Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 1968 02 19 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL February 19, 1968 CALL TO Meeting called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Mack. ORDER II. PLEDGE OF Led by Mayor Mack. ALLEGIANCE III. INVOCATION Given by the Reverend J. Cla~k, Associate Pastor of Trinity United Presbyterian Church.- ROLL Present: Councilmen: Mack, Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller CALL Absent: Councilman: Ring Others Present: City Administrator Harry E. Gill City Attorney Ken Bryant City Clerk Ruth C. Poe Planning Director James L. Supinger APPROVAL OF Moved 'by Coco, seconded by Miller that minutes o'f MINUTES February 5th meeting be approved as mailed. Carried. VI. PUBLIC 1. ZONE CHANGE 68-164 HEARINGS APPLICATION OF GARDEN LAND COMPANY, LTD. FOR REZONING FROM PD 3500 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 3,500 SQ. FT. PER DWELLING UNIT) TO R-3 (MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT. Site is approximately 15 acres and fronts 742 feet on the North side of McFadden Street and 583 feet on the West side of Williams Street, and excludes the site presently occupied by the service station. Hearing opened at 7:32 P.M. Staff report and Planning Commission recommendations for appro. val presented by Mr. Supinger. Mr. Hugh Halderman, 1833 East 17th Street, Santa Ana, Engineer ror the applicant, spoke on behalf of this Zone Change, stating that it is in conformance with the General Plan, compatible with identical zone change approved in December of last year and the land is suitable to the use suggested. There. being no objections or further comments, the hearing was declared closed at 7:36 P.M. Moved by Miller, seconded by Klingelhofer that Zone Change Application 68-164 be granted. In answer to questioning by Councilman Coco, Mr. Supinger stated that all of the zone changes to R-3 in the South and West Tustin Area have been in con- formance with the General+Plan. However, we are reaching a point where we have some amount of land which does not appear to be developing as fast as it Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 2 is rezoned. The market can only eat up so many new apartments, so it may be some time before all are utilized~ Mr. ~nping~r stated that copies Of each rezone are sent to the School Districts and they are aware of this density° Above motion carried. Moved by Miller, seconded.by Klingelhofer that Ordinance No, 389, approv~ng Zone Change 68-164 of Garden Land Company, have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. 2. ZONE CHANGE 68-165 APPLICATION OF DEAN W. FRANCIS ON BEHALF OF THE HESPERIAN FOUNDATION LTD. FOR REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.5 ACRES FROM C-2 (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT TO R-3 (MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT. Site fronts approximately 450 feet on the South side of McFadden Street and approximately 240 feet on the West side of Pasadena Avenue. Hearing opened at 7:40 P.M. Staff report and Planning Commission recommendations for approval presented by Mr. Supinger. There being no objections or comments, the hearing was declared closed at 7:41 P.M. Moved by Klingelhofer0 seconded by Coco that Ordinance No. 390, approvlng Zol~e Change 68-165 of Hesperian Foundation, have first reading by title only. Carried unanimously. VII. OLD 1. ORDINANCE NO. 385 BUSINESS AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL AS PUBLIC NUISANCES OF ABANDONED, WRECKED, DISMANTLED OR INOPERATIVE VEHICLES OR PARTS THEREOF FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY OR PUBLIC PROPERTY NOT INCLUDING HIGHWAYS AND RECOVERY OF COSTS OF ADMINISTRATION THEREOF AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 22660 OF THE VEHICLE CODE. Councilman Miller questioned Section 12, and suggested some nominal charge of $5.00 or $10.00 to cover cost of appeal. Moved by Klingelhofer, seconded by' Coco that Ordinance No. 385, providing for the abatement and removalas public nuisances of abandoned, wrecked, etc., vehicles, with the addition of the wording "together with a $10.00 fee" in Section 12, have first reading by. title only. Carried unanimously. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pgo 3 2. ORDINANCE NO. 386 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CA/LIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESIGNATED RED HILL AVENUE - COMO ROAD ANNEXATION (REVISED) TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN. LoCation - 40 acre parcel known as B0rChard a~ SoUtherly corner of Red Hill and Edinger, and 5 acre parcei known as MUllin Lumber Co. at Northerly corne~ of Red ~ll and Edinger. Moved by Cocor seconded by Miller that Ordinance No. 386 have second. reading bY title only. Carried unanm~'~'~usly. Moved by Millerr seconded by Klingelhofer that Ordimanc~ No. 386, ~pproving the Red Hfll A~en~e ~ como ~oad A~nexatloh {ReVised), be ~assed ~ ad0p~e~. Carried By roll call. Ayes: Mack, Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller. Noes: None. Absent: Ring. 3. ORDINANCE NO. 387 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A CITY BEAUTIFICATION FUND. Moved by Miller, seconded by Coco that Ordinance No. 387 have second reading by title only. Carried unanimously. Moved by Coco, seconded by Klingelhofer that Ordinance No. 387, establishing a City Beautification Fund, be passed and adopted. Carried by roll call. Ayes: Klingelhofer, Coco, Miller. Noes': Mack. Absent: Ring. Councilman Coco stated that all on the Council~ including the Mayor, are unhappy about 'the way this money is coming into the City, namely that of a Federal tax being taken from the, property owners and then being adopted by the County. As a protest to the way it is being adopted, we are putting it in a special fund to always remind everybody of the way we had to accept the money. 