HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 02-06-89 (2)MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
'FEBRUARY 6, 1989
I.
II.
III.
IV.
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kennedy at 7:01 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance
was led by Councilman Hoesterey.
INVOCATION
The Invocation was given by Henry Sellers, Pastor of the First
Baptist Church.
·
ROLL CALL
Council Present:
Council Absent:
Others Present:
Ursula E. Kennedy, Mayor
Richard B. Edgar, Mayor Pro Tem
Ronald B. Hoesterey
John Kelly
Earl J. Prescott
None
William A. Huston, City Manager
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk
Christine Shingleton, Dir./Community Development
Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works
Royleen White, Dir./Community & Admin. Services
Ronald A. Nault, Finance Directou
Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent
Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk
Daniel Fox, Associate Planner
Lloyd Dick~ Building Official
Chuck Cran~, Lieutenant/Police Department
Mark Bergquist, Sergeant/Police Department
Approximately 70 in the audience
PROCLAMATION - OFFICER RON FRAZIER AND CANINE PARTNER GUNDO
Mayor Kennedy read and presented 'a proclamation to Officer Ron
Frazier and his canine partner, Gundo. The proclamation was in honor
of their retirement from the Canine Program.
O~ficer Ron Frazier recounted several experiences that he and Gundo
had shared during their law enforcement years together and praised
Gundo's valuable service to the City.
Officer Robert La Barge, representing the Tustin Police Officers'
Association, presented a trophy to Officer Frazier and Gundo for
their dedication and service.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-02 AND ZONE CHANGE 88-02 (SAN JUAN
APARTMENTS )
Daniel Fox, Associate Planner, gave a staff report indicating
that the proposed General Plan' Amendment would change the land
use designation of the subject site from (C) Commercial to MF
(Multi-family Residential) and the proposed Zone Change would
change the PC-Cl (Planned Community/Retail Commercial)
designation to R-3 (2200) (Multi-family Residential) to
accommodate a maximum of 8 dwelling units.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar asked, if the land were zoned as res~dentiai,
would a future zone change be required to build commercial. He
received aD affirmative answer from staff.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:18 p.m.
Larry Campeau, representing San Juan Associates~ and Mesa
Development, informed Council he was present to answer any
questions.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 2, 2-6-89
T~ere were no other speakers on the matter and the PublicHea~ring
was closed at 7:20 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar was concerned with the existing high density
of multi-family units and would support rezoning to residential,
but only to an R-3 (2700) allowing a density of 1 dwelling unit
per 2700 square feet of lot area. -
Councilman Prescott voiced his approval of the Planning
Commission's recommendation of R-3 (2200).
Councilman Kelly felt that the applicant's'request for rezoning
was compatible with the immediate area and supported the zone
change.
Councilman Hoesterey clarified that, under the 2700 square foot
requirement, the project would be reduced from eight units to six
units. He noted the high density on San Juan Street, proximity
to Tustin High School and the surrounding compatibility of 2700
square feet housing.
Councilman Prescott requested to hear from the property owner
regarding the rezoning and the possible reduction in the number
of units.
Larry Campeau said he was undecided which direction to take
should the project units be reduced.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to continue this
matter at the February 21, 1989, Council meeting. The motion
carried 5-0.
2. APPEAL OF PLAN~ING COMMISSION ~(ENDMENT TO USE PERMIT 87-14,
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY - NEWPORT AVENUE/BONITA STREET
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, reported
that one of the mitigation conditions imposed upon the fuel
facility at the time'of construction required the relocation of
all large trucks in excess of 30 feet upon completion of an
alternate truck fuel facilitY. While the applicant was currently
establishing an alternate fuel facility, it would not be in
Tustin and subsequently the Planning Commission modified the
condition to include a review and monitoring period every 18
months. The modification of the condition did not require
relocation of the truck service. The applicant had requested
deletion of Condition 36 which required the City to periodically
monitor and mitigate traffic concerns that resulted from large
truck fuel service at the applicant's existing fuel facility.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Frank Greinke, 230 South "A" Street, Tustin, owner of Southern
Counties Oil Co., stated that his family-owned business had been
located in Tustin for 58 years. He clarified that their new
facility had been in operation since October and a number of
trucks had been relocated. The need for on-going review and
monitoring was an area of disagreement between himself and staff
and he reiterated the City's provisions and authority to revoke
Conditional Use Permits should problems or violations occur. He
stated his company had complied with all of the City's mitigation
requests and now should be allowed to operate without
restrictions. He considered the condition to be an infringement
upon his rights as a property owner and noted other oil companies
in the City that operated without such restrictions. He
appreciated the cooperation and assistance he had received from
staff and requested Council's approval of his appeal.
