Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1970 04 06 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL April 6, 1970 CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order by Mayor pro tam G. Miller aT 8:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor pro tern C. Miller. III. INVOCATION Given by Councilman L. Miller. IV. ROLL CALL present: Councilmen: C. Miller, L. Miller, Marsters, OsTer Absent: Councilmen: Coco Others Present: City AdministraTor Harry Gill City Attorney James Rourke City Clerk Ruth Foe APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Marsters, seconded by L. Miller that the minutes of March 10~ '1970~ and March 16, 1970~ be approved as receive{. Carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. ZONE CHANGES 70-202 THROUGH 70-209. Changing from an Unclassified Use District to a specified classification the following properties as recommended by the Planning Commission: 1) ZC 70-202 - Prospect Park Condominium (Assessor's Parcel 62-671-03), located 318 ft. on the easterly side of prospect Avenue, approximately 230 ft. southerly of the centerllne of Irvine Blvd., recommended for Planned Development Zoning District. 2) ZC 70-203 - Saddleback Mobile Home ?ark, a 19.17 acre parcel ( Assessor ' s Parcel 62-330-01,02,03) located on the southwesterly corner of Main and Willjams Streets, recommended for MH~ (Mobile Home Park) District. 3) ZC 70-204 - A 4.22 acre undeveloped parcel owned by Marvin L. Bose (Assessor's Parcel 62-330-35) with 214 ft. frontage on the westerly side of Willjams Street, approx- imately 774 ft. northerly of the centerline of McFadden, recommended for PC-R-3 (1750) Zoning District. 4) ZC 70-205 - A developed parcel 170 ft. by 125 ft., owned by Herbert Zarember, (Assessor's Parcel 62-330-05), located on the westerly side of Willjams Street, approx- imately 988 ft. northerly of the centerline of McFadden, recommended for PC-R-3 (1750) Zoning District. 5) ZC 70-206 - The Tustin Village Trailer Park, a portlot." of Assessor's Parcel 62-322-09 and 11, located approximate ly 552 ft. along the easterly side of Willjams Street for a depth of 330 ft. from the centerline and approximately 426 ft. southerly of the centerline of Main St., recommended ~e~ MHP (Mobile Home ~a~k) DisEriet. 6)' ZC 70-207 - The southeasterly frontage property of Newport Freeway (old Newport Avenue) between Valencia and Warner Avenues, an approximate distance of 110 fT. south- easterly of the centerline of Newport Freeway (old Newport Avenue)(Assessor's Parcels 120-015-03 and 120-015-05), re- commended for zoning classification of adjoining properties classified as 100-M-20,000 and PC Industrial. City Council 7) ZC 70-208 - The southeasterly frontage property on Newport Freeway <old Newport Avenue) approximately 110 ft. sou~heasterl~ of the centerline of Newport Fr~eway :(old Newport Avenue) (Assessor's Parcel i'!~'~!~-04) commended for zoning classification of adjoining property classified as 100-M~20,000. 8) ZC 70~209 - Two adjoining parcels (Assessor's Parcels --- 103-300-2~ and 103-300-28) owned by Marcia V. J. Fisher and the First Baptist Church, located on the southwester- ly corner of San Juan Street and Red Hill Avenue. Recom- mended for C-~ onlthe northerly 175 ft. and PC-C-2 on the southerly 450 Mayor pro tem C. Miller suggested that Mr. Fleagle explain the proposed zone changes in a consolidated manner. Mr; Flea~le stat&d that ~he Planning Commission, on its own motion initiated zone !~hanges for"unclassified" properties within the City to a classified district. A public hearing was conducted ohM arch 9th, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended~the approval of the zone changes. No opposition was presented at the hearing. In explaining the changes, he stated that some discussion had evolved over the proposed zoning of th~ parcel identified in ZC 70-204 on the contention that this was a site considered by the Parks and Recreation Commission as desirable for a public park. As the owuer of the parcel has development plans for the parcel, it was deemed inappropriate to deny the zoning classification based upon uncertain future designs of theCity. The Planning Commission thus recommended that the City Council -- introduce an ordinance to effect the zone changes as specified. Councilman Oster asked if there