HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 06-19-89MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF T~E CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CZTY OF TUSTIN,
JU~ 19, 1989
I®
II.
III ·
IV.
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ~LLEGIANCE
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kennedy at 7:04 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance
was led by Councilman Prescott.
INVOCATION - The Invocation was given by Mayor Kennedy.
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 Director
Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent
Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner
Randy Westrick, Recreation Supervisor
Melissa O'Neal, Recreation Consultant
Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk
Former Mayor and Mrs. Arthur Charleton
Approximately 50 in the audience
PRESENTATIONS
1. FUND RAISING PROCEEDS FROM THE TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER FUND,
INCORPORATED
Margarete Thompson, FUnd Raising Chairperson, reported
contributors to the Tustin Area Senior Center Fund consisted of
large and small amounts from the business~'c0mmunity and
individual senior citizens. She made special note of the
numerous donations from senior citizens on social security income
and the generosity of Ron Paige, Recreation Systems, Inc.
Special gratitude was expressed to members of the campaign
cabinet, senior task force and city staff. From the results of
a partnership between senior citizens and the community, she
proudly presented Mayor Kennedy with a check in the amount of
$415,000.
Mayor Kennedy commented that the senior center project was unique
because some of the funding was raised through private
contributions rather than government sources. Contributions
ranged from a substantial amount donated by the Irvine Co. to a
gift of one dollar from a Tustin resident and' all donors would
be acknowledged for their support and overwhelming generosity at
the dedication ceremonies to be held July 28, 1989. 41
2. DONATION FROM PACIFIC BELL
Arlene Steinert and Kathy Cooper, representing Pacific Bell,
shared in the community support of the Tustin Area Senior Center
by presenting to Margarete Thompson a donation in the amount of
$5,000.
Margarete Thompson expressed her appreciation for the donation
and the friendship that had developed during the project.
At Mayor Kennedy's request, Kathy Cooper reported on Pacific
Bell's program to eliminate employee use of styrofoam. 41
CITY COUNCIL M.~,~$TES
Page 2, 6-19-8 '
INTRODUCTIONS
Ve
Mayor Kennedy acknowledged members of the audience: Boy Scouts
from Troop No. 256 and the newly crowned Miss Tustin, Cathy
Reynolds. Miss Tustin spoke briefly to the Council and was
congratulated by Mayor Kennedy.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. GENERAL PLAN~~NT89-02(B) AND ZONECHANGE 88-03 - NORTHWEST
CORNER OF EDINGER STREET/JAMBOREE ROAD
Steve Rubin, Senior Planner, gave a staff report indicating this
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change was requested by the
Irvine Office Industrial Company to change the General Plan land
use designation and zoning of an 18.4 acre vacant parcel located
at Edinger and Jamboree Road. The applicant was proposing a
change to PC-IND which would allow the parcel to be incorporated
into the Irvine Industrial complex located immediately to the
north.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Edaar, seconded bv Kell/, to adopt the following
Resolution No. 89-83 certifying the Negative Declaration for
General Plan Amendment 89-02(B) and Zone Change 88-03:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-83 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AS ADEQUATE FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89-02(B) AND ZONE CHANGE
88-03, INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved by Edaar. seconded bv Kelly, to adopt the following
Resolution No. 89-84 approving General Plan Amendment 89-02(B):
RESOLUTION NO. 89-84.- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLANAMENDMENT 89-
02(B), A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
FROM P & I (PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL) TO I (INDUSTRIAL) ON THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EDINGER STREET AND
JAMBOREE ROAD
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved bv Edaar. seconded bv Kelly, that Ordinance No.
1025 have first reading by title only. T~e motion carried 5-0.
Following first reading by title only of ordinance No. 1025 by
the City Clerk, it was moved bv Hoesterey, seconded by Edaak,
that Ordinance No. 1025 be introduced as follows: -
ORDINANCE NO. 1025 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 88-03, A
REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
EDINGER STREET AND JAMBOREE ROAD FROM P & I (PUBLIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL) TO PC-IND (PLANNED COM~ff/NITY - INDUSTRIAL)
The motion carried 5-0. 81
2. G~NEPJJ., PLaN XMENDMENT 89-02(D): REVISIONS TO THE LAND USE
ELEMENT
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, reported
revisions to the land use element were in response to recent
court decisions effecting requirements in State law for cities
to define building intensity and population density standards in
their General Plans.
Councilman Kelly questioned references on pages 10 and 15 of the
Land Use Element to "increase in taxes" and requested those
outdated statements be deleted or revised.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3, 6-19-89
Following Council/staff discussion, Council concurred to address
those statements and concerns during a comprehensive review of
the General Plan revision program:
Council/staff discussion followed regarding the timeline for
~hat revision of ~he General Plan, which would be an approximate
12-18 month process.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Publi¢ Hearing at 7:30 p.m. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Hoesterev. seconded by EdGar, to approve General
Plan Amendment 89-02(D) by adoption of the following Resolution
No. 89-81:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-81 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89-
02(D), AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The motion carried 5-0.