There were no other speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing
was closed at 7:40 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar felt Mr. Greinke's position'~ eloquently
presented the concern of bureaucracy imposing extreme controls
upon the community. He thought Conditional Use Permits needed
to be monitored and non-compliance, whenever it occurred, was the
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3, 2-6-89.
basis for revocation. To apply a condition on the premise'that
in 18 months there may be additional factors to consider was
unfair and he was supportive of the appeal request,
It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Kelly, to delete Condition 36
of Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2420.
Councilman Hoesterey said the trucks would not be eliminated and
felt a continuing monitoring program was futile.
Mayor Kennedy noted her respect for the Greinke family but said
she had'received several complaints from citizens impacted by the
large truck traffic; sUch as, trucks disregarding automobile
traffic, noise, blocking of traffic, hazard of trucks completing
wide turns, no on-site employees, and the potential hazard of
entry/exit on small feeder streets. She recalled the initial
plan which was to move the trucks from the smaller facility. She
felt the property owner had changed the intended use of the lot
an~ should be required to monitor the situation.
Councilman Kelly did want government to force excessive
monitoring on acceptable operations within the community.
The motion carried 3-1, Kennedy opposed and Prescott abstained.
3. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 88-01, SYCAMORE GARDENS
HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, reported
that Sycamore Gardens became a stock cooperative in January,
1980, and was the only stock cooperative in the City. The
applicant had met the City's condominium requirements and this
change would provide the applicant with resale capability. The
Code amendment would effeqt only the subject property.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:48 p.m. There were
no speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Prescott, that Ordinance No.
1020 have first reading by title only. The motion carried 5-0.
Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1020 by
the City Clerk, it was moved by Kelly, seconded by Edqar, that
Ordinance No. 1020 be introduced as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1020 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
88-01, AMENDING SECTION 9314, EXCEPTIONS (66412) OF THE TUSTIN
MUNICIPAL CODE, TO PERMIT THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLIANCE TO CONVERT A STOCK COOPERATIVE TO A CONDOMINIUM
The motion carried 5-0.
4. SUBSTANDARD PROPERTY AND ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE LOCATED AT 13662
GREEN VALLEY
James'Rourke, City Attorney, reported that the property owner had
filed bankruptcy and the Public Hearing should be continued to
the next regular meeting.
It was moved by Hoesterey', seconded by Edqar, to continue the
Public Hearing at 'the February 21, 1989 Council meeting. The
motion carried 5-0. '
VI. PUBLIC INPUT
1. REQUEST FOR ITEM TO BE HEARD OUT OF AGENDA ORDER
VII.
Joe Herzig requested that New Business Item No. 5 be taken out
of agenda order. His request was denied by the Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR .~
..
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar, to approve the Consent
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 4, 2-6-89
Calendar.' The motion carried 5-0.. Councilman Hoesterey absta'ined
on Item No. 1 only.
1. APPROVED MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1989, REGULAR MEETING
2. APPROVED DEMANDS iN THE AMOUNT OF $2,059,478.00
RATIFIED PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $196,434.64
3. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-65; CLAIMANT-GREGORY HAMPSON, DATE OF
LOSS-8/6/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-12/19/88
Rejected subject claim for personal injury and property damage
of an undetermined amount.
4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-67; CLAIM3~NT-PACIFIC'BELL, DATE OF
LOSS-10/24/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-12/20/88
Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$2,279.07.
5. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-63; CLAIMA/~T-JAYNE REYNOLDS, DATE OF
LOSS-9/19/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-11/10/88
Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$853.51.
6. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-62; CLAIF=AI~T-sOUTHEP~NCALIFOR/{IA EDISON
CO., DATE OF LOSS-9/27/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-11/9/88
Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$10,000.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 89-17 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING AND ADOPTING
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-89, IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ARTICLE XIIIB OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND SECTION 7910 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
Adopted Resolution No. 89-17 setting the appropriation~ limit
for fiscal 1988-89 at $16,219,192.
8. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT - MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, TUSTIN
Executed the proposed Hold Harmless Agreement with the United
States Marine Corps-Tustin for use of their facility in
connection with driver training for police motorcycles.
9. .REQUEST FOR BOND REDUCTION - TRACT NO. 13053
Authorized the reduction of Tract No. 13053 Faithful
Performance Bond #1253 from $888,200.00 to $355,200.00 and the
Labor and Materials Bond #1253 from $444,100.00 to
$177,600.00.