was any reason why ZC 70-209 (~8) was zoned on a ~C basis. Mr. FleaMle explained that initially it was considered but the minister of the First Baptist Church .had requested it be advertised for C-2 for a broader range of use. Mayor pro tem C. M~ller opened the public portion of the hearing at 7:43 p.mt There being no response from the audience, public hearing closed at 7:44 p.m. Councilman L. Miller asked about the agreement mentioned in ZC 70-204 (~3) Izmade upon annexation for re-classification. Mr. Flea~le stated that he could not speak onthe de~ails as it was made at the time=of annexation and no one was there at the ~ime. However, the applicant insisted that when the .property was annexed, he had been told that upon re'classi- fication he would ,be entitled roan R-3 development. -- Mr. Gill stated that this property was annexed in 1963. Mayor pro tem Ci M/fller stated that this might_be one of the ' parcels where the ~oning required by the council was over- turned bY a referendum of the prople. He' would be interest- ed to see if that was the case as' there were a large number of parcels which had been zoned for multiple development but were reversed and ?the property reverted to unelassified. Mr. Melvin Bose, ownerof subject property, stated that the matter as ~escribed by Mayor pro tem C. Miller was somewhat accurate but that at the time it was tabled indefinitely by the council presiding at the time and it was never brought ~, ~h~ ~a~el ~ame inte the ~i~y unclassified, City Council 4-6~70 Page 3 Mayor pro tom C. Miller explained that the citizen committee at that time was opposed to the zoning of any apartment develop- ments in the City but would not oppose such zoning i~f specified in the general plan. So this zone change No. 3, ZC~.70-204 is. in conformance with the general plan as far as density is con- cerned. In answer to questioning, Mr. Fleagle stated that ~11 school property in the City remains unclassified. The staff is work- ing on a zone to be presented for consideration, covering school civic centers, and all public property. As to size of property in zone change no. 4 (ZC 70-205) of H. Zarember, it was the thought that this property could be incorporated with adjoining property for development. The property is completely surrounded by R-3. There has been no response from the owner on this. With regard to no. 8 (ZC 70-209) on C-1 zoning, there is an indication that there is a service station interested in this property--nothing official. The east portion is recommended for C-l; the City could extend C-2 to include this portion but would not like to see PC, C-l, or C-2 extended to the west- ern portion which is unlikely as it is under separate owner- ship. Councilman Marsnets stated he could see no objections to changes 1, 2, 3,5, 6, and 7, but is concerned about no. 4. It could accomodate 12 units unless developed with the pro- perty to the south. ~o. 8, he felt, would require some in-depth study and he questioned if ~his recommended zoning is right for this property. Moved by Marstots, seconded by Oster that Zone Changes 70- 202, 70-203, 70-204, 70-206~ 70-207~ and 70-208 be approved. Carried by roll call. Ayes: C. Miller, Marstots, L. Miller, Oster. Noes: None. Absent: Coco. Moved by Oster~ seconded by Marsters that ZC 70-205 and 70- 209 be continued to April 20, 1970. Carried. Mayor pro tom Miller stated that regarding ZC 70-209 on the corner of Red Hill and San ~uan, he has felt badly for a number of years that the Tustin planning Gommlssion did not protest strongly to the County Planning Commission about the zone change which changed the PR zoning which was on the opposite corner to the C-1 which allowed the service station to be placed there. The residential area to the north deserved some sort of protection --a buffer zone. Mr. Miller asked that the staff report at the next Council meeting on possible zones which would provide more buffer than if the zone recommended by the Planning Commission were to be adopted. 