Due to an agenda omission, Christine Shingleton requested the
City Council take the following action:
It was moved by Hoesterev. seconded by EdGar, to certify the
Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 89-02(D).
The motion carried 5-0.
81
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89-02(C), ZONE CHANGE 88-02 AND EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, stated
the intent of the amendments was to implement the school
facilities agreement that was executed between the Irvine Co. and
the Tustin Unified School District and a Memorandum of
Understanding between the City and the Irvine Co. The agreement
required that the community park originally proposed at Tustin
Ranch Road/Irvine Boulevard be relocated north of Irvine
Boulevard to accommodate expansion of the proposed East Tustin
area high school site.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by Edaar. sg¢onded bY Kelly, to approve Addendum 89-
01 to the East Tustin Specific Plan EIR 85-2 and recertify Final
EIR 85-2 and all subsequently adopted Supplements and Addenda by
adoption of the following Resolution No. 89-87:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-87 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT EIR 85-2 FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AND
ADDENDUM NO. 89-01 FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-02(C), ZONE
CHANGE 88-02 AND EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01 AND
FINDING THAT THE FINAL EIR, AND ALL SUBSEQUENT ADDENDA AND
SUPPLEMENTS ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE PROJECT AND ALL FEASIBLE
MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved bv Hoeste~e¥, seconded by ~dqar, to approve General
Plan Amendment 89-02(C) by adoption of the following Resolution
No. 89-88:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLANAMENDMENT 89-
02(C), A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTOR 7 AND 11 OF THE EAST TUSTIN
SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA
The motion carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL ¥ 'TTES
Page 4, 6-19-8
It was moved bv Hoesterev. seconded bv EdGar, that Ordinance No.
1024 have first reading by title only. The m_otion carried 5-0.
Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1024 by
the City Clerk, it was ~oved bv EdGar, seconded by Hoestere~,
that Ordinance No. 1024 be introduced as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1024 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 88-02, A
REQUEST TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTORS 7 AND
OF T~E EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA
The ~otion carried
It was moved by EdGar. seconded by Hoestere~, that Ordinance No.
1026 have first reading by title-only. The ~otion carried 5-0.
Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1026 by
the City Clerk, it was ~oved by H0esterev. seconded by EdGar,
that Ordinance No. 1026 be introduced as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1025 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT 88-01, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN LAND
USE PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN SECTOR 7 AND 11 OF THE
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AND NARRATIVE TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
SPECIFIC PLAN
The motion carried 5-9.
4. GENEP.%L PLAN AMENDMENT 89-02(A): 1989 REVISIONS TO THE HOUSING
ELEMENT
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner, reported that the 1989 revisions
constituted changes to the 1984 Housing Element in order to
update statistical infoz~mation and provide current data as a
result of recent changes in State law. The revisions also
addressed the Regional Housing Needs Assessment figures provided
by Southern California Association of Governments.
Councilman Kelly questioned why the letter to the City Manager
from the Department of Housing and Community Development dated
May 31, 1989, was copied to Irwin Schatzman 6f the Carma-Sandling
Group.
William Huston, City Manager, responded that the information was
a matter of public record and anyone could request to be included
on the mailing list. He noted that the State Housing agency had
historically been very aggressive on housing policy and, with
discussions at the State level concerning growth and traffic
management, this was an excellent opportunity for housing
advocates to argue that cities should have more intense
development in order to obtain housing closer to employment
centers.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar commented on the quandary created between
addressing the housing programs in the community and the desires
of the State. He said it was a difficult task and commended
staff for their efforts.
A brief discussion between Mayor Kennedy and s~aff followed
regarding military base housing and its effect upon the City,s
low-moderate housing count.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved by EdGar. SeConded by Kelly, to approve General Plan
Amendment 89-02(A) by adoption of the following Resolution No.
89-82:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-82 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89-
02(A), REVISING THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The motion carried 5-0.
81
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 5, 6-19-89
5. APPEAL OF AMENDMENT TO USE PERMIT 88-8 (17602 E. SEVENTEENTH
STREET, SUITE 105)
Steve Rubin, Senior Planner, gave a background report on the
development of an office/retail center on Seventeenth Street
which allowed for 50% retail space and 50% office space. He
noted the following reasons for the Planning Commission's denial
of a request to amend the original Use Permit allowing the
installation of a 1,000 square foot dental office in the retail
portion of the project: original conditions of approval
specifically prohibited medical/dental use, dental office space
would cause allowable amount of office space to be exceeded,
incompatibility of office use within retail area, preservation
of potential sales tax revenue, inconsistent signage and, the
major concern, inadequate parking.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 7:50 p.m.