10. RESOLUTION NO. 89-21 - A RESOLUTION OF THE'CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE ORANGE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S ANTI-GRIDLOCK PROGRAM AND REQUESTING
"DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION, FINE UP TO $500" SIGNS FOR POSTING
AT CONGESTED INTERSECTIONS IN THE CITY
Adopted Resolution No. 89-21 supporting the Orange County
Transportation Commission's Anti-Gridlock Program and
requesting "Do Not Block Intersection, Fine Up to $500" signs
for posting at congested intersections in the City and
directed staff to file an application for signing to be placed
at seventeen (17) ~treet intersections within the City.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 89-22 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR SLURRY SEAL PROJECT 1988-89 FY AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT
FOR BIDS
Adopted Resolution No. 89-22 approving plans and
specifications and authorizing advertisement of bids for
subject project.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 89-23 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER MAIN RELOCATION ON MCFADDEN AVENUE
ACROSS RTE. 55 FREEWAY OVERPASS AND AUTHORIZING ADVeRtiSEMENT FOR
BIDS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 5, 2-6-89
Adopted Resolution No. 89-23 approving plans and specifications
and authorizing advertisement of bids for subject project.
13. SURPLUS SCRAP METALS
Received and filed notice of the sale of surplus metals as
.provided for in Ordinance No. 871.
· .
14. JAmBoREE ROAD PIPELINE AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL WATER. DISTRICT
OF ORANGE COUNTY
Approved the Jamboree Road pipeline agreement with Municipal
Water District of Orange County and authorized the Mayor to
execute said agreement subject to final approval of the City
Attorney's office.
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
1. TRAINING OF PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS AND DISPATCHERS- ORDINANCE NO.
1017
It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Prescott, that Ordinance No.
1017 have first reading by title only. The motion carried 5-0.
Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1017'by
the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey,
that Ordinance No. 1017 be introduced as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1017 -AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1711 OF THE TUSTIN CITY
CODE PERTAINING TO ACCEPTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 13522
OF THE PENAL CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO THE
TRAINING OF PEACE OFFICERS AND OF PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
The ~otion carried 5-0.
IX.
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
1. ORDINANCE NO. 1015 - PLANNING COHHISSION, CHANGE OF EXPIRATION
DATES OF COM}{ISSIONERS' TERMS
The following Ordinance No. 1015 had first reading and
introduction at the January 16, 1989 Council meeting:
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar, that Ordinance No.
1015 have second reading by.title only. The motion carried
5-0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No.
1015 by the City Clerk, it was moved by puescott, seconded by
~oesterey, that Ordinance No. 1015 be passed and adopted as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1015 -AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1513 OF THE TUSTIN CITY
CODE RELATIVE TO THE APPOINTMENT AND TERMS OF MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION.
The motion carried 5-0. (Roll call vote)
2. ORDINANCE NO. 1016 - PARKS AND RECREATION, CHANGE OF EXPIRATION
DATES OF COMMISSIONERS, TERMS
The following Ordinance No. 1016 had first reading and
introduction at the January 16, 1989 meeting.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edq~r, that Ordinance No.
1016 have second reading by title only. The motion carried
5-0. Followfng second reading by title only of Ordinance No.
1016 by the City Clerk, it was moved by H0esterev, seconded by
Prescott, that Ordinance No. 1016 be passed and adopted as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1016 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1553 OF THE TUSTIN CITY
CODE RELATIVE TO THE APPOINTMENT AND TERMS OF HEMBERS OF THE
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION.
The motion carried ~-0. (Roll call vote)
-!
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 6, 2-6-89
Xe
OLD BUSINESS
1. STATUS REPORT - JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE MONITORING PROGRAM
(JWA) t COALITION FOR A RESPONSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTION (CRAS),
AIRPQRT SITE COALITION (ASC) A/~D HELICOPTER OVERFLIGHT PROGRAM
TASK FORCE'(HOPTF)
..
Christine Shingleton, Director o{ Community D~velopment, gave a
staff report as contained in the Community Development memorandum
dated February 6, 1989.
Council concurred that Councilman Kelly be formally nominated to
serve on the CRAS Board.
Mayor Kennedy expressed her concerns regarding the JWA Monorail
and its effect upon increased traffic in Tustin. She did not
want John Wayne Airport expansion encouraged and urged the
Council to monitor Newport Beach's appeal of the determination
that the monorail would have no significant impact on the
environment.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar said it was premature to judge if the
monorail was growth inducing.
Councilman Prescott thought McDonnell-Douglas should be commended
for providing a monorail at private expense.
At Mayor Kennedy's request, Mayor Pro Tem Edgar provided
information on the lack of bus service to John Wayne Airport.
Mayor Kennedy asked for Council concurrence in adamantly opposing
the possible helicopter f~ights over the East Tustin area.
Councilman Hoesterey felt it was more of an issue than
helicopter flights because in 3 to 5 years there would be
different types of aircraft using the helicopter station and
approaching at lower'altitudes and higher speeds.. He wanted the
City to vigorously oppose.any change to the approach pattern.
Mayor Kennedy directed staff to take steps accordingly and
offered Council assistance if needed.
It was moved by Kelly, seconded by Edqar, to receive and file
subject report. The motion carried 5-0.