4. REQUEST OF PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CENTER ISLAND ON FIRST STREET FROM "H" STREET TO NEWPORT AVENUE. Mayor called a three minute recess to enable interested parties to view the two proposed plans on display. Meeting reconvened at 8:00 P.M. Correspondence from the Chamber of Commerce and the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission was read by the City Clerk. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 4 Mr. Earl Rowenhorst spoke on behalf of the Board of.Directors of the Tustin Savings and Loan Association, stating that the Savings and Loan ownes 417 feet of undeveloped land on First Street (approximately ten acres of land), and requested that this Center Island be held in abeyance for at least six months so that their plan of operation can be worked out. The Association is not entirely against center dividers, but ~re opposed to this one at this time due to the undeveloped property. Mr. ~ick Barletta, representing the .Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce, stated the Board is not against dividers, but they are at this time asking that a total plan be worked out and that the property owners along the path be given some opportunity to speak and be heard at a public hearing. Mr. William Micka, Director of Real Estate, Thriftimart Inc., 1837 South Vermont, Los Angeles, owners of a large parcel at Holt Avenue, First Street and Fourth Street. Mr. Micka stated they were unaware of this proposed divider until this morning. They have tried to cooperate in the best interests of the City of Tustin with the Engineering Department and Planning Department regarding the possible development of this property. They would suggest that Thriftimart Inc. Engineering Department have the opportunity to study effects of this project on their property. As requested by Councilman Coco, Mr. Charles Greenwood spoke on the overall tenure of Chamber Committee actions, stating that their thought was that the City should have a capital improvement program encompassing not only beautification and safety, but access to commercial property. The Committee would like to see a report by the City staff which would indicate specifically what the overall plan is for the City on center divider strips° Then, if money is availabe, they could be put in. The Chamber is no~ opposing this they are merely asking that it be studied along with the other projects in the City capital improvement program. In answer to further questioning, Mr. Greenwood stated that the Committee is interested in both a complete capital improvement plan and a study of center dividers and beautification. It is understood that the City is hiring a City Engineer and one of his main jobs will be to prepare a capital improvement program, which would include sidewalks, streets, dividers, City Hall, etc. Part of that overall study would be the center divider study, and perhaps this could be the first step in the overal. 1 program. At that time, property o~ners and the Chamber could review the plan and a public hearing be held. These plans should be engineered as to where dividers can logically go and then decide which comes first. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 5 Mr. Quentin Fleming, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commissfon stated that the goal of the Parks and Recreation Commission is the saturation of all main arteries. Many streets are not ready~ such as Fourth Street to Newport. Keeping in mind all major arteries, the City must first be squared off to assure they are all in the City and that curbs are installed. The City is now installing center islands on Red Hill Avenue to the South. Newport Avenue cannot be completed until the tracks are rem6ved. First Street is the only street available at this time. Next logical island would be Fourth Street from "D" Street tO Prospect Avenue, but the north side is not developed an~ Curbing is not in. Mr. Nick Barletta answered questioning by CoUncilman ~iller, stating that the Chamber is not opposing center dividers, but would like to look at the total picture and have public hearings held and property owners given the opportunity to be heard. The Chamber did not go into the aspect of number of left turns which should be provided. The Chamber's motive was to gain time to give property owners a chance to be heard.. In answer to Councilman Klingelhofer, Mr. Gill stated that center islands will be a natural development