The following members of the community spoke in opposition to
denying the subject appeal:
Don Carter, D.D.S. (applicant)
Terry Tvrs, representing Colco Prospect
There were no other speakers on the subject and the Public
Hearing was closed at 7:55 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar expressed his concern regarding the parking
insufficiency. He did not want to create a short-term acceptable
solution and questioned if the applicant could be permanently
constrained to the 4 parking spaces for 1,000 square feet.
Mayor Kennedy commented that one of the duties of the City
Council was to protect tax sources in order to provide services
to the citizens and the 50% retail policy was established for
that reason. She said for the economic protection of the City
and for orderly, well-planned development within the community
she did not believe this case deserved special findings. She
encouraged the doctor to establish his practice in Tustin by
waiting until a tenant vacated or locate space within a medical/
professional center.
Councilman Kelly did not believe government acted prudently when
it attempted to dictate to developers what the best use of their
property would be.
It was moved by Kelly, seconded by Prescott, to overrule the
Planning Commission's denial of the requested amendment to Use
Permit 88-8 (Resolution No. 2598).
Councilman Prescott noted there were other shopping centers in
the community with optician/dental offices that did not cause
parking problems. He felt the only viable argument was the
diminishment of the sales tax base but he was not that greedy for
tax dollars to deny dental care to citizens.
Councilman Hoesterey was concerned with setting a precedent for
additional medical offices in the center. When shopping centers
were planned they are developed under a set of criteria
established to not only preserve revenue but eliminate excessive
parking problems that also effect the surrounding neighborhoods.
He said perhaps a compromise could be reached if other medical
facilities were prohibited and he expressed concern regarding
such a selection process.
Mayor Kennedy questioned staff if there was a way to impose
limitations.
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development,
suggested, should the City Council wish to accommodate the
dentist's request, that there be conditions lifting the
restriction on medical uses to a provision of only a 1,000 square
foot tenancy with parking restrictions. Staff would prepare a
Resolution with such conditions and submit to the City Council
CITY COUNCIL MI'-VfEs
Page 6, 6-19-8
for action. She asked that the record reflect her certainty that
variance applications would be received on future retail uses as
a result of that action.
Council/staff discussion followed concerning precedent setting
action and parking space standards/restrictions.
As a substitute motion, ir was moved by Kennedy. seconded by
Hoestere~, to adopt the following Resolution No. 89-77 denying
the subject appeal:
P~8OLUTION NO. 89-7? - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF AN AMENDMENT
TO USE PERMIT 88-8, REQUESTING TO AMEND CONDITIONS 1.4 AND 1.8
OF EXHIBIT "A" TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2494, TO
AUTHORIZE THEESTABLISHMENT OF A DENTIST'S OFFICE WITHIN A RETAIL
TENANT SPACE IN A COMMERCIAL CENTER
The substitute motion failed 2-5, Edgar, Kelly and Prescott
opposed.
As a second substitute motion. ~t was moved bv Edaar, seconde,!
by Prescott, that staff submit for Council action a Resolution
outlining restrictive parking requirements for a 1,000 square
foot tenancy (Amendment to Use Permit 88-8).
The second substitute motion cart%ed 4-], Kennedy opposed. 81
RECOVERY OF CITY INCURRED COSTS OF ABATEMENT OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE
LOCATED AT 170 EL CAMINO REAL
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, stated
the Public Hearing was for the purpose of assessing charges to ·
the property owner for work completed to alleviate a code
enforcement problem at subject property. She noted there would
be a continuing enforcement problem with maintenance of the
property and requested City Council direction for alternative
mechanisms of future abatement.
Mayor Kennedy opened the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m. There were
no speakers on the subject and the Public Hearing was closed.
It was moved bv Edaar, seconded bY Kennedy, to access the charges
of four thousand three hundred and fifty eight dollars and fifty
three cents ($4,358.53) against the property as a special
assessment and lien.
The motion carried 5-0.
It was moved bv Edaa~. seconded bv Kelly, ~o ins~ru¢~ s~aff to
initiate abatement proceedings to demolish the house at 170 E1
Camino Real as a substandard structure.
Mayor Kennedy felt it was only appropriate to discuss in general
the options available to the Council for health and safety
protection of the public. With the strong stand the Council had
taken on private property rights, she wanted to proceed slowly
with a process resulting in the demolition of personal property.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar stated when a property owner, over a period
of years, showed complete disregard for health and safety, they
relinquished their private property rights for the betterment
of the community and the lengthy legal process would give the
property owner ample opportunity to rectify the problem.
Councilman Kelly said it would take a strong imagination to think
of the property as someone's home, it had minimal property value,
and he did not view the proposed action as an invasion of private
property rights.
Councilman Hoesterey stated the legal process would take
approximately 3-4 years before final action could be completed
giving the property owner sufficient time to take corrective
measures. The Council was caught in a dilemma because if a child
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7, 6-19-89
VI.
XTI.
was injured due to substandard property, the public would
ascertain that the Council did not act quickly enough and, if the
property was demolished, others would judge the Council acted too
quickly and ignored personal property rights. He believed the
best method was to direct the City Attorney to proceed with the
legal process.