2. RECEIPT OF ADOPTED OWI~ER PARTICIPATION A/~D PREFERENCE RULES, THE
PROPOSED SECOND AHENDMENT TO THE AMENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE AGENCY'S
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED SECOND AMENDMENT
At 8:08 p.m., it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar,'to
recess to the Redevelopment Agency. The motion carried 5-0.
(During the Redevelopment Agency meeting, the Agency adopted
Resolution Nos. RDA 89-2 and RDA 89-3. See Minutes of
Redevelopment Agency dated February 6, 1989.)
At 8:11 p.m., the City Council meeting was reconvened.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar, to adopt the
following Resolution No. 89-13 receiving the subject documents:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-13 - A RESOLUTION 0F THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECEIVING ADOPTED OWNER PARTICIPATION
AND PREFERENCES RULES, PROPOSED SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
AND AGENCY'S REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED SECOND
AMENDMENT
The motion carried 4-0, Prescott abstained. ..---
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7, 2-6-89
3.. WATER WORKSHOP
It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Hoesterey, to approve the
following staff recommendations submitted to Council during the
Water Workshop held on January 16, 1989:
'.1.' The City Council direct that an engineering analysis of
_ water stora~e'facilities be prepared by a consultant.
2,
Water rates (fixed and consumption) not be adjusted at this
time.
3,
The surcharge rate not be adjusted at this time.
Upon completion of the water storage engineering analysis,
the City Council consider options for financing future water
system capital improvements and adjust water rates and/or
the surcharge rate accordingly.
The motion carried 5-0.
4. I-5/RTE. 55 II~TERCHA~GE PROJECT
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, reported that the
date for the Caltrans Open House meeting with the Tustin Village
Way residents had been set for March 14, 1989, in the Council
Chambers. Both Caltrans and the homeowners' association had
agreed to this date and notices would be mailed by staff to all
property owners and residents.
A brief Council/staff discussion followed regarding the specific
subjects to be covered during the Caltrans meeting.
Howard Branski, Tustin Village Way, requested that Caltrans staff
reports be provided for the homeowners prior to the meeting on
March 14, 1989, reiterated his concerns that the proposed project
would have on the immediate area adjacent to the interchange, and
asked t~e reason for the delay of the. meeting date.
Mayor Kennedy reminded him that the City 'Council had only the
power of persuasion and through that power the Council and staff
was attempting to serve as a guide and counselor for the
residents.
Councilman Hoesterey recalled that information from Caltrans
concerning the Tustin Village Way area had been inconsistent and
Council had, through meetings with' Mr.. McKean of Caltrans,
strongly advised that the next meeting convey precisely what
would transpire. He hoped the next report and information would
be Caltrans' true intentions and the Council had encouraged, at
Mr. McKean's level, those results.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, clarified that the
delay in the meeting date was due to a combination of conflicts
with the homeowners' association board meetings and Caltrans
inability to provide all the vital data on a short time-line.
Ralph Neal, Caltrans Director for District'No. 12, pledged to the
Council, as he had to the representatives of the homeowners'
association, that when Caltrans responded the information would
be accurate, correct, up-to-date and exactly what would happen
to the Tustin Village Way property. This was the reason Caltrans
could not be prepared for one of the suggested meeting dates.
He said Caltrans would meet with the homeowners prior to the
meeting and provide them an opportunity to preview the data.
Mayor Kennedy informed Mr. Neal that other groups of residents
in Tustin, effected by the I-5 widening, would need informational
meetings with Caltrans.
Donna Wilson, 15500 Tustin Village Way, was concerned about the
fire coverage and was informed by Mayor Kennedy that the City
contracted that service through the Orange County Fire
Department.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE?
Page 8, 2-6-89
It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Kennedy, to receive and~file
subject report. The motion carried 5-0.
5. 1989 CHILI COOK-OFF LOCATION
RoyleenWhite,'Direc~or of Administrative and Community Services,
reviewed the petition submitted ~y Mr. Michael David requesting
a change in'the location of the Chili Cook-Off. Staff found that
less than 20% of those addresses listed on Mr. David's petition
were closely impacted by the Chili Cook-Off. Staff personally
interviewed residents on the street that is closed for the event
and the results were 78% positive about the Chili Cook-Off and
its current location in Old Towne Tustin.
Councilman Kelly was angry because City resources were spent on
the poll and he felt the quality of the poll was poor.
Councilman Prescott noted that Mr. David's petition had specific
names and addresses while staff's survey did not. He felt the
petition with names and addresses was more credible.
Councilman Hoesterey felt the Chili Cook-Off was an historical
event held in the downtown area, it directly benefited charitable
organizations and he was in favor of the event and its location.
It was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded by Edqar, to continue the
1989 Chili Cook-Off at the Old Towne Tustin location.
The following members of the community spoke in opposition to Old
Towne Tustin as the location for the Chili Cook-Off:
Michael David, 445-1/2 Sixth Street, Tustin
Greg Kelly, 330 E1 Camino Real, Tustin
.