out of overall plans of arterial streets within the City and adjacent to the City. It is the staff's intent to develop a program which would encompass the eleven square miles that are included in the General Plan as the potential City. Any portion of this could be studied at a more rapid rate than the overall plan, but there may be some deficiencies in coming up with a piecemeal approach. An overall plan of both secondary and primary arterials and all related improvements therein such as drains, center islands, curbing, etc., may take quite a bit of time. With someone working on this program full time, he would envision that at least by the following year's budget, there should be a fairly general six year program. This'coming fiscal year there may be a rough long range program. The following year would give a more detailed long range program. There are many things to consider~ There is a preliminary estimate of some five million dollars worth of drain needs in the community. Center islands certainly will be affected by the drainage that is installed in the street right-of-way. Underground utilities will have a bearing. There are a lot of ramifications and no definite time can be given. Councilman Klingelhofer commended the Parks and Recreation Commission and stated that it is only through their efforts and hard work to improve such streets as Fourth and Seventeenth, that we have what we do have, and they are certainly improvements and not detriments. At the same time, he appreciates the view of good planning. Councilman Ktingelhofer said he did not believe he is ready to make a decision at this meeting. He appreciates the concern of the property owners, but feels that perhaps something could be worked out that would not be costly to the City or a disadvantage to the property owners. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 6 Councilman Miller stated he would not like to see the center divider study held up for a detailed drain Study. He suggested that the Parks and Recreation Commission come in with a center island master pla~ and a public hearing be set at a definite date; then see how it conflicts with underground utilities, etc. This Would be the simplest phase o'f a master plan and one thing that we do have funds set aside for. Councilman Miller stated that he is primarily interested i~'safety and has seen many cities going to divideKs just for the safety aspect to cut down on unlimited left turns. COuncilman Coco stated ~e believed ~here is a ~ifference between a ~e~eral Pian and even a street tree plan and a plah, fo~ center dividers. They have been compared, but the big difference is time and priority. There is no need 0f a General Plan to concern ourselves with priority of development. You lay out a General Plan and it's there. When you come to things like center islands, they depend not only on the existing geography and topography, but on the develop- ment on either side. It is very easy to come up with a mast-er plan for dividers and then whether there are enough left turns or not will come out in the public meetings. Councilman Coco said he heartily concurred with the property owners being able to speak their piece. Mr. Micka of Thriftimart, Inc. stated that if necessary from 60 to 90 days would be adequate for an engineering study by his Company as to left lane requirements. MaVor Mack stated that at a meeting of the Economic Development Committee of the Chamber they were concerned as to whether this was the place to spend the money and this was one reason why the thoughts came out regarding long range planning of the capital improve- ments - not against the beautification or this center divider but that perhaps there were better places to spend the money. Councilman Coco stated he wanted to be sure the Chamber understood that there are various funds available in the City and that some expenditures came from the General Fund, some from special funds. That in the Beautification Fund, there is no other use. In the sidewalks and street improvements, there is a plan that has absolutely nothing to do with the beautification money. M~yor Mack stated that at the time of the study by the Chamber, there was no special Beautification Fund. At the time of the study, they were considering the funds that were budgeted for Parks and Recreation uses and the General Fund. Councilman Coco stated that there is a projection of some $14,000 per year income to be used solely for beautification in the City and it cannot be used in any other way. These funds will be available in the next fiscal year and the projects being prepared for here are for next year's budget. Of all the arguments pro- posed, possibly the Thrif~imart request for an engineering study of the property has the most foundation. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 7 We are getting the reputation of being a good city aesthetically, and 'he would like to see this reputation continued, but would like to give every opportunity for the property owners in the area to come in with solid studies. If in favor of a delay, it would be because the City is in the process of hiring a City Engineer who can work with the property owners and to provide for the Thriftimart property to have time for their staff to go over the plans. Mr. Fleming stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission could present a master plan of dividers in two months. Mr. Gill said that the next fiscal year budget ~eview will be in late May. Mgved by Coco, seconded by Klinge~hofer that the matter of the First Street Center Divider be placed on the agenda for the second meeting in April for public hearing. The Council hoped that reports from Thriftimart and a Master Plan from the Parks and Recreation Commission will be available, and that all property owners in the area will come in with concrete proposals. gouncilman Klingelhofer stated that he was glad to see that there is no great voice against center dividers in the community. He commented on the five disadvantages of cen~er dividers as given by Mr. Wheelock, Director Of Public Works, and read the following one disadvantage which he was pleased to see no one had utilized: "Most property owners d~.s!ike center dividers because of restrictions of left turns into his property. On commercial streets, it is quite common to find driveways located at 50 feet to 200 feet apart. Cer'~er dividers will not allow left turn access to all driveways, but will provide a safe storage space for a vehicle to wait in the left turn lane to make a U-turn and return to the driveway. The only prohibition against U-turns in this instance would be at signalized inter- sections, unless posted to permit such turns." Above motion carried. ~ouncilman Miller requested that the City Engineer come up with standards as to how Close to major signalized intersections left turns should be allowed. 5. REQUEST OF THE EXCHANGE CLUB OF TUSTIN FOR PErmISSION TO HELP PROPERTY OP~ERS AND BUSINESS- ~EN DISPLAY THE AMERICAN FLAG. Mr. J. W. Reaqan spoke on behalf'of this request, stating that they felt there was a need for this service. The Exchange Clubproposal is to purchase flags, poles, etc., for display in the business districts eight times per year for an annual fee of $i0.00. The Club would distribute and collect and store these flags. He felt that these flags could be Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 8 displayed from buildings, but would be more effective on poles placed in curbs or sidewalks. Mr. Rea~an said that as yetthey'have not .contacted the Chamber of Commerce. Mayor Mack made note Of the letter from the Director of Public Works stating his willingness to work with the Club in any way possible to see if this can be accomplished. Councilman Miller felt that the uniformity of flags erected in holes ~n the ground would be more effective and the best way to display these flags. Councilman Coco stated he is very much in favor of the program, but could see some prOblemS in drilling holes in the sidewalks° Mr. Reagan stated that there are ca~s available to place over holes and also stands, but both cost and storage space are big factors to consider. Moved by Miller that the Council ~rant permission to · t~E~n'~eC'Yub to provide hol~s in the sidewalk and to solicit to put up flags st~ject to working out t~e actual detail of the spacing of the holes, etc., with the Public Works Department. Motion died for lack of second. Moved by Coco, seconded by Klingelhofer that the Council of the City of Tustin go on record in full approval and ~cou~agement of the Exchange Club's desire to provide more exposure of the American flag in the City and encourage the Exchange Club to make whatever arrange- ments are necessary with the business owners and business tenants in the community. Councilman Coco stated that if the arrangements call for holes in the sidewalk, the City would have to give approval. He also stated he does not in any way want to discourage what the Exchange Club is trying to do. Above motion carried - Councilman Miller abstained. 6. HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM ORANGE COUNTY HARBOR DISTRICT AS PETITIONED TO LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION. Mayor Mack explained the Committee proposal presented at the executive session of the Orange County Division of the League regarding this matter. It was the consensus of the Committee report that the present handling of the Harbor funds was not adequate, that we should ~o back to the system of a regional concept of recreation whether it be inland or on the wate~qays, and that the funding of future parks and so forth be utilized for purchasing and building the facilities and that a user fee be utilized to help hold the cost down. All of the cities were in sympathy with. Huntington Beach as they were having a very difficult time trying to get funds on the mutual aid from the Harbor District to help them defray costs in their Huntington Harbor Marine area which is a City project rather than a ~arbor project. This hearing will be held February 21st before the Local Agency Formation Commission. It has Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 9 be~n requested that any City which cares to conment at.this hearing put their comments in writing an the9 should be present at the hearing~ The City of Tustin went on record in asking the Local Agency Fo.