Councilman Prescott wanted the matter resolved in the courts
through litigation instead of using the force of demolition° The
City had the right to sue the landowner and compel them to
correct the problem instead of the City correcting the problem
for the property owner.
As a substitute motion, i% was ~oved by prescott, seconded b~
Kennedy, to direct the City Attorney to proceed with litigation
action forcing the landowner to be responsible for property
improvements meeting public health, safety and zoning standards.
Council/City Attorney discussion followed clarifying the various
legal options available to the City Council.
Council concurred to withdraw all previous motioDs.
It was moved by Edgar. seconded bv Pre$cptt, to direct staff to
initiate court proceedings to obtain a judgement forcing the
property owner to renovate the structure and property.
The motion carried ~-Q. 81
PUBLIC INPUT
1. EXTENSION OF LIBRARY HOURS
·
Mark Bachan, 215 S. Prospect #B10, Tustin, requested a letter
from the City Council be forwarded to the County Librarian
supporting extension of library evening hours.
Council concurred to forward a letter supporting his request.
REPORTS (AGENDA ORDER)
5. ASSAULT ON CITY MAINTENANCE WORKERS
Council concurred that this item be taken out of agenda order
to accommodate the speaker.
Michael David, 445-1/2 Sixth Street, Tustin,'expressed concern
regarding an incident of violence following the Chili Cook-Off
on June 4, 1989, and requested that the annual event be
terminated or relocated.
It was moved bv Kelly. seconded by Edaar to receive and file
subject report. '
Councilman Prescott did not want the report to be interpreted as
placing blame for the violence on The Swinging Door bar. He
believed the incident occurred as a result of the Chili Cook-Off
and access to alcoholic beverages.
Lillian Williams, owner of The Swinging Door, reported the
Police Department had continually monitored the bar during the
Chili Cook-Off, she had security on the premises, she did not
allow the sale of hard liquor after the Chili Cook-Off began and
the incident of violence did not involve The Swinging Door.
Councilman Kelly was sympathetic toward The Swinging Door but
reiterated that the Chili Cook-Off on E1 Camino Real contributed
to the lawless atmosphere. The street was strewn with trash and
he had seen photographs that would be used when determining the
location of next year's Chili Cook-Off. '
Mayor Kennedy verified with staff that the Chili Cook-Off ended
at approximately 4:30 p.m. and the altercation occurred at 5:30
p.m. She felt that the only relationship between the Chili Cook
CITY COUNCIL , ~TES
Page 8, 6-19-,
VII o
Off and the altercation was the shared location on E1 Camino
Real.
Councilman Hoesterey thought the way the report was interpreted
related directly to whether or not a person was in favor of the
Chili Cook-Off prior to the event. The subject incident was two
individuals involved in an assault and it was now a police/court
matter.
Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police, reported details of the
assault and the police investigation. He stated it could not be
determined that the assault occurred because of the Chili Cook-
Off or The Swinging Door and excellent cooperation had been
received from The Swinging Door ownership during the Chili Cook-
Off. He noted that the Police Department would appreciate having
access to any photographs that had been taken.
The motion carried 5-0.
82
CONSENT CALENDAR
Item No. 7 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Councilman Kelly
and Items No. 17 and 18 were removed by Councilman Prescott. It was
moved by Kelly. seconded bY Edqar, to approve the remainder of the
Consent Calendar.
Mayor Kennedy commended staff on their expeditious response regarding
Resolution No. 89-94 (Item No. 6 ) and Councilman Prescott requested
a letter supporting co-sponsorship by the City's Congressional
representatives of the subject Bill. Council concurred.
The motion carried 5-0.