Councilman Kelly noted Ordinance No. 510 which prohibited the
sale of goods in the public right-of-way and said the Chili Cook-
Off was in violation of that law.
.-
A ~ubs~itute motion was made by Kelly, seconded by Prescott, to
relocate the 1989 Chili Cook-Off to the Senior Center facility
or Peppertree Park.
The following members of the community spoke in favor of the
Chili Cook-Off and its location in Old Towne Tustin:
Margaret Greinke, 1989 Chili Cook-Off Honorary Chairman
Rick Rengel, Rengel & Co. Architects, 333 E1 Camino, Tustin
Margarete Thompson, Chili Cook-Off Committee
Mayor Kennedy asked if Chili Cook-Off permits were required to
comply with Ordinance No. 510 and received an affirmative answer
from staff and, therefore, no violation of the law had occurred.
She said staff conducted their poll because this was a City
Council sponsored event and there was concern when a petition is
signed by 160 people. The downtown area was originally selected
as the Chili Cook-Off location to celebrate its restoration and
"showcase" Old Towne Tustin. She suggested polling residents of
the downtown area as to their preference for next year's location
and the 1989 location remain as scheduled.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar felt a poll expanded beyond E1 Camino and the
adjoining streets would be irrelevant.
The substitute motion failed 2-3, Kennedy, Edgar and Hoesterey
opposed.
As an addition to the oriqinal motion, it was moved by Hoesterey,
seconded by Edqar, to increase the clean-up efforts if needed.
The motion carried 3-2, Kelly and Prescott opposed.
..
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 9, 2-6-89
6 · DIAMOND LANES
Councilman Kelly stated he had submitted copies of two
Resolutions for Council consideration. He noted an earlier
conversation with Mayor Kennedy where she said she would not
voice opposition to the concept of diamond lanes and Mayor Pro
Tem Edgar's commentary supporting diamond lanes..
.
Mayor Kennedy commented that Councilman Kelly was referrin~ to
a private conversation between the two of them in which s~e told
him that, at the present time,· she favored diamond lanes. She
,did not say that she would never vote against them and asked him,
if he was going to report on private conversations in a public
meeting, to report them accurately.
·
.
Discussion followed between Mayor Kennedy and Councilman Kelly
regarding their private conversation.
Councilmah Kelly said he had acquired a Resolution from the City
of Fountain Valley requesting that the local Orange County
Congressional delegation go on record opposing H.O.V. lanes and
he wanted the Council to adopt a similar Resolution.
Councilman Hoesterey clarified that of the two Resolutions
submitted, he would support the one requesting a trial period on
diamond lanes.
Councilman Edgar noted that when a trial period is requested it
meant that analytical procedures used for decades should be
ignored and discard the investment that had been made. The
studies that had been done made a positive conclusion through
analytical models on the freeways in the Southern California
area.
,
The following member of ~he community spoke in opposition to
diamond l~nes:
Larry Koeni~, 14481 Deerfield Avenue, Tustin
At Mayor Pro Tem Edgar's request, Brian Pearson of the O.C.T.D.
staff, addressed the Council regarding the background of commuter
lanes, transportation management, ~ide-sharing plans, transitwaYs
in Orange County, and the current and future projects of O.C.T.D.
A question-and-answer period followed between Council and Brian
Pearson.
It was moved by Kelly, seconded by Hoesterey, to adopt the
following Resolution No. 89-24:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-14 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO REMOVE DIAMOND LANES FOR A TRIAL PERIOD
Councilman Prescott felt it was unfair to have diamond lanes
forced upon the public by a non-elected body and he considered
it social engineering.
Mayor Kennedy thought there were sRrious traffic problems without
benefit of necessary funding and property for expansion of the
freeway system. She hoped that a small portion of the general
public would be encouraged by their places of employment to join
van pools and contribute to cleaner air. She was opposed to the
resolution as a step backward.
The motion carried 3-2, Kennedy and Edgar opposed.
(At 9:48 p.m., the meeting recessed for five minutes.)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 10, 2-6-89
XI. NEW BUSINESS
1. CITY COUNCIL NOTIFICATION POLICY
Mayor Kennedy said the Council had a present policy whereby the
Council was notified when a major event effecting residents and
businesses occurred; such.as, chemical spills, airplane crashes,
major crimes, health hazard~,'negotiat~ons, resignations ef major
staff members and crimes committed-by staff.
Councilman Hoesterey noted that the Mayor had information that
was not included in the Council agenda packets and requested this
matter be continued.
It was moved by' Hoestere¥, seconded by Kelly, to continue this
item to the February 21, 1989 meeting.
The motion carried 5-0.
2. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SIGN CODE EXCEPTION
It was moved by Hoestere¥, secOnded by Edgar, to adopt the
following Resolution No. 89-18 approving a Sign Code exception
authorizing Abigail Abbott Personnel Companies to display a flag
bearing their company name at 660 West First Street:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-18 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A SIGN CODE EXCEPTION FOR
ABIGAIL ABBOTT PERSONNEL COMPANIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF DISPLAYING
A 15 SQUARE FOOT CORPORATE FLAG AT 660 WEST FIRST STREET
The motion carried 5-0.
DECLARATION OF INTENTION'.--TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE
PURPOSES OF DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE -170 EL CAMINO REAL
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to approve the
following Resolution No. 89-16 declaring the City's intent to
l~old a Public Hearing on .February 21, 1989, for the purpose of
declaring a public nuisance at 170 E1 Camino Real:
RESOLUTION NO.' 89-16 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE INTENTION TO CONDUCT
A PUBLIC HEARING TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE CONDITION OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 170 EL CAMINO REAL (AP# 401-571-05)
CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC .NUISANCE
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to direct the
Building Official to initiate inspection and abatement
proceedings on the structural condition of the building at 170
E1 Camino and authorize a Public Hearing to be scheduled on
February 21, 1989, for the purpose of receiving protest or
objections to the work charges being impqsed as a lien on the
property.
The motion carried 5-0.
4. REPAIR OF SIDEWALK DAMAGED BY PROPERTY OWNERS' TREES
Councilman Hoesterey did not feel comfortable claiming that a
homeowners' tree could be the sole problem with a sidewalk and
wanted to maintain the present policy of sidewalk repair and
replacement.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Prescott, to continue the
policy of paying 100% of the cost to repair standard cdncrete
sidewalks damaged by property owners' trees.
Mayor Kennedy was concerned about the City's involvement in
causing growth and subsequent damage. .She felt the policy was
prudent, but heartless. She questioned staff if the problem
could be dealt with on an individual basis.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 11, 2-6-89
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, responded that
locations were reoccurring at a rapid rate and staff" was
concerned about the increasing cost to the City. The main
concern was, in order to repair the sidewalk, cutting the root
system of a tree on private property without permission or a Hold
Harmless agreement.
Councilman Prescott asked if root barriers were installed and .
received, an affirmative %nswer from staff.
Mayor Kennedy directed staff to-return with a modified policy for
Council consideration. Council concurred.
(No vote taken on the motion).
5. PROPOSED HOLT AVENUE/NORTH OF'WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 147
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, reported
that this proposal had a 100% petition of all landowners in the
area that consisted of six single-family dwellings. She informed
Council that proponents of the annexation had some expectations
of possible future rezoning.
It was moved by Prescott, seconded by Kelly, to adopt the
following Resolution No. 89-6 which petitions the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) to proceed with proposed Holt
Avenue/North of Warren Annexation No. 147:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-6 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION FOR THE INHABITED
ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS HOLT AVENUE/NORTH OF WARREN
ANNEXATION NO. 147
Joseph Herzig read a letter from Valerie Via of 18222 Theodore,
Tustin. The letter questioned if an Environmental Impact Report
had been prepared. ~
Councilman Hoesterey said it appeared that the premise for the
annexation request was for rezoning and substantial increase in
the density of properties.
christine Shingleton clarified that the item proposed for action
was only the annexation proposal and any future rezoning request
would require submittal at a future date.
Patricia Theeland, property owner in ~he proposed annexation
area, spoke in favor of Annexation No. 147.
..
Discussion followed between Council and Mrs.' Theeland regarding
the question of rezoning.
Mayor Kennedy noted the only action being taken was the'
· annexation and Council was not inclined toward rezoning the
property.
~ .
Councilman Hoesterey was in favor Of forwarding the annexation
proposal to LAFCO and wanted to clarify that there were no
expectations that the zoning of the subject area would be changed
to a higher density as a condition of the annexation.
It was moved by Prescott, seconded by EdgaF, to adopt the
following Resolution No. 89-7 which confirms the application of
the Master Property Tax Transfer Agreement to the proposed Holt
Avenue/North of Warren Annexation No. 147:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-7 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE APPLICATION OF THE
MASTER PROPERTY TAX TRANSFER AGREEMENT TO THE PROPOSED HOLT
AVENUE/NORTH OF WARREN ANNEXATION NO. 147
Both motions carried 5-0.
6. PARK NAMING GUIDELINES
..
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to approve the
following park naming guidelines:
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 12, 2-6-89
1. The City of Tustin is the "City of Trees". Whenever
appropriate, parks should be named for a t~ee.
2. When a tree name is not available or suitable, and whenever
appropriate, park names involving a ranch theme could be used.
3. Since the Peters Canyon Wash runs through East Tustin, a
canyon theme could be used for parks developed in the Peters
Canyon area.