2. APPEAL - UP 70-336 OF RICH SIGN & NEON COMPANY. Appeal of the decision of the Tustin Planning Commission denying application of Rich Sign & Neon Company for a Use Permit to permit the installation of one (1) over- sized free-standing sign within 200 ft. of a freeway, with additional mansard roof and wall signs for Pioneer C~icken take-out food ese.ablishme~ located on property with lll. ft. Ere~a~e '~n ~e sou~Heas~ side Of New~= A~e~ue, a'~ Avenue. City Council 4~6-70 Page 4 Mr. Flea~le explained Use Permit application and location, and stated that the Planning Commission had deniedthe request due 1. Lack of a freeway~oriented business 2. The adverse eff~Utthe excessive sign would have on ~he residential community 3. The excessive.amount of sign area In answer to ~uestioning by the Council, Mr. Fleagle ~tated that the sign appliedf0r would be 86 it. from the rear pro- perty line~f residential property. If not within 200 ft. of a freeway, t=he permitted sign height would be 20 ft. plus 1 ft. for every 60 ft. from.a residential development~ to a maximumof 35 ft~ Thins sign then could be 21 ft. Hearing opened at 8~03 p.m. Mr. James Nicola, 15518 Sharonhill Drive, Whlttier,-represent- ing the sign company and Pioneer Chicken, stated that he pre- viously had offered t6 eliminate smalI="'Golden ~ioneer Chicken" sign and stripes under "Pioneer Take-out" sign, leaving "Pioneer Take-out" at 27 sq. ft. Mr. Paul Wil~outh had offered tO omit the ,Goldeg, frOm the "Pioneer Chicken" on each side. leaving them ate30 sq. ft.--making a total of 87 sq. ft~ This would leave-a balance of 135sq. ft., within the limita- tion. Square foota~eof192 sq, ft. on the pole sign brings the total toapproximately 380 sq. ft. The sign is not a square sign so you ~ose a great deal going fro~ point to point. Mayor pro tem MiLler explained that the area of any irregular sign is the area of the rectangle it takes to enclose it. Mr. Nicola stated that according to City Ordinance, if a sign is within,200 ft. of a freeway, you may file for a Use Permit, with no provision stating the percentage of your business is from the freeway. The height of this sign was figured on free- way and surface street visibility. in answer 'to Mr.O~t&r, Mr. Nicola stated that he would like at least the same amount of footage as the Jack-in-the-Box whose sign, including all four sides, exceeds this sign, and they have signs on three sides of their building. Mr. FleaMle stated that the Sizzler sign now going in is com- plying with the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Nicola statedhe would like an amount of signing at least equal to that of the Jack-in-the-Box. It was explained to Mr~ Nicola that this application is under different circumstances, as the Jack-in~the-Box is not+abut- ting R-1 property. Mayor pro tem M~ller .stated that there are three alternatives: 1. Uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. 2. Approve the~appeal. 3. Applicant~ould submit new,plans to the Commission. Mr. Paul Wilmouth of 1310 Echo Park, Los Angeles, of, Pioneer Take-out~ stated that on the copy area measurements differ. If his'understanding and,figures are correct,-they are talking about 4~le~. ~ ~he purpose of ap~lFi~ is me~lF for i~ent- lfication. City Council 4-6-70 Page There being no further comments and no objections, the hearing was declared closed at 8:21 p.m. Moved by Marsters, secondedby Oster that as this request is far in excess of the Ordinance, the Council.uphold the decision. of the Plannin~ Commission; Motion carried by roll,call. · '~ Ayes: C. Miller, Marsters, L. Miller, Osier Noes: None Absent: Coco __ VII. OLD BUSINESS 1. TO CONSIDER CHANGING DESIGNATIONS OF EDINGER STREET AND NAVY WAY TO MOULTON PARKWAY. · Mr. Gill explained that this matter has been before the Council, several times. Certain property owners appealed the re-naming of the street, which is primarily in the County. The.appeal was denied by the street naming committee. The portion within the City is still Edinger. The City has filed annexation on certain properties along Edinger; however, if the bulk of the area is not annexed, the City would not have jurisdiction over the bulk of the street. The 'Council could re-name the City portion, leave as is, or defer the matter pending results of the annexation and determination of the extent of the City's jurisdiction. Mr. Gill said he had not heard whether or not the property owners would appeal to the Board of Supervisors. As the majority of the properties are in the City, although the street is in the County, he felt that the City should support the owners if they did appeal. In deference to !these property owners, Councilman L. Miller suggested that the matter be deferred, and the City Administrator poll the owners to determine if they do intend to either appeal to the Board of Supervisors or to initiate annexation. Mr. Gill suggested that the matter be deferred to the Council meeting of May 4th which will be after the annexation meeting before the Local AEency Formation Commission. Moved by L. Miller, seconded by ester that consideration of n~m~ chan~e for Edin~er Street and Navy Way be deferred to the May 4th Council meeting. Carried. 