not think ~hey could
be separately stated on the tax bill, even if
separate resolutions were passed. This could be
confirmed the following day.
Mr. Oster said that he would like to amend his
motion to include provision for separation of the
general tax rate from the Park Bond tax rate on
the tax bill, if possible.
Councilman Marsters concurred. He also agreed with
Mr. Oster's comments relative to trash collection
fees, and acknowledged Mr. Gill's efforts to increase
the staff through funded programs.
Councilma~ L. Miller agreed, and commented on Jack
Harrison's report on Recreation fees; he questioned
the fact that instructors receive 80% of fees col-
lected with 20% going to the City. He suggested an
hourly fee for the instructors.
Mr. Gill stated that the 80% 20% split has been
City policy for a number of years, developed. and
reviewed by the Parks & Recreation Commission, on the
basis that 80% is about what the instructor would re-
quire to conduct the class. A lower figure would re-
sult in difficulty in obtaining qualified instructors.
Councilman Marsters suggested a committee of the
Council meet with Jack Harrison to explore this area
more fully.
Mr. Gill mentioned that the Parks & Recreation Com-
mission meets on August 24 if C6uncil members would
like to meet with them. He noted that Tustin is the
only City in.the County that charges for general
recreation programs, after school etc.
Councilman Oster stated that the Park Bond issue will
substantially increase the City's tax rate and will
give residents and non-residents certain benefits.
He favored a pay-a~,you-go approach. He felt that
this must be strongly conveyed to the Staff.
Councilman L. Mikler referred to Mr. Harrison's re-
port in which he stated that unless an additional
$18,783 is allotted to the Parks and Recreation budget,
1,500 participants must be dropped from the program.
He felt that if beople are willing to pay, an ade-
quate recreation program could be offered with an
increase in fees. Comparisons with other cities are
irrelevant in determining Tustin's course with re-
gard to recreation programs and fees.
Mr. Gill stated that trial last summer of an hourly
payment to each instructor resulted in a drop in en-
rollment as a result of the lack of incentive on the
part of the instructor to ~ncrease class size.
Mayor Coco stated that, while favoring maintaining a
$.95 tax rate, he could not support the above motion
due to the conditions that $9,187 would have to be cut
from the Budget; services are minimal and the reserve
is too low. He stated that Recreation is underfunded
and that increasing 'fees and inaugurating incentive
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 10
programs provide only a partial answer. He felt
that the only way to maintain the tax ra~e without
cutting an already austere Budget is to implement
a user-pay scheme--trash collection fees or fran-
chising--to provide the revenue to maintain the tax
.rate and supply some sort of reserve. He emphasized
that the conditions on the motion were unacceptable
to him, and that he~would be derelict in supporting
it. (In response to C. Miller, the Mayor agreed
to support the motion to read by title only.)
Above motion to read Resolution 71-48 by titl'e only
carried unanimopsly~
Resolution title read by clerk.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by Oster that Resolution
No. 71-48 be passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes:
C. Miller, Marsters~~ L. Miller,'Oster. Noes: Coco.
Absent: none.
Mr. Gill supplied the following figures for inclusion
in Ordinance No. 521, based on a $.95 tax rate:
Line 8-1/2 $2,127,077.00
Line 10 2,127,077.00
Line 12 1,587,894.00
Line 12-1/2 539,183.00
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that Ordinance
NO. 521 have first reading by title only. Carried
unanimously.
Ordinance title read by clerk.
Moved by C. Miller,'seconded by Marsters tha~
further reading be waived and Ordinance No. 52],
FIXING AND DETERMINING THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE NECESSARY
TO BE RAISED BY TAXATION UPON THE TAXABLE PROPERTY
WITHIN THE CITY AND THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE NECESSARY
TO CARRY ON THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR 1971-72, be passed and adopted as an
urgency measure to go into effect immediately.
Carried. Ayes: C. IMiller, Marsters, L. Miller,
Oster. Noes: Coco, Absent: none.
2. APPOINTMENT OF PAYING AGENT FOR $1,200,000
TUSTIN PARK BONDS
Moved by Oster, seconded by L. Miller that the
Bank of America be appointed paying agent for the
$1,200,000 TustinPark Bonds and that First National
City Bank in New York and Harris Trust and Savings
Bank in Chicago be designated as co-paying agents.
Carried unanimously?
Ma~or Coco called a recess at 10:10 p.m.
The meeting reconven~d at 10:25 p.m.
XII.
OTHER
BUSINESS 1. SKINTEKS' REQUEST FOR ACCESS
Mayor Coco announced that this matter was going to
the Board of Supervisors on August 17, with a Flood
Control District recommendation for approval.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 11
He said that Mary-Evelyn Bryden, Supervisor Clark's
Executive Assistant, indicated, following input from
Mayor Coco and the County Counsel's office, that Mr.
Clark would probably reject the request.
Mr. Gill stated that Ms. Bryden was to talk to the
Flood Control District again before making a definite
decision.
2. T.N.T. COMMITTEE STATUS
Ma~or Coco explained that he and Councilman Marsters
had attended the August 10 meeting with the T.N.T.
Committee which resulted in a decision to deactivate
the Committee by the consensus of those present.
Moved by Marsters, seconded by C. Miller that
Charles Greenwood's resignation as T.N.T. Chairman
be accepted with regret, and that a Resolution of
commendation be prepared. Carried unanimously.