4. If a person pays for a park's development in its entirety, the
park could be named for them or the name of their choice as
approved by the City Council.
5. If none of the guidelines above are applicable, the park could
be named for a street location.
Councilman Kelly expressed his displeasure at staff surveying 27
cities for comments.
The motion carried 5-0.
XII. REPORTS
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - JAI~UARY 23, 1989
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar, to ratify the
Planning Commission Action Agenda of January 23, 1989. The
motion carried 5-0.
2. INVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 31, 1989
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edqar, to receive and file
subject report. The motion carried 4-1, Prescott opposed.
3. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND SUBMITTAL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN~S COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT DATED 6-30-88
It was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded by Edgar, to approve the
following Audit Committee recommendations regarding future audits
as contained in their Annual Report dated January 11, 1989:
1. In accordance with th~ City's Cable T.V. Franchise Agreements,
an audit of American Cable T.V. and Community Cable
Television's records for compliance with the franchise fee
provisions of the agreements.
3. The scope of the audit should be expanded to include testing
of purchases of $10,000 and above for compliance with the
government code and the City's purchasing ordinance.
4. The City should review the new Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard to
determine whether or not the City is exempt. If the City is
not exempt, steps should be taken to bring the City into
compliance.
5. The Police Department's procedures for handling property and
evidence should be reviewed and tested for compliance with
existing legal requirements.
6. The Committee suggests that the present auditor's engagement
be extended for one year with a new fee negotiated t~ include
the suggestions contained herein.
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kelly, regarding Item No.
2 of the Audit Committee's recommendations, that the Audit
Committee resubmit a further analysis regarding proper inventory
tagging levels and procedures; and the investigation of using
bar-coded devices.
The motion carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 13, 2-6-89
It was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded by Edgar, that staff submit
an Ordinance for Introduction establishing a five-member Audit
Committee with guidelines for residency requirements.
Maygr Pro Tem .Edgar requested that the majorityj but not the
total membership of the Audit Committee, be residents of the
City. Members could live in-the surrounding area' or own a
business in the City.
Council discussion followed regarding the residency composition
of the Audit Committee.
The motion carried 5-0.
Council concurred tha~ Audit Committee members, Jerry Weil and
Walt Sullens, continue to serve until the proposed Ordinance is
finalized.
4e
Council concurred to have a workshop with the newly formed Audit
Committee and discuss the City's financial policy.
EAST TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT MONITORING AND ANNUAL REVIEW REPORT:
1986-87 AND 1987-88 REVIEW PERIODS
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by EdGar, to continue subject
report until rescheduled by the Community D~velopment Department.
The motion carried 5-0.
5. EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR SCOPING MEETING
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by EdGar, to receive and file
subject'report. The motion carried 5-0.
6. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 46-2 IMPROVEMENT BONDS CONVERSION TO
FIXED RATE
XIII.
It was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
subject report. The motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC INPUT - None
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS
1. AUDIT COMMITTEE
Councilman Prescott thanked the Audit. Committee for the wonderful
year they just concluded.
2. GRAFFITI SITE
3,
Councilman Prescott reported graffiti at the bus stop across for
Far West Savings. He reinforced the need for immediate removal.
Mayor Kennedy clarified with the Director of Public Works
Council's wishes regarding graffiti removal and their commitment
for additional funding if needed.
DISPLAY OF PROPOSED CITY HALL BLUEPRINTS
Councilman Prescott requested that the blueprints and renderings
for the proposed City Hall be displayed for the public and
provided to Council at the February 21, 1989 meeting.
4. CITY LABOR RELATIONS
CounCilman Prescott expressed his concern regarding the city's
current labor relat, ions .and volunteered his mediation services
if needed.
COMMUNITY CARE FACILITIES
..
Councilman Hoesterey had learned, during recent contacts with
Senator Seymour, that the Senator co-authored a bill to establish
five communities in the State where the City Council would be
,.'
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page' 14, 2-6-89
xv.
empowered to review State community care facility applications
prior to their i~troduction into a c~mmunity and Senator Seymour
had asked whether the City of Tustin would volunteer as one of
.~he five test communities. Councilman Hoesterey encouraged the
City's participation in this project and will submit the matter
for further Council action.
6. MINIATURE-SIZED FIRE HYDRANT
Councilman Kelly reported a miniature-sized fire hydrant on "D"
Street near Orangewood/Lockwood Streets and requested staff
investigate how many are located in the City and can they provide
adequate fire protection.
7. COUNCILMAN KELLY APOLOGIZES TO }~YOR KENNEDY
Councilman Kelly apologized to Mayor Kennedy for remarks he had
made to her earlier in the Council meeting.
8. FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT AREA/OLWYN DRIVE AND RED HILL AVENUE
Mayor Kennedy reported her concerns regarding the Flood Control
District property at Olwyn and Red Hill. The abandoned railroad
property behind the residences on Olwyn Drive had recent dumping
of cement and other materials that extended onto the sidewalk.