2. APPOINTMENT OF TWO MEMBERS TO THE DEVELOEMENT PREVIEW COMMITTEE AND MEMBER TO THE BUILDING BOARD OF AP- PEALS. Cont'd from 3-16-70. Councilman L. Miller, a member of the sub-committee, stated that the intent'of the last deferral was to have a combined meeting of the Development Preview Committee, the Board of Appeals and the City Council, prior to an appointment, to discuss pros and cons of the basis of their'current operation. This meeting was re-scheduled for a later date. Move4 by L. Miller, seconded by Marsters that this matter be deferred until after a workshop of the Council, the Development __ Preview Committee and the B~ard of Appeals. Carried. 3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AS PROPOSED BY THE TNT COMMITTEE - Cont'd from 3-16-70 Moved b70ster, seconded by Marsters that this matter be deferre~ until a full Council iS present. Carried. Ce~u~i. Itman L. Miller requested that at such time the City Admin- l~&~ ~mi~ ~he eS~i~e ~ ~he right-of~wa~ acquisiti~n ef City Council 4-6-70 Page 6 Mr. Gill stated-that it is scheduled to have an appraisal of the Civic CenteF site at the next Council meeting. 4. EXPANSION OF PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION - e~' ~ ~ Park and Recreation Commission recommendat~o~.~fsl to add a high school student and one representative each from the Elementa[y and High School Boards. Mayor pro-tam Miller directed that this be placed on the next Council agenda. 5. PLACEMENT OF MISSION BELLS ON EL CAMINO REAL Moved by L. Millerm seconded by Oster that plan for location of Miss"ion Bells:, as submitted by the Downtown Business Associ-. ation be approvedI and the staff directed to proceed ~ith ~:installation of the bells and name plaqueS. Carried.. VIII. BUSINESS 1. RESOLUTION NO. 70-15 AResolution~ of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, ordering the canvass of the General Municipal Election to be held on the 14th day of April, 1970, to be made by the City Clerk of the City of Tustin. Moved byL. Miellert seconded by Oster that Resolution No. 70-15 be read bY title only. Moved byL; Miller~ seconded by Oster that ReSolution No. .. 70-15, Qrdering that'the canvass of the General Municipal "' ' Election be made by ~he City Clerk, be passed and adopted. Carried unanimously. 2. AWARD OF BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF MEDIAN ISLANDS IN FIRST STREET FROM PROSPECT AVENUE TO CENTENNIAL WAY AND THE WIDENING OF FIRST STREET AT THE SOUTHWEST ' CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE. Moved by Oster~ seconded by L. Miller that contract for con- s~ructiom of median islands in First Street - Prospect to Centennial WayS-and the widening of First Street at the south- west corner of ProspeCt Avenue be awarded to R. J. Noble Co., being the low bidder in the amount of $9,994.91. Carried. 3. GROWER MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND OLIVE HEIGHTS CITRUS ASSOCIATION AND SUNKIST GROWERS~ INC. Moved by,Oster, seconded by L. Miller that the Grower Member- ship A~reement with Olive Heights Citrus Association and Sunkist Growers, Inc. be approved and the City Administrator authorized to execute the necessary documents. Carried. 4. .EXTENSION OF TIME FOR COMPLETION OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS ... - Parkin~ Area ~d,~a'cent to 125 West Main Street. Movedby Marsterst seconded by L. Miller that request of Fir. and Mrs. C. B. BarnerrS. for an extension of time to May 1~ 1970, for completion of the terms of agreement with the City for paving:Of parking area adjacent to 125 West Main S~reet be approved. Carried. 