1. APPROVED MINUTES - JUNE 5, 1989, REGULAR MEETING
2. APPROVED DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,620,306.44
RATIFIED PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $204,530.73
50
3. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 89-11; CLAIMANT-FORREST T~J%TCHER, DATE OF
LOSS-4/18/89, DATE FILED WITH CITY-5/10/89
Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$189.76. 40
4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 89-12; CLAIMANT-SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
CO., DATE OF LOSS-3/20/89, DATE FILED WITH CITY-5/17/89
Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of
$4,000.00. 40
5. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPS 88-315 AND 88-316
RESOLUTION NO. 89-78 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 88-
315; and
RESOLUTION NO. 89-79 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 88-
316
Adopted Resolution Nos. 89-78 and 89-79 approving Tentative
Parcel Maps 88-315 and 88-316 respectively. 99
6. RESOLUTION NO. 89-94 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
RESOLUTION 2380, ALLOWING CITIES TO OBTAIN ZIP CODES WHICH
CONFORM WITH THEIR MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES
Adopted Resolution No. 89-94 supporting HR 2380 and authorized
staff to take appropriate action. 24
8. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTINUE OPERATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
Authorized the City Manager, through Minute Order, to continue
fiscal operations for 1989-90 at an appropriation level not
to exceed that of 1988-89 until such time as the budget
process can be completed. 50
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 9, 6-19-P-~
9. RESOLUTION NO. 89-97 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF MAIN STREET FROM PACIFIC STREET TO RTE. 55
(OCUTT PHASE III)
Adopted Resolution No. 89-97 approving the plans and
specifications for the subject project and directing the City
Clerk to advertise for bids. 868
10. RESOLUTION NO. 89-98 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS ALONG JAMBOREE ROAD BETWEEN
EDINGER AVENUE AND BARRANCA PARKWAY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
Adopted Resolution No. 89-98 approving plans and
specifications for the subject project and directing the City
Clerk to advertise for bids. 868
11. CA~tPETING FOR FIELD SERVICES OFFICE
Rejected the bid of Carpetime in the amount of $3,374.14 for
carpeting the Field Services office at 1472 Service Road and
authorized staff to readvertise the project and solicit
additional proposals. 86
12. ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ANDRELEASE OF BONDS FOR TRACT
NO. 13094
Accepted all public improvements within Tract No. 13094 and
authorized the release of all pertinent improvement and
monumentation bonds. 99
13. JAMBOREE ROAD EXTENSION (EDINGER AVEN~E TO BARRANCA PARKWAY)
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION AGREEMENT
Approved the Jamboree Road Extension Construction
Administration Agreement with the City of Irvine and
authorized the Mayor to execute said agreement. 45
14. ~LNIMAL CONTROL ~ SHELTER SERVICES AGREEMENT
Authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement for Animal
Control and Shelter Services at a cost of $70,366.00 for
fiscal year 1989-90. 45
15. REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY
Granted Jeff Chen a leave of absence without pay of forty-one
(41) working days from his employment with the City commencing
on June 26, 1989 and continuing through August 21, 1989. 86
16. RESOLUTION NO. 89-96 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN ORANGE
COUNTY COORDINATED ULTRA FREQUENCYLAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEM
Adopted Resolution NO. 89-96 as a commitment to participate
in the Orange County Coordinated 800 MHz UHF Law Enforcement
and Public Works Communications System. 82
19o CONTRACT JANITORIAL SERVICES - PARKS
Authorized the renewal of the Janitorial Services Contract for
the Park restrooms with American Building Maintenance Co.
(ABM) and amended the contract to reflect the current
Consumers Price Index which is five percent (5%) for the
period from April 1988 - April 1989. 45
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7, RESOLUTION NO. 89-89
It was moved by Hoesterev. spconded bv Edqai[, to approve the
following:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-89 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
THAT USE PERMIT 87-6 EXPIRED ON JUNE 1, 1989
The motion carried 3-~, Kelly and Prescott opposed.
81
CITY COUNCIL' ~TES
Page 10, 6-19, ~
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 17, STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR 1989-90
Councilman Prescott asked that this item be continued at the July 17,
1989, City Council meeting and, at that time, the amended language
from the previous investment policy be highlighted and a City Council
notification requirement be added.
William Huston, City Manager, responded that the Audit Committee was
currently reviewing the policy pertaining to the choice of inves~ent
institutions and the Audit Committee had adopted a policy regal, lng
City Council notification requirements. He stated both matters Would
be submitted to the Council for future review and action.
James Rourke, City Attorney, informed the Council that, by statute,
the Investment Policy required adoption in the month of June.
It was moved by Presco%~, Seconded by H~este~ey, to approve the
Statement of Investment Policy for fiscal year 1989-90.'
The motion carried $-0.
50
CONSENT CALEND~ ITEM NO 18, RESOLUTION NO. 89-80
Councilman Prescott welcomed the residents in Annexation No. 147 to
the City of Tustin.
It was moved by Prescott. seconded by EdGar, to adopt the following:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-80 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS ANNEXATION
NO. 147 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN (HOLT AVENUE, NORTH OF WARREN) ANNEXED
TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN
The motion carried ~-0.
Z4
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None
IX. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None
X. OLD BUSINESS
1. STATUS REPORT - JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE MONITORING PROGRAM
(JWA), COALITION FOR A RESPONSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTION (CRAS),
AIRPORT SITE COALITION (ASC) AND HELICOPTER OVERFLIGHT PROGRAM
TASK FORCE (HOPTF)
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, gave a
brief staff report concerning appointment of a resident to the
CRAS Board.
Mayor Kennedy noted the following residents had expressed
interest in serving on the CRAS Board of Directors: Kathy Weil,
Donald Saltarelli and Frank P. Greinke, Jr.
Council concurred that Kathy Weil be appointed as the City's
representative to the CRAS Board of Directors and Frank P.
Greinke, Jr. serve as alternate.
It was moved by ~0este~ey, seconded by ~dqar, to adopt the
following:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-93 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING ASSEMBLY BILL 1830 WHICH
CREATES AN AIRPORT JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
Councilman Kelly said adoption of this Resolution conflicted with
prior Council position that problems relating to air traffic
should be resolved at a higher level of government and for that
reason he felt the Council majority should deny the subject
Resolution.
