Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1971 01 18 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL January 18, 1971 CALL TO Meeting called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Coco. ORDER II. PLEDGE OF Led by Mayor Coco. ALLEGIANCE III. INVOCATION Given by Mayor Coco. IV. ROLL Present: Councilmen: Coco, C. Miller, Marsters, CALL L. Miller, Oster Absent: Councilmen: None Others Present: City Administrator Harry E. Gill City Attorney James G. Rourke City Clerk Ruth C. Poe Ass't City Admin.-Comm. Devo R, n F~.~agle Mayor Coco welcomed members of Girl Scout Troup i697, V. PUBLIC 1. SEVENTEENTH STREET PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXATION HEARINGS NO. 61 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN - Cont'd. from 12/7/70 Property fronts approximately 1731 feet on the sou~h side of 17th Street and approximately 506 feet on the west side of Prospect Ave. consisting of apprcx- imately 27~6 acres. Hearing opened at 7:35 P.M. Mr. Gill recommended continuance of this hearing to the meeting of February 1, 1971. Moved by Oster, seconded by L. Miller that hearing on Seventeenth Street - Prospect Avenue Annexation No. 61 be continued to February 1, 1971. Carried unanimously. 2. PREZONE NO. 70-124 A prezoning initiated by the Planning Commission of the properties of C. J. Bonner and Walter H. Opp from the Orange County Residential Professional District to the City of Tustin Planned Community (Commercial) District, to be effective upon annex-. ation to the City of Tustin. Subject properties are located on the northerly side of 17th Streen extending northerly a distance of 250 feet, bounded by Yorba Street on the wesE a/,~ une Orange County Flood Control District ± 870 feeC easterly. Mr. Fleagle stated that the Planning Commission had conducted a public hearing in this prezonlng and recommended that upon annexation this property be zoned Planned Community (Commercial) with the following conditions: 1/18/71 Pa<,~ 2 (a) The applicatj_on and issuance of a Use Permit and approval of development plans prior to issuance of a building permit; (b) The exclusion from permitted uses of service stations, drive-in and take-out food estab- lishments on the finding that such uses -- would have a detrimental effect upon the peaceful and quiet use of adjoining residentia developments and an adverse influence upon the traffic flow of 17th Street. Mr. Fleagle also presented correspondence from the Orange County Planning Department stating due to the size and shape this property precludes its use as a shopping center and would limit it to strip ccnunercial and commercial would not be in keeping with the residential area to the north. The letter recommended that the property be restricted to professional offices. Hearing opened at 7:40 P.M. There being no comments or objections the hearing was closed. Moved by L. Miller, seconded by C. Miller that Ordinance No. 499 prezoning property of C. Bonner and W. Opp on application NO. PZ 70-124 be read by title only. Councilman L. Marsters stated that he agreed with. the County that this could be strip commercial and that he has strong feelings to protect and buffer the area and believed this property should be prezcned under residential uses. In answer to questioning by Councilman ester, Mr. Fleaale stated that no development plans have been submitted. Uses have been explored, one being a bank which is not a permitted use in Pr District. He also answered that the plan submitted to the County for the commercial development proposed for the south side of 17th Street did call for an extezior walled complex. In answer to Mayor Coco, Mr. Fleagle stated that the Planning Co~nlssion had considered this prezoning at some length and the concern for adjoining properties and uses. Mayor Coco stated that the proposed ordinance states that the zoning is contingent upon certain con- ditions including approval of development plans an<] exc].usion of uses which would have a detrimental effect upon the peaceful and quiet use of adjoining residential developments. Councilman Marsters said he is not in favor of annex-. ation for annexation sake and would rather see this developed in the County under Pr than as commercial in the City. Councilman ester stated he agreed with Mr. Marsters. He could not envision, without plans, a development which would be conlpatible with a walled development ~--- across the street and prior to any action he would like to see some plans. 