5. WORLD HANDICRAFT - REQUEST FOR TWO YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON NEWPORT AVENUE. ,Mr. Gill stated tha~ this request had been received to extend for two years the time for certain improvement requirements en ~he preper~y. S~lIy Miller was contacted by the City En- B{~e~ ~fElce and has revised street work City Council 4-6-70 Pagc Mrs. Jean Adams spoke £or World Handicrafts regarding the background and said that to her recollection, no time limit had been placed on these imporvements, and she had been told the cost would run about $1,200. She now finds they need $4,000. Mrs. Adams said she believed World Handicrafts has justification for an extension of time. Mr. Gill stated that the cost was $1,500. They now find that the S.A.V.'~. line will have co be relocated, raising the cost to a $2,000 bond based on a figure from Sully Miller Company. It appears that the $4,000 bid is rather high. All that is requested at the present time is the street improve- ment dedicationof right-of-way. Mrs. Adams said the dedication has co come from the owner. · The owner will not put the improvements in therefore the lessee must do this. The owner will no~ give this until such time as we guarantee that the improvements are going to be made. If we put up a $2,000 bond and it is not sufficient-- then what happens. Mr. Oster reviewed.minutes of November, 1969, where Mr. Robertson agreed ~to the improvements. Mr. Handy Robertson of World Handicrafts recalled a statement made by Mr. Clifton Miller regarding helping problem properties in the area. Mr. C. Miller stated that at that time he was in favor of granting a Variance on the parking requirements in order to allow the businessto proceed, and that be still feels it better to have World Handicrafts go in. One of the determining 'factors in not requiring all the usually required things would __ be that the street be improved. Mr. Robertson stated that he thought at the time that the talk was of curbs and gutters, not paving ~6f ~he street. They had questioned the S.A.V.I. line buc were told, in all honesty, that the line had been abandoned. They got bids of which the lowest was $2,048.48. Mr. Robertson stated that if he did not get the extension of time asked for, he would have to cancel his lease. At $4,000cost he would need two years.~ If ~he cost is $2~000 he would need one year from now. Councilmen L. FPiller suggested requesting a bond for $2,000 guaranteeing completion one (1) year from the date th~ Use Permit was granted. Mr. Robertson again sta~ed that he needed one calendar year and saw no reason why he could not post a bond. Moved by Oster, seconded by L. Miller that the street improve- ments be completed on or before December 31, 1970, that a bond or agreement in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney be executed for completion of the street improvements, that the bond be in the sum of $2,000, that as a condition of the grant- ing of this extension, the bond, cash deposit or satisfactory agr~- ment and the dedication of the right-of-way be completed within thirty days. Mr. Rourke stated that if conditions are not met the Council would have to se~ a hearing to cancel the Variance that has been granted. City Council 4-6-70 Page 8 6. TUSTIN JAYCEE REQUESTS 1.Permission tohold Memorial Scene on Irvine Boulevard divider. Mr.-JamesZahlen explained that theJaycees are asking per- mission to put~ their,usual Memorial Day Scene on the Fourth Street center ~sland from Friday, May 29,- through Sunday, May 31. The Jaycees will.raise the Flag inthe morning, and Marines will lower the Flag while playing t~psat sunset. 2. Tustin Tiller Day Proposal The Jaycees are requesting an increase in money over last · year's request. They must get Tiller Days organized now and contact bands, schools, etc. They are not asking for a complete payment arthis time,. but possibly a $500.00 payment to be is- sued .prior to the new!:fiscal year and then after JUly'l, the balancemof the money tO be paid as agreed upon. Right now they are asking p~rmissiDn to putthe project on and a $500.00 pay- ment in the near fU=tu~e. In answer to questioning, Mr. Zahlen stated they are basing their request on last year's budget. Last year's budget was $3,627.80, less $329.80. If any money is left over, it should go into a fund for next year. A special Tiller Day account is-set up. Moved by Oster.