Councilman Prescott found this was a petition to a higher level
of government and, therefore, consistent.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 11, 6-19-89
Ma, r Kennedy noted the City Council .,ad fought the FAA, the
Orange County Board of Supervisors, and any body deemed acting
improperly on behalf of residents and business.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar was unwilling to defer any decision of an
airport location to any agency other than the City Council.
Councilman Hoesterey noted there was a faction in Newport Beach
eliminating all sites except E1 Toro to minimize the impact of
John Wayne Airport overflights. CRAS had been established to
address alternate airport sites, but E1 Toro was not a viable
solution to the City Council.
The motion carried 4-], Kelly opposed, i01
2. 10-YEAR MASTER PLAN OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar highlighted the serious transportation
problems existing in Orange County and State.and Federal funding
was inadequate to meet those needs. He felt it was appropriate
to place the Orange. County Traffic Improvement and Growth
Management Plan on the ballot.
It was moved by Edgar. seconded bY Kennpd¥, to adopt the
fQllowing:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-95 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ORANGE COUNTY TRAFFIC
IMPROVEMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLACING
THE PLAN BEFORE THE VOTERS OF ORANGE COUNTY
The following members of the community spoke in opposition to
diamond lanes:
Carole Bryant, 15500 Tustin Village Way, Tustin
Larry Koenig
Councilman Prescott stated he had been active last year in
supporting Doris Allen's initiative which would have required all
gasoline sales tax be used for funding roads. His opposition to
the Plan included the following: he would never vote for tax
increases, subsidizing railways between Riverside County and
Irvine and the deviousness of placing the Plan on a special
election ballot in November.
Councilman Hoesterey supported the Resolution, not necessarily
the Plan, because the Resolution stated the issue would go to a
vote of the people and for it not to be placed on the ballot was
wrong, the voters should decide. In reference to the special
election, in most of the off-year elections, the "no" vote
carries more weight than the "yes" vote because the opposition
usually gathers more support. He suggested that the extensive
funds used for the public relations element of the OCTD be
diverted to transportation use.
Councilman Kelly was concerned about the process involved to
decrease taxes but unfortunately State politicians had the
ability to propose desired tax increases. He was bothered by the
Plan and did not want the taxpayers to bear the expense of
placing it on the ballot.
The motion carried 3-~, Kelly and Prescott opposed. 54
3.POL~8/STA~DARDS FOR BANNER DISPLAY8
James Rourke, City Attorney, reported that the City can allow
such public event banners on its poles and standards while
prohibiting commercial banners.
It was ~oved by Edqar. seconded by Prescott, to direct staff to
submit for Council action a list of alternative sites on First
Street, Irvine Boulevard and Newport Avenue with the inclusion
of prioritized locations.
The motion carried 5-9.
93
CITY COUNCIL' W3TES
Page 12, 6-19. ~
XI. NEW BUSINESS
1. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS,
SIXTH AND PACIFIC STREETS
It was moved by Hoesterev, seconded by Edgar, to award the
contract for subject project to Jana Contracting Corporation of
Anaheim, California, in the amount of $295,698.00; and authorize
supplemental budget appropriation from General Fund reserve in
the amount of $24,300.00 to complete Contract funding and provide
for construction engineering and contingency costs.
Mayor Kennedy questioned if residents would be notified of
construction activity and received an affirmative response from
staff.
The motion carried ~-o. 868
2. AWaRD OF CONTRACT FOR STREET WIDENING/TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF RED HILL AND WALNUT
It was moved by Hoesterev. seconded by Kelly, to award the
contract for subject project to Excel Paving Company of Long
Beach, California, in the amount of $197,296.00.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar questioned when construction would begin and
received a response from staff of approximately July 17, 1989.
The motion carried 5-0. 868
3. LEVY OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 1989-90 FISCAL YEAR FOR THE
TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to approve the
following:
1. Adopt the following Resolution No. 89-90 ordering the
preparation of an Engineer's Report:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-90 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF
AN ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE LEVY OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR
THE 1989-90 FISCAL YEAR FOR THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING
DISTRICT
2. Adopt the following Resolution No. 89-91 approving the
Engineer's Report with correction as noted of Assessors Parcel
Number:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-91 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S
REPORT FOR THE 1989-90 FISCAL YEAR FOR THE LEVY OF ANNUAL
ASSESSMENT FOR THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTAND
FOR THE ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL TERRITORY TO SAID EXISTING
DISTRICT
3. Adopt the following Resolution No. 89-92 of intention to.levy
annual assessments, annex additional territory, and to set the
protest hearing for July 17, 1989:
RESOLUTION NO. 89-92 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO
ORDER THE ANNEXATION OF ADDITIONAL TERRITORY TO AN EXISTING
DISTRICT AND TO PROVIDE FOR AN ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENT FOR
THE IMPROVEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING OF PUBLIC
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING FACILITIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF
THE TERRITORY INCLUDED IN THE TUSTIN LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING
DISTRICT AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF
William Huston, City Manager, requested that Resolution No. 89-
92 be changed to reflect a Public Hearing date of July 17, 1989.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES.