1/18/71 Paac 3 Councilman L. Miller remarked that on a PC zoning, plans must be approved by the Planning Commission and they do not automatically come to the Council. Asked if this could be granted with a proviso that any development plans would have final approval by the Council. Mr. Rourke stated he believed the Council did have a proviso in that any Councilman can appeal nhe decision of the Commission and bring the matter before the Council. Councilman C. Miller stated that if the Council is thinking of uses other than commercial, it should be so labeled. Council cannot zone property commercial and then hold out for professional. Mr. Walter Opp, owner of a portion of property within this zone change, stated that the type of conunercial would be in keeping with Council plans and compatible with the area. He said he is not a developer, but an owner. They have had no success trying to develop under professional and he felt the time had come for either the City or the County to g~ve them some con- sideration. Mr. Opp said he was aware that any commercial development would require Commission approval. In answer to questioning by the Council, Mr. Opp said he was aware that any commercial develop- ment would require Commission approval, but he could not'speak for Mr. Bonner who was unable to attend this meeting. Mr. Fleagle explained that the Local Agency Formation Commission approved the Treehaven Annexation, including this property. The question before the Council is the zoning of the property owned by Mr. Bonner and Mr. Opp. Treehaven zoning was a separate action. The inclusion of this property in the annexation was previously brought to the attention of the Council. Councilman Marsters thought it conceivable that Mr, Bonner could request different zoning or have different thoughts on this matter. Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Marsters that this proposed prezone matter be continued to the February 1, 1971 meeting. Carried unanimously. 3. ESTABLISHING BUILDING SETBACK LINE ON PORTIONS OF FIRST STREET. The establishment of a front building setback line for properties located on the north and south sides of First Street between the western city boundaries and the eastern property line abutting Prospect Avenue. Existing regulations require a front building setback line of 15 feet from the ultimate First Street right- of-way line for a primary arterial 100 feet in width. The proposal, initiated by the Planhing commission, is to establish a 10 feet front building setback line from the ultimate fright-of-way line. Said proposal has no effect upon existing stru6tures and serves as a criteria for new construction. 1/18/71 Page 4 Mr. Fleaale stated thaE the Planning Commission on Decen~er'2~, 1970, conducted a public hearing and recommended to the City Council that a ten foot front building setback line be established for First Street west of ProspecE in lieu of the presenn required 15' from the ultimate right-of-way. No opposition was expressed to the proposal. Endorse- ment was given by the TNT Committee and Citizen's First Street Improvement Committee for the purpose of en- couraglng project support without undue hardship upon the property owners. Hearing opened at 8:10 P.M. Mr. Charles Greenwood, 366 E. First Street, reiterated the support of the TNT Committee and the TNT General Plan Subcommittee. Mr. Clifton Miller commented that as seen on Irvine Boulevard, a 10' setback can make a good looking street. Moved by C. Miller, seconded by L. Miller that Ordinance No. 500, establishing building setback line on portions of First Street, have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. 4. AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 5.3(e) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO TEMPORARY USES. This amendment establishes that Temporary Use Permits of less than thirty days may be granted by the Community Development Director, and shall not require a public hearing or notice. Amendment also establishes a fee of $25.00. Mr. Fleagle reported that the Planning Commission on December 28, 1970, conducted a public hearing and by Resolution No. 1198, recommended an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to. Temporary Use Permits. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify and eXiminate ambiguities pertaining to fees, hearings and process for uses of less than a 30 day period. Hearing opened at 8:15 P.M. There being no comments or objections, the hearing was declared closed. Moved by Marsters, seconded by L. Miller that Ordinance No. 501, amending the Zoning Ordinance relative To temporary uses, have first reading by title onlX. Carried unanimously. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR 1. ORDINANCE NO. 498 INTRODUCTION (OUT OF ORDER) An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, ENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO LICENSING OF BICYCLES. Mayor Coco announced that as this Ordinance would be of interest to the Girl Scouts present who would be leaving early, it would be discussed at this time, enabling them to take part in the discussion. Cc>u~lciJ bli IIULCS 1/18/71 P~JC 5 Mayor Coco and Mr. Gill explained the benefits of licensed bicycles for recovery of lost or stolen bicycles and identification in case of accidents. Fee exempt licensing should encourage all to obtain a license. The City will license bicycles of residents inside or outside the City as long as they are not registered by another entity. Scout Mary Lou Horner, 13672 Carroll Way, agreed that taking the fee off of licensing would encourage more people to register. Licensing is important and could save a life. A life is worth more than $1.00. Although a $1.00 is not a lot Of money it does represent two hours of babysitting. Moved by Marsters, seconded by Oster that Ordinance No. 498, amending the City Code relative to licensing ~f bicycles, have first reading by title only, Carried unanimously. VI. CONSENT 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 4, 1971 CALENDAR 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS In the amount of $72,782.56 3. APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT #110 For Lawrence J. Lechman - Use Permit 70-344 (Car Wash, 1082 Laguna Rd.), as recommended by the City Engineer. 4. APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS - Clyde Stockdale UP 69-328 (Convalescent hospital on Myrtle Ave.), as recommended by the City Engineer. 5. EXONERATION OF SURETY BOND AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT NO. 107 - Male, Inc. as recommended by the City Engmneer. Moved by L. Millerl seconded by Oster that items ! through 5 of the consent calendar be approved. Carried unanimously. VII. ORDINANCES 1. ORDINANCE NO. 486 FOR ADOPTION An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, REZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. ZC 70-219 OF R. T. FRENCH DEVELOPMENT CO. ON BEHALF OF HARRIET O. ENDERLE. Rezoning an approximate 10 acre parcel from the C-2 & R-3 Districts to the PC-C-2 District. Site fronts approximately 585' on the east side of Yorba Street~ approximately 214' south of the centerline of 17th Street. First reading he;ld 11/2/70. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 487 An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, REZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. 70-220 OF R. T. FRENCH DEVELOPMENT CO. ON BEHALF OF HARRIET O. ENDERLE. Rezoning an approximate 10.5 acre parcel from the R-1 District to the PC-R-3 District. Site fronts approx- imately 355' on the east side of Yorba St., approx. 735~ south of th~ ~enterline o£ 17th St. First reading hel~] 11/2/70. 1/18/71 Pag~ 6 3. ORDINANCE NO. 488 An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, REZONING PROPERTY ON APPLICATION NO. PZ 70-122 OF R. T. FRENCH DEVELOPMENT CO. ON BEHALF OF HARRIET O. ENDERLE. Prezoning an approximate 27.6 acre parcel from Orange County AC-PA and AC-CN Districts to the City of Tustin P-C District. Site fronts approximately 173t' on the south side of 17th Street and approx- imately 506' on the west side of Prospect. First reading held 11/2/70. 4. ORDINANCE NO. 496 An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, PREZONING PROPERTY OF TREE HAVEN ASSOCIATES ON APPLICATION NO. PZ 70-123. Prezoning approximate 9.4 acre parcel to Planned Development (PD) District. Parcel fronts approx- imately 677' on the east side of Yorba Street, approximately 250' north of the centerline of 17th Street and is developed with a 92 unit, garden-type apartment complex. 5. ORDINANCE NO. 497 An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, ENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO ANIMAL CONTROL. Mayor Coco announced that there is a staff re- commendation to continue the first three Ordinances (Nos. 486,487, and 488) to February 1, 1971, Titles of Ordinances No 496 and 497 were read by the Clerk. Moved by C. Miller, seconded by Oster that further reading be waived and Ordinance No. 496, prezoning properuy of Tree Haven Associates and Ordinance No. 497, amending the code relative to animal control, e[~'passed and adopted. Carried. Ayes: Coco, C. Miller, Marstars, L. Miller, Oster. Noes: None. Absent: None. Moved by C. Miller, seconded by L. Miller that Ordinances 486, 487, and 488 be continued to February 1, 1971. Carried unanimously. VIII. ORDINANCES FOR 1. ORDINANCE NO. 498 INTRODUCTION An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING TIlE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO LICENSING OF BICYCLES. Taken out of order - See previous action. IX. RESOLUTIONS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 71-1 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, PETITIONING THE BOARD OF SUPER- VISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO CANCEL TAXES. Final parcel from Irvine Conlpany on Red llil/Avenue. 1/18/71 Page Moved bv C. Miller, seconded bL Marsters that Resolu"'t~on No. 71-1 F6 ~'6'S~ by Title only. Carried unanimously. Moved by L. Miller, seconded by Marsters that Resolution 71-1, petitioning the Board of Supervisors to cancel taxes, be passed and adopted. Carried unanimously. X. OLD 1. MARCH OF DIMES - REQUEST FOR ROADBLOCK EL CAMINO BUSINESS REAL. Report from Chief of Police received. Councilman Marsters thought this request to be unrealistic and suggested dimes be collected mn a more traditional manner. Councilman C. Miller asked for comment from City Attorney on City's liability. Mr. Rourke was of the opinion that this would not be a desirable procedur? and thaz the City would have some liability as this ~s not a proper use of streets. Councilman L. Miller felt this could open the door to all charitable organizations. Miss Stacey Huson, Corresponding Secretary, ~aps and Caps of the Orange County Chapter of the March of Dimes, stated this would be a public service as they will be distributing information on rubella as well as requesting a donation. Miss Huson said this had been done all over the United States, although, not in Orange County. Councilman Oster stated that the liability on the City and the March of Dimes might be too great for Tustin to pioneer. It was the reluctant consensus of the Council that this would not be a desirable or safe procedure. Moved by Marsters, seconded by