~ seconded by L. Miller that the Tustin Jaycees be given permission tO holda Memorial scene on the Irvine Boulevard divider, that the Council approve the proposed bUd- get for Ti!ler~ Days, and that the Council approve an iuunediate payment=of $500.00-'to begin the Tiller Days project Carried. As to last yearJs~expenses, Mr. Gill stated that the same $500.00 which was left over from the Centennial Year had been turned over =tot. the Jaycees, and the City spent about $2,000for the parade. 7. REQUEST FROM SANTIAGO BANK FOR PERMISSION TO DROP STYROFOAM BALLS' FROM HELICOPTER IN CONJUNCTION WITH BANK OPENING. Councilmen 0ste= and. L. Miller stated they would be'abstaining. Mayor pro tem Miller read letter of request and the following staff comments.: 1. Potential hazard"with children running in the streets to retrieve balls. 2. Distraction to motorists. 3. Clean-up problem. ~ouncilman Marsters stated he agreed with the stafflon ~11 three counts-. In answer tol questioning, Mr. Rourke stated that the City could request a certificate of insurance. Asto the closing of streets, it might-be a problem. The bank is on main City streets which should probably not be closed. In the matter of clean-up, they WoUld probably be cleaned'up eventually and some would be on' private property. Moved b~ Marsters~ seconded h~'C. Miller that. Fequest to drop styrofoam bal!s-.fromhelicopter be denied. Carried. L. Mille: and Oste~ abstaining. _ city Council 4-6-70 Page 9 8. NAMING OF NISSON ROAD PARKETTE SITE Mayor pro tem Miller stated that the Park and Recreation Com- mission has recommended that this parkerrs be named after Hazel Gowdy, former Tustin Librarian, and that the Council keep Congressman Utt's Dame for a more significant development'. Councilmen Marsters moved that this site be so named. Motion died for lack of a second. -- Councilman Marsters said that he felt in complete accord with the Park andsRecreation Commission in that a more sigaificant community landmark could be named after Congressmen Utt. Councilmen L.'Miller said he concurred with Mr. Marszeta but · questioned naming the park after Hazel Gowdy, whom he had never heard of. Perhaps there are other Dames to be considered. It was the consensus of the Council that this matter should he deferred to the next Council meeting pending more informa- tion. 9. REQUEST FOR TIME 0N AGENDA RELATIVE TO THE SWITCHING OF TRAINS BEHIND TUSTIN MEADOWS. - Mrs. John Campbell Mrs. Campbell. spoke tc the Council regarding the trains switch- ing and being stored behind the homes in Tustin Meadows, stating that there are double tracks about two miles from these houses where th.is switching and storing could be done. Mrs. Campbell stated that besides the noise at all hours, these stored cars are unsightly and a definite hazard to children who will play in and on them. Mrs. Campbell. said she had contacted the Irvine Company, Santa Fe Hailroad, and the Pffolic Utilities Commission, and is now asking for Council support. Mr. Earl Davis of 1912 Royal Oak Drive also spoke on the hazards of these trains. Mr~ Gill stated that railways are chartered by the State and ~pelled out in the State Constitution. He will discuss this with Santa Fe. They are cooperative with the City. He will keep Mrs. Campbell advised. . Mr. Rourke stated that the City is limited because the State has exclusive right to control railroads, through the railroads and the public Utilities Commission. The contact with the railroad and Public Utilities Commission would be the appropri- ate way to see what can be done. Councilmen Oster stated that the Counci~ is co~,9erned. The Public Utilities Commission is a politically oriented body. Mr. Oster stated that he would send Mrs. Campbell the names and addresses of the Commissioners so that she, as well as the City, can contact them directly, not just the Commission sec- retary. Mayor pro tem Miller stated that the City will contact the __ Public Utilities Commission' as well as the State.legislators'. 10. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS. Moved by Marsterse.seconded by L. Miller that demands in the amount of $136~389.37 be paid..Carried, City Council 4-6-70 Page 10 OTHER BUSINESS 1. REQUEST TO HOLD ANTI-WAR DEMONSTRATION Mr. Gill explained that'a letter had been received from Mrj · -.