Page 13, 6-19-89
XII.
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar requested a map be provided detailing the
Tustin Landscape and Lighting District.
Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, requested the first
Assessor's Parcel Number listed on page 11 of the Engineer's
Report, Exhibit A, (Resolution No. 89-91) be deleted and replaced
with 502-401-04.
Discussion followed between Mayor Pro Tem Edgar and staff
regarding expansion of the Tustin Landscape and Lighting
District.
The ~Qtion carried 5-0.
63
4. EQUIPMENT PURCNASE REQUEST
It was moved by Hoesterev. seconded by EdGar, to authorize the
purchase of a replacement Aerial Truck from Morrison Industries,
Inc., in the amount of $79,387.64.
The ~otion carried 5-0°
86
REPORTS
1. PL~/TRING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - JUNE 12, 1989
It was moved by Hoestere¥. seconded by Prescott, to ratify the
Planning Commission Action Agenda of June 12, 1989.
The motion carried 4-0, Kelly absent. 80
2. INVESTMENT SCHEDULE AS OF MAY 31, 1989
It was moved bY Hoesterev. seconded by Prescott, to receive and
file subject report.
The motion carried 4-0, Kelly absent. 50
3oTRANSIENTOCCUP;tNCY STUDY
It was moved bY Hoestere¥, seconded by Prescott, to receive and
file subject report.
The motion carried 4e0, Kelly absent.
81
4. W~RNER AVENUE BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION STATUS REPORT
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar stated the staff report was more detailed
than he required and cited examples of a status report he was
seeking.
Councilman Hoesterey questioned the use of'staff time to compile
data when the City Council would have little recourse against the
State if the project was behind s.chedule'.'
It was moved by EdGar. seconded by Hoesterev, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0. 54
5. ASSAULT ON CITY MAINTEN~NCE~WORKERS
See Page 7.
6. PHOTO RADAR SPEED ENFORCEMENT
It was moved by Hoesterev. seconded by Edgar, to receive and file
subject report.
The motion carried 5-0.
82
CITY COUNCIL } ~TES
Page 14, 6-19-~
7. SET BUDGET WORKSHOP DATE WITH COUNCIL
Council concurred to conduct budget workshops on July 10 and July
17, 1989, at 5:00 p.m.
50
xIXI. PUBLIC INPUT - None
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS
1. MAYOR PRO TEM EDGAR SELECTED AS "MAN OF THE YEAR-
Councilman Prescott congratulated Mayor Pro Tem Edgar on his
recent selection as Tustin "Man of the Year".
2. SUPPORT OF EXTENDING LIBRARY HOURS
Councilman Prescott supported Mark Bachan's request to gain
extension of the library,s evening hours.
3. ADJOUI~NMENT IN MEMORY OF SAMUEL FRANCIS
Councilman Prescott requested the meeting be adjourned in memory
of Samuel Francis, a resident of Tustin for 62 years who died
on June 15, 1989. ,
4. FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION
Councilman HoestereY'invited everyone to participate in the 10th
Annual Fourth of July celebration at the Tustin High School
Stadium.
UPGRADING OF SYCAMORE STREET FROM NEWPORT AVENUE TO RED HILL
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar requested a staff report outlining the
upgrading of Sycamore Street from Newport Avenue to Red Hill
Avenue.
6. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS - LAND USE
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar noted two possible areas for upgrading land
use within the City and questioned the timeline for improvements
on a short-term basis rather than delaying until comprehensive
language/policy of the General Plan was revised.
Christine Shing~eton, Director of Community Development,
recommended against incremental modifications addressing major
land use issues without a comprehensive analysis. Staff would
be utilizing consulting services, which would be submitted for
Council.approval in September of 1989, with phasing of individual
elements to take place over a 12-18 month period.
7. .JOINT MEETINGS TO INCLUDE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Councilman Kelly requested that the upcoming joint meetings
between the City Council and the Planning Commission/Parks and
Recreation Commission also include the Tustin Unified School
District Board of Education, both past and present Trustees.
·
~.. 8. COMMERCIAL JET FLIGHTS OVER PEPPERTREE DEVELOPMENT
Mayor Kennedy noted that her husband had identified a two-engine,
commercial jet flying over the meppertree development at 10:28
a.m. on a Sunday morning and requested staff to investigate.
9. ALL STAR CENTENNIAL PARADE
Mayor Kennedy announced that, due to the cooperation of the
Greinke family and University of California, Irvine, the City
would participate in the Ail Star Centennial Parade on July 5,
1989, at Angel Stadium. A 1930 Model A Coupe automobile donated
by the Greinke family and a new prototype called the UCI Solaris
would represent Tustin~s heritage and future in the parade.