The area residents had requested (1) removal of dumped items and
determine financial responsibility for that removal and (2) fence
the subject area. Additionally, property owners in the same
vicinity requested the County area on the west side of Red Hill
be cleaned on a regular basis and cemented; and there-was also
an abandoned house that could be potentially dangerous.
INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS RE~ARDING THE I-5 WIDENING
Mayor Kennedy noted a City-wide concern regarding the widening
of the I-5 and the number of residents that would be impacted.
She requested that the Council assist residents/business owners
and organize informational meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar'added that a map should be prepared as soon
as possible outlining the exact right-of-way for the freeway.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, requested that a
consultant be hired to accomplish the foregoing and serve as a
communicator between the effected residents and Caltrans.
Mayor Hoesterey disagreed that City taxpayer money should be
spent when Caltrans should be informing residents and noted
Caltrans lack of financial planning in acquiring the necessary
right-of-way property.
Council discussion followed regarding the extent of City
involvement in the project.
Mayor Kennedy said the most current informati.on should be
distributed and the residents assisted.
10. PROCLAMATION FOR SHIRLEY AND LES JOHNS
Mayor Kennedy requested a proclamation be awarded to Shirley and
Les Johns for their efforts in aiding the homeless. Council
concurred.
CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Kennedy announced the cancellation of Closed Session.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 15, 2-6-89
XVI. ADJOURNME~T
At 10:40 p.m., 'it was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded bv Edgar, to
recess to the Redevelopment Agency and then adjourn to an Adjourned
Regular Meeting on Tuesday, February 2!,- 1989 'at 7:00 p.m. The
motion carried 5-0.
MAYOR
iCIT¥ CLE'RK
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFOrNiA
FEBRUkRY 6, 19S9
1. CALL TO ORDER
o
The meeting'was convened from the City Council meeting at 8:08 p.m.
in the City. Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin,
California.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Ursula E. Kennedy, Chai.rperson
Richard B. Edgar, Chairperson Pro Tem
Ronald B. Hoesterey
John Kelly
Earl .J. Prescott
Members Absent: .None.
Others Present: William A. Huston, Executive Director/City Manager
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
Mary E. Wynn,. Recording Secretary/City.Clerk
Christine Shingleton, Director/CoMm. Development
Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works
Royleen White, Director/Community & Adm. Services
Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director
Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent
Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk
Daniel Fox, Associate Planner
Lloyd Dick, Building Official
Approximately 20 in the audience
AGENDA ORDER
4. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ~{E~DED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE TO~
CENTER AREA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Itfollowing: was moved by Hoesterev,~ seconded by 'Edqar,_ to approve, the
1. Adopt the following Resolution No. RDA 89-2 approving the
Agency's report to the City. Council on the subject Amendment
and authorizing transmittal to the City Council:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 89-I - A RESOLUTION OF THE CO~'E4IINITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING THE
AGENCY'S REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE A~IENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLA~ FOR THE TOWN CENTER
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ~D AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF REPORT
AND SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ~ENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLA2-~ TO CiTY
COUNCIL ,
2. Adopt the following Resolution No. RDA 89-3 approving and
.adopting 'Rules governing participation and preferences
project owners and business occupants in the Town Cente~
Project Area and authorizing transmittal to the City Council:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 89-3 - A RESOLUTION OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING.
ADOPTING RULES GOVER~ING PARTICIPATION A~D PRE.=R~JC_S=- '~ ~ BY
PROPERTY O~fNERS A}~D BUSINESS OCCUPA2~TS IN ~H- ~ TOWN C-.~T~R=~
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA~ND AUTHORIZIN~ TRA~SMITTAL OF SAiD
RULES TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
The motion carried 4-0, Prescott abstained.
RECESS
·
At 8:11 p.m., the meeting was recessed Co the City Council meeting.
RECONVE1TE
..
At 10:40 p.m., the meeting was reconvened.
REDEVELOP~.IENT AGENCY MI~UTES
Page 2, 2-6-89
AGENDA 6RDER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - j~NUARY 16, 1989, REGULAR MEETING
It was moved bv Hoesterev, seconded by Edcar, to approve the
Minutes of January 16, 1989. The motion carried 4-0, Hoesterey
abstained.
APPROVAL OF DE~MA/~DS IN THE ~.~OUNT OF $19,155.62
.
·
It was moved by Hoesterev, seconded by Edcar, to approve subjec~
demands in the amount of $19,155.62. The motion carried 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS - None
7 ·
ADJOU~hR~EI;T
At 10:41 p.m., the meeting was adjourned to an Adjourned
Meeting on Tuesday, February 21, 1989, at 7:00 p~m.
RECORDING ~. ECP. ETARY
CHAIRPERSON