~ Deryl Ruger requesting permission for members of the Woodstock Nation to hold a small anti-war demonstration at the corner of Third and E1Camino Real, and make known their stand on war, the vote, and drugs. In answer to questioning, Mr. Rourke said 'thatit appears that they are talking ofusing the sidewalk. If that is the case, the Council would not have any say.and they would be free to do this without'City approval. If they are contemplating making use of the street itself, then the City would have soma say about that. Mr. D.J. Ruger, 18121 Theedora Drive, Tustin, stated that the demonstration would be held on the sidewalk and the grass area by the Civic=Center sign, Mr. Rourke stated that tothe extent that it would involve Civic Center property, the City would have the say about that. Nothing else mentionedin this letter would require.a permit. Mr. Ruger stated there would be speakers on the subject, rep- resentatives of Veterans for Peace, etc., and would like to pass out anti-war literature and handbills as advertising. They do not intend to include any outside organizations or groups or to invite them to come in. These are the sons and daughters of Tustin residents. " In answer to questioning by Councilman L. Miller, Mr. Ru~er stated that the Woodstock Nation is a state of mind, a dream of what they hope this country one day will be. As to his position on the vote, he is for lowering the age to 18. He stated that he personally is against the use of drugs as they ruin you system. This demonstration is not only to raise his position but to let others speak and voice their opinions. There could be some peopl~ advocating the use of drugs. They would need the use of soma of the Civic Cente~ property. Mr. Rourke stated that use of .loudspeakers is limited by Section 15-7 of the City Code so they are limited in the use of loud~peakers..The Council decides if they can use Civic Center property. The Council cannot'deny the use of the sidewalk or the use of a loudspeaker as long as it is not of- fensive or disturbing. Mr. Ruger stated that they were' asking for a permit to avoid trouble. He said he and others will be policing to keep the demonstrators out of the City parking lot. Councilman Oster asked what would happen if 200 demonstrators arrived. You never~know how far it will go, Once the City gives a permit they will have to be prepared tO protect the- "'" City property. ~ did not think this to be a very good location. The Council concurred~that they were reluctant to limit rights of free speech and assembly, but that these dO have a tendency to get out of hand. There would be no reason to give or deny a permit for any demonstration on the sidewalk, but did not believe in a permit for use of C~vic Center property. It was the consensus of the Council to take no action on this matter. Mayor p~o tem Miller directed that the City Attorney ~or the City Administrator send a letter to.Mr. Ru~er stating what his ~hes are es to th~ use of the sidewalk. city Council 4-6-~0 Page 11 2. BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE Report received pertaining to the portion of this Ordinance regulating licenses for coin-operated washers and dryers. Deferred to a later date. 3. PROPOSED CHANGE IN RETIREMENT LAW Proposal to include managers and attorneys (prosecutors) as a safety member. Matter continued for more specific information as to dos=s and benefits. 4. REPORT ON SALES TAX Presented by Mr. Gill. 5. REGULATIONS FOR DOGS IN PUBLIC PARKS The City Attorney was directed to work with the staff and draft and Ordinance prohibiting dogs from all parks and City property with certain exceptions, such as controlled situations, seeing eye dogs, etc. 6. LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN Letters of opposition to be sent to the State Legislative Representatives and authors of bills SB-695 (Police Salaries) and SB-676 (EliminatinE Cities' share of Fines and Forfeitures). 7. REPORT ON RED HILL AVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS Mayor pro tem Miller directed that a copy of this report he sent to Tustin Meadows Home Owners Association. 8. MINI-BIKES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY City Attorney to work with the Chief of Police and draft Ord- inance restricting the use of mini-bikes on priva'te property. 9. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AND FILED. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor pro tem Miller declared the meeting adjourned. MAYOR PRO TEM