~mation Commission to defer any action until such ti]~e as the League report came out and all cities had a )etter chance to study the material that was furnished by the Local Agency Formation Commission, the Harbor Di:~tric~, and.any other cities involved in this measure. Co3ncilman Miller said he believed that the recommendation · h~t-th~ League Committee made is the most constructive th~.ng he has seen - that the DiStriCk Board, which is coiIpletely unresponsiVe to citizenry, be expanded to in~!lude.repreSentatives from all citiee ad the money be spent for developing recreatioh:faclli~ies all o~er th~ County. All people in all cities contribute and the majority get no benefit from it. He felt th t if HuItington Beach could get out of the District ~a~ Tu~tin could too. ~o~ncilman Klingelhefer felt that Tustin should speak in favor of Huntington-Beach,s withdrawal and then to ch llenge from the City of Tustin's standpoint, ~he va idity of the continuance of the Harbor District as it now ~tan~s and hope that others concur, and a '~rying to work out an agreement with the Harbor District for seven years with no success and that he is against the District as it now stands. Co ~cilman Miller stated that it had been pointed out tha~ the Directors of the Harbor District are appointed by ~he Board of Supervisors. Each Supervisor appoints one Director and at least one of these Directors does not live in the district of the Supervisor who appointed him , Part of the problem of the Harbor District is tha': the Directors are not really answerable to anyone exc,~pt the Supervisors. . Cou]~eilman Klingelhofer stated that the League presented ~he~.r committee recommendations and there is no way of kno~ing whether the League members present concurred wit~ this. This was merely a presented report and left up :o each Council to take action as required. He said he ~as not in favor of the Committee's recommendations. Col .cilman Coco said he was not in favor of the expa.nsion of any district. Would there be any ceiling on ~.he taxes that could be levied by this expanded district even if it did have more benefit to the County residents as a whole? Courcilman Klingelhofer stated he would be in favor of the elimination of the District and then to satisfy the needs for the beach area and the recreation needs of the County to develop some type of a commission basis without a district type of tax fixed structure, more of a user pay. Many philosophies as presented ~y the committees were well founded. Particularly that when recreation facilities are constructed from public funds, when completed, it is up to that facility to pay for itself in )me way. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 10 Mr. Gill stated that there were two recommendations in the League repor. t that-were somewhat inconfliet. One was that the harbors, beaches and parks should continue as a department of the County. They also recommend that they continue as a taxing agency. The minority report out of the Committee recommended that it no longer continue as a taxing agency but be a County department responsible for harbors, beaches and parks. Mayor Mack stated he would be in favor of supporting the request of Huntington Beach and of being against the Harbor District as it is now situated. Mr. Gill stated that the League will discuss and evaluate their report at the next business meeting. Councilman Coco stated that he had mixed emotions about encouraging a city to secede from a district to which they are prime contributors. Huntington Beach is going to be the largest city in this County some day. Councilman Klingelhofer stated that itrhad been brought 6ut that HUntington H~rbor was the real spark for this whole p~obtem and as he sees it as a TuStin resident, he is paying taxes to the Harbor District and they are using these funds to patrol Huntington Harbor, whereas Huntington Beach feels that they should, and are willing, to patrol it and it is apparently a city responsibility anyway. Councilman Coco said he had no mixed emotions about the abuses of the Harbor Commission and would be in favor of going on record as being against all these abuses. But to support a City which is seceding from a District that may conceivably collapse on its pull out, is setting a dangerous precedent. Could this Eity concentrate on the abuses such as patrolling, taking over of City functions that a City is willing to do, or such as the contribution of inland cities. Councilman Klingelhofer saw no validity to the continuance of the District and therefore stated he is for Huntington Beach and everyone else, and would support the minority report to abolish the District as a taxing agency. Moved by Klingelhofer, seconded by Miller that this Council recognize and support Huntington Beach's effort'to withdraw from the Orange County Harbor District as petitioned, and make it known that the City of Tustin is in support of the minority report as presented to the Orange County Division of the League of Cities. Councilman Coco presented a substitute motion striking the support of the secessiDn of the City of Huntington Beach from the Harbor Dist-rict, but to have the rest of the motion remain intact~ Motion died for lack of second. Above motion by .Councilman Klingelhofer carried - Councilman Coco abstained from voting. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 11 Mr. Gill was directed to send a letter to the Local Agency Formation Co~nmissi6n Conveying the Council's action. Mayor declared a three minute recess. Meeting reconvened at 9:26 P.M. VIII. NEW 1. ORDINANCE NO. 388 BUSINESS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO FINANCE. MoVed by KlingelhOfer, Seconded by Miller that ~rdinan~e NO. 388, amehding the Tustin City Code relative to finance, have first reading by title 9nly. Carried unanimously. 2. TRAVEL REQUEST - LOCAL TAX UNIT, BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, SACRAMENTO ~ovedby Miller, seconded by Klingelhofer that the City Administrator be authorized to review sales tax records at the State Board ofEgualization on March 15, 1968, and to incur all necessary costs at City expense. Carried. 3. TRAVEL REQUEST - ANNUAL OIL FIRE CONTROL SCHOOL, LAS VEGAS, NEVADA Moved by Miller, seconded by Klingelhofer that two representatives of the Fire Department be authorized to attend the Annual Oil Fire Control School to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada, April 26-28, 1968, and to incur all necessary costs at City expense~ Carried. 4. TRAVEL REQUEST - ANNUAL CALIFORNIA PARKS AND RECREATION SOCIETY CONFERENCE, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA Moved by Kling~lhofer, seconded by. Coco that certain 'representatives of the City be authorized to attend ~he annual California Parks and Recreation Socl'I~7' 9onference to be held in San Diego, California, ~arch 2-6, 1968, and to xncur all necessary costs at City expense. Moved by Coco, seconded by Klingelhofer that the above motion be carried with amendment of the addition of the words "costs up to $463.00". Carried. 5. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Mr. Gill explained that the demand to Southern Pacific Company is the City cost of maintenance for the traffic signals at First ahd Newport for one year. The Main Street signalization was deferred by the City in order to receive benefit of the new P.U.C. action which will require maintenance and construction shared by the railroad. The P.U.C. will be sharing in maintenance which they have not done in the past. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 12 Moved by Coco, seconded by Miller that demands in the amount of $37r3~9.99 be paid. Carried.. IX. OTHER CITY ADMINISTRATOR BUSINESS 1. 1976 Summer Olympics Request from the City of Los Angeles for.a Resolution from Tustin inviting the 1976 Olympics to Los Angeles It was directed that a Resolution be prepared for the next Council meeiing. CITY ATTORNEY None X. INFORMATION The following correspondence received: AND CORRESPONDENCE 1. Department of Housing and Urban Development - Requesting Support. 2. M. Jorgensen of Orange County Ad Club relative to recognition luncheon 3. Tustin Chamber of Commerce - Resolution urging support of Tustin Centennial 4. Building Department - Monthly reports 5.Orange County Peace and Human Rights Council relative to use of firearms. XIo OTHER CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Request for permission to be absent from the State - C. Miller Moved by Klingelhofer, seconded by Coco that Councilman Miller be granted permission to be absent from the State from February 25th to March 2nd. Carried. 2.County Zone Change 68-3 located southerly of S~n Juan and easterly of Red Hill Avenue. Councilman Miller stated that the Planning Commission requested the County Commission to defer action until the property owners study was, completed. The significant thing is that it should comply with the General Plan study. Councilman Miller requested that the Council -- direct a letter to the County Planning Commission requesting denial of this Zone Change as it is an increase in density from 12 units to 25-30 units per acre and is in direct conflict with the Tustin Area General Plan which shows this a~ea as an R-1 zone. y.. Moved by Miller, Council direct a Commission urging as it does not c~ r-- Plan. Carried. Council Minutes 2/19/68 Pg. 13 seconded by Coco that the City letter to the County Planning ~ that Zone Change 68-3 be denied inform to the Tustin Area General 3. Annual Fire Department Program Councilman Klingelhofer stated that on the 14th of March at 6:30 P.M. the Fire Department will have its annual program and plan, to have the Deputy Fire Chief 'of. Lds Angeles as the speaker. All Councilmen are urged to attend if possible. 4. Centennial Ball Mayor Mack commented on the success of tie Centennial Ball and requested that a letter be sent to Lee Wagnet and her committee commending them for a job well cone and expressing the appreciation of the Council. Letter to be signed by all members of the Council. PUBLIC None XII. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned to a ersonnel session. Present: --, Councilmen Mac3c, Klinge~hofer, Coco, Ma. ler; City Administrator and City Clerk. ~~ Moved b Coco, seconded b Klin elhofer that meeting e adjourned. Carried. ~~~ TY CLERK ~~ MAYOR