It was the consensus of the Council that a plaque
also be prepared for presentation to Mr. Gr~ehwood.
3. 'CONSTRUCTION OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES IN RED HILL
AVENUE FROM BARRANCA TO APPROXIMATELY 400'
NORTH OF BELL AVENUE--City Engineer
Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that Resolution
No. 71-51, PETITIONING THE ORANGE COONTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT FOR PRIORITY FUNDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF
BARRANCA CHANNEL to be read by title only. Carried
unanimously.
Resolution title read by clerk.
Moved b~ L. Miller, seconded by Oster that Resolution
No. 71-51 be passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes:
Coco, C. MillEr, Marsters, L. Miller, Oster. Noes:
none. Absent: none.
4. APPOINTMENT OF PARK DEVELOPER
It was the consensus of the Council that a Council
meeting be held on Monday, August 23, 1971, at
6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room, to ap-.
point the developer.of the First and "C" Street
park site.
5. NISSON-RED HILL-MITCHELL ANNEXATION NO. 72
Mr. Gill stated that the Nisson-Red Hill-Mitchell
Annexation No. 72 had been filed with the Local
Agency Formation Commission on August 3, 1971.
This annexation comprises 7.8 acres.
6. RESIGNATION OF QUENTIN FLEMING
Commendatory Resolution adopted (Resolution No. 71-49).
See page 7.
Mr. Gill stated that a public hearing is not required
prior to appointment of a member to the Parks and
Recreation Commission, but the vacancy should be
advertised in the Tustin News.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 ~,~:ge 12
7. CARPORTS ~
Moved by C.. Miller, seconded by Marsters that an
ordinance be drafted to require completely enclosed
garages in all residential units in the City~
Mr. Fleagle stated that builders will claim that it
Will be too expensive to develop under those condi-
tions. Also, it can be verified that garages are
not used if inconvenientr difficult to get to, or if
there is a lack of storage space elsewhere in the
apartment. He said"that objectives should be
examined to determine what the przme consideration
--aesthetics or security--should be.
Above motion carried unanimously.
8. SPEED STUDIES ON IRVINE BOULEVARD--City Engineer
It ~as the consensus of the Council that the City
Engineer proceed with painting curbs red adjacent
to driveway entrances, providing marked parking
stalls, etc.,. as recommended in his report.
9. CALIFORNIA COUNCIL ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL
RELATIONS--REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICTS
Staff directed to tailor response to Regional Planning
Survey toward inclusion of Orange County with San
Diego County in District 9, rather than with Los
Angeles, Ventura, and Santa Barbara Counties. It was
the Council's feeling that there are no overriding
factors forming a common bond between Orange County
and other jurisdictions in District 10.
10. CONSTRUCTION OF CENTER ISLANDS ON RED HILL
AVENUE NORTH OF BRYAN AVENUE
Moved by C. Miller,~seconded by Oster that expenditure
of $10,000 (of County Sanitation District 7's Main
Trunk Fund held in trust by the City) be authorized
for the purpose of correcting soil conditions on
Red Hill Avenue. Carried unanimously.
11. "FREEZE" ON SALARY INCREASES
Moved by L. Miller,lseconded by Marsters that the
City Administrator'~ August 16, 1971, Newsletter to
employees relative to the President's Executive Order
on stabilization of wages and prices be endorsed.
Carried unanimously.
12. TRASH COLLECTION COMPLAINTS
Mr. Gill said that several complaints have been re-
ceived from residents concerning trask pickup in early
morning hours, primarily where the commercial areas
abut residential areas. Through contacts With Helen
Holthe, it was learned that it is not possible to
start the routes at77:00 a.m. or later for various
reasons. He suggested that the Staff submit
recommendations on ~his matter at the next regular
Council meeting.
Council Minutes
8/16/71 Page 13
13. CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE LEGAL FEES
Moved by,L. Miller, seconded by C. Mille~ that the
Staff con~unicate with the Chairman of the Cit~
Selection Committee that the City of Tustin does
intend to participate in sharing the cost of legal
fees incurred in seating City Selection Committee
members on the Local Agency Formation Commission.
Carried unanimously.
14. MAYOR'S LETTER TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Mayor Coco stated that the City Attorney had pre-
pared for him a letter to go before the Board of
Supervisors on August 17 expressing disapproval of
County Counsel defense of Caspers and Battin
without the concurrence of the Local Agency Forma-
tion Commission or all of the Board of Supervisors;
asking to instruct the County Counsel to withdraw
from action supporting Battin and Caspers as indiv-
iduals; and if they choose not to withdraw, that
they also provide him (Mayor Coco) with legal
assistance since he is named respondent in action
filed by Battin and Caspers.
15. ANNUAL LEAGUE CONFERENCE, SAN FRANCISCO
SEPTEMBER 26-29, 1971
Moved by L. Miller, seconded by C. Miller that
Mayor Coco be designated voting delegate at the
Annual League Conference, with Councilman L. Marsters
as alternate. Carried unanimously.
16. MAINTENANCE OF CENTER ISLANDS
Councilman L. Miller asked that information be
provided relative to cost of artificial'grass for
center islands.
XIII.
ADJOURNMENT Moved by Marsters, seconded by C. Miller that the
4 meeting be adjournedto Monday, August z3, 1971,
a~ 6:30 Ip.m. in the City Hall Conference Room.
Carried unanimously.
RECORDING SECRETARY