L. Miller that request be denied. Carried. XI. NEW 1. SUBMISSION OF RECOMMENDATION ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUSINESS PROGRAM - Charles Greenwood, Chairman TNT Committee. Mr. Charles Greenwood stated that Over the pas~ several months, TNT Public Works subcommittee under chairmanship of John Siegel with the cooperation of Orville Myers, City Engineer, had been working on the 5 Year Capital Improvemenn Program as relates to Public Works. Their recommendations are as contained in the repor~ presented to the Council. Mr. Greenwood said he realizes there are a lot of demands for money but the TNT Committee is concerned with good access to the City. Mr. lohn Sieqe]~ stated tha~ the program is of major magnitude ~n money' and in stimulating business and upgrading the City. Outside funds are av~ ilable such as Gas Tax money. The committee hat; addr< t;~;cd itself to the public llortjon of needed improvenichEs - strcuts. Council Mil~utcs 1/18/71 Pa.]e 8 Mr. Siegel expressed his appreciation for the help rendered by Mr. Myers and said that his priorities, in general, ran much same as the committee's. The program presented is limited to safety features including street lighting, signalization, and street improvements. Total cost of the program estimated to be about 2½ million dollars some of which in addition to Gas Tax monies, could be made up by private developers. The subcommittee views this program as an investment in the future the return of tax money to the people who paid it. In answer to questioning, Mr. Gill stated that in all construction involving other agencies such as the railroadr all matters have been discussed with the proper agency. As to TOPICS Program, forms are being filed to get into the program. XII. OTHER 1. TRANSFER OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OF THE MARSHAL'S BUSINESS OFFICE TO THE COUNTY SHERIFF. (Reconunendation of Orange County Grand Jury Report) Staff recommended support of this consolidation. City Attorney directed to draft a resolution similar to that of the City of Westminster for next Council meeting. 2. NARCOTICS INVESTIGATOR AND BUDGETING PROJECTIONS FOR REMAINDER OF 1970-71. Reports from Mr. Gill received. Mr. Gill explained that this is not a new request but is not included inthe budget. Mr. Gill then stated briefly the status of City revenues and expenditures for the first half of 1970-71 fiscal year. The Council then discussed the hazards of the one narcotics investigator operating alone, increased efficiency of two officers and the overtime now put in by the one officer. It was believed that the additional officer would not completely eliminate overtime, but would result in a substantial cut. Councilman Marsters stated that for the little additional cost the officers could pursue cases as they should. It would be demoralizing to have to stop pursuit because of lack of backup. It would be a grave mistake not to provide this backup. Mr. Marsters said he did not want to raise taxes, but it may be out of order not to and give services the community is entitled to. He did not recommend this approach ~nd believed the City could rake up the additional money. The Council should support the Police Department tonight. Moved by Marsters, seconded by L. Miller that the Council authorize the position of additional narcouics investigator at amount specified in report, effective February 1, 1971. Councilman Osuer asked that the Council be advised at the next meeuj. ng as to how much overtime money is going out in the entire City and how many unfilled positions there arc. C~;uncil Minut..t; 1/18/71 Page 9 '~ayor Coco stated that he had talked to Police Officers and that morale skyrocketed when they found out the Council was considering this. If the Council does nothing, morale will be worse. Citizens should be made aware of the decreased revenue and that it may mean reduction in other services. It is important to protect the safety of personnel. Mayor Coco also said that it could be directed that overtime be kept to a minimum, but there is a certain amount of demoralization when any officer cannot follow through on a case for lack of assistance. Amended motion Moved by Oster, seconded by Marsters that an addditional narcotics investigator be authorized effective immediately and until written report on vacancies is received, no position be filled and City Administrator to advise Department Heads of difficulties and need for prudent use of overtime. It was the feeling of the Council that the City could be faced with a critical situation and it should be understood that in an emergency case, the City Administrator could fill a vacancy and so notify the Council. The Council also agreed that those positions already authorized, such as Traffic Officer and Administrator's Secretary, should be filled. It was brought out that the intent is tha~ the staff realize the budgetary problems. Mayor Coco objected to portion of motion stating that no positions be filled. This should be left at discretion of the City Administrator. Mr. Oster agreed and deleted portion of motion stating that no positions be filled, but asked that a report on vacancies and employment to be presented at each meeting. Above amended motion carried. 3. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT RED HILL AND WALNUT AVENUES Report from Mr. Myers received. Consensus of the Council that no further Council action be taken and the City Engineer and City Administrator work this matter out as suggested in report. 4. TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS AT 1ST ST. AND NEWPORT AVE. & AT 17TH ST. & CARROLL WAY. Report from City Engineer received. 5. PAVEMENT FAILURES ON IRVINE BLVD. BETWEEN YORBA & "B" STREETS. Reports from City Engineer and La Belle Consultants received. It was the decision of the Council that the City not proceed with capping and staff to con- tinue with their discussions with the County. 6. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION Mr. Gill reported that letters had been sent to 11 ~roperty owners regarding construction of sidewalk along their |}ropetry. |]e had received comment.!s from seven and it looks ]ikc these would go in oil a volunnc!cr 1/18/71 Page- 10 basis. Of these, two, Mrs. Robbins on Second Street and Mr. F. Primrose on South "C" Street, have been completed. Four contacted had not replied. Moved by Marsters, seconded by L. Miller that a resolution be drafted commending Mrs. Robbins and Mr. Primrose and resolution to be presented at Council meetmng. Motion carried. Councilman Marsters suggested that perhaps the Chamber of Conm~erce could take szmilar action. 7. ORANGE COUNTY DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL The Council concurred that this seemed to be setting up commission - another staff to an already overgrown County government and that only one side had been presented. The Council agreed they would like to see the alternatives presented. Councilman L. Miller referred to the study presented to the Orange County League by the Mayor of Westminster relative to districts and taxing agencies and asked that this report be distributed to Department Heads and Councilmen. He hoped the City would come back with definite recommendations and support of this report. 8. PARK, BOND ELECTION Report received from James Rourke with proposal from O'Melveny and Myers. Mr. Gill recommended that before accepting proposal of O'Melveny and Myers that he be authorized to confer with Ed Wells to coordinate this matter. Mr. Rourke concurred that the involving of a financial expert would be desirable and that it would be well to coordinate before taking steps to hire legal advisors. As there were no objections, Mayor Coco directed that this matter be deferred for further action by the City Administrator. 9. CORRESPONDENCE FROM HARRY E. GILL TO FORREST DICKASON, ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT re: County Zone Cases Nos. 70-1, 70-18, 70-60 Mr. Fleagle stated nhat the City had requested denial as being an infringement on the General Plan and had twice asked for a workshop to discuss the ultimate best uses with the County Planning Comnlission on these cases and had received no answer to their requests. Mr. Brown of the City Planning Department had appeared at previous hearings and requested workshops. These cases would again be on the County agenda Tuesday, January 19, 1971. Council requested that Mr. Gill and Mr. Fleaqle attend this hearing and again request a workshop with the City. 1/18/71 Pag~.= ll .10. ANDREWS DEVELOPMENT - TREES Mr. Fle{lqle reported that the Development Preview Commission had directed Andrews Development Company that no more trees were to be touched until the Commissmon was shown a tree plan. On Friday, January 15, he had responded to a call and found they were again toppmn9 and removmn9 trees which he had put a stop to. Councilman Marsters said that this tree trmmmin9 and removzn9 worrmes the area residents as co what will happen as the tract develops. Mr. Marsters asked that the files on this development be flagged so that s~aff is sure everythin9 is done as planned. 11. Following Correspondence received: 1) Correspondence to LAFC re City sphere of influence A.J. Coco. 2) First American Title Insurance Co. Report - Apartment Profile. 3) Letter of apology re Tract 7332 - Jay A. Andrews. 4) Invitation to Dedication Ceremonies for Los Alamitos Civic Center Addition. 5) Correspondence re: "Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices" - from James Moe, State Director of Public Works. 6) Reports month of December, Year to Date, Projections and Comparisons - Tustin Building Department. 7) Letters of appreciation: R. K. Fleagle from Howard Gardner, League of California Cities. Mrs. D. Robbins from A. J. Coco. Chief Sissel from Mrs. L. Adrian Chief Sissel from R. Goldberg, City of Laguna Beach 8) Correspondence re: Taxpayer Aid to Children - Association for Children Deprived of Support. 9) Report Comprehensive Transportation Planning Committee - LARTS. 10) Resolution 3276 - City of Huntington Beach. 11) Resolution - Orange County Board of Supervisors re Jet Operations, Orange County Airport. 12) Resolution 1487 - City of Rialto expressing concern re request for increase by Southern California Edison. Co. 13) Resolution 162 City of San Mateo re Tax Relief for the Homeowner. City Attorney Rourke requested an executive session. There being no further business, Mayor Coco declared the meeting adjourned ~o an executive session. btAYOR