Council ~oncu~red to appropriate funds in the amount of
approximately $500.00 for transportation of the vehicles.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 15, 6-19-89
XV. CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Kennedy announced the City Council would recess to Closed
Session to consider personnel matters pursuant to Government Code
Section 54957.
XVI. ADJOURRMENT
At 10:00 p.m., the meeting recessed to the Redevelopment Agency, then
to the above Closed Session, then adjourned in memory of Samuel
Francis to the Budget Workshops on July 10 and 17, 1989, at 5:00
p.m., and then to the next Regular Meeting on Monday, July 17, 1989,
at 7:00 p.m. (There would not be a City Council meeting on July 3,
1989).
XVII. FOLLOWING CLOSED SESSION - POLICE CHIEF WILLIAM FRANKS
It was ~oved bv Hoestere¥. secQtded bY Kelly, to approve a salary in
the amount of $80,000 per year and a one-time credit of 120 hours of
General Leave for Police Chief William Franks effective August 1,
1989.
The motion carried 5-0.
-~ CITY CLERK
1. CALL TO ORDER
5.
2®
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGE~TM OF
THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CAL~ .tNIA
JUNE 19, 1989
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Kennedy at 10:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin
California. '
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Ursula E. Kennedy, Chairperson
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
Steve Rubin, Senior Planner
Laura Kuhn, Senior Planner
Randy Westrick, Recreation Supervisor
Melissa O'Neal, Recreation Consultant
Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk
Former Mayor and Mrs. Arthur Charleton
Approximately 20 in the audience
APPRO~FAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 5, 1989, REGULAR MEETING
It was moved by Hoesterey. seconded by Edqar, to approve the Minutes
of June 5, 1989. The motion carried 5-Q. ·
APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,595.65
It was moved bY Ho,stet.y, seconded by. Ed~a~, to approve subject
demands in the amount of $11,595.65. The motion carried 5-0. 60
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - TUSTIN PROMENADE PROJECT
Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, reported
the Agency, in September of 1988, had approved an Exclusive
Agreement to Negotiate with CMS Development for proposed development
in the vicinity of the I-5 Freeway/Newport Avenue. Staff had
negotiated with CMS Development to identify major business terms for
preparation of a Disposition and Development Agreement with the
developer. The subject location was a blighted, irregular site of
3.9 acres and the proposed development was a 10,240 square foot
retail center, a 3,760 square foot Carl's Jr. fast food restaurant
and a minimum 105 room Marriott Fairfield Inn. The business terms
would provide for assistance to the developer in the amount of
$1,000,000 over a 10-year period to offset land acquisition, site
preparation, clearance costs and public improvement costs as
authorized by California Community RedevelopmentLaw. Repayment was
based upon an expected level of sales tax, transient occupancy tax
and tax increment; and based on the projected level of revenue, the
Agency's assistance would be repaid in approximately 5 years.
Important business terms included in the proposal was the
requirement of a covenant use restriction on the property and all
Agency resources would be repaid in the event of a sale transfer or
refinancing of the project.
Alan Kotin, representing Kotin, Regan and Mouchly, Inc., stated he
had been engaged by staff to review the CMS Development proposal and
to assist in the negotiations of the terms. He reported on the
amount of subsidy requested by the developer, the low risk factor
to the City, reasonableness of projected income and prospect of
repayment to City.
REDEVELOPME~"" AGENCY MINUTES
Page 2, 6-1 9
It was moved by Edaar. seconded bY Hoesterey, to approve a
Memorandum of Understanding between CMS Development and the Tustin
Redevelopment Agency and authorize the Chairperson and Executive
Director to execute the Memorandum°
Councilman Hoesterey said he viewed this as a positive project
because there was no obligation to the City unless the project met
revenue projections. Without resorting to eminent domain, a
developer proposed to take a blighted area and convert it into
income generating property that would benefit residents and
taxpayers. He liked the fact that rebates were tied only to after
a point in time when the City received tax money from the project.
Councilman Prescott thought staff and the consultant were
professionals who had thoroughly researched this matter. He found
no fault in their methodology but did have a philosophical
difference. His mathematical computations revealed the land cost
would be $31.67 per square foot and the Marriott Hotel/Carl's Jr.
organizations could well substantiate land values in excess of that
amount without the City providing a $1,000,000 subsidy. He noted
other landowners in Tustin who did not receive financial assistance
from the City. He was not critical of the individuals involved but,
from a philosophical viewpoint, he disagreed and felt it was a
misuse of public funds.
Councilman Kelly was disappointed with the amount of time and effort
devoted by staff to the project and could not believe it had been
authorized. He held a firm belief that the City should not enter
into any speculative real estate transactions and approve loans.
He could not believe that the "two champions of free enterprise"
involved in the project would approach city government and request
assistance. Their presentation was very impressive but he thought
it should be presented to a bank, which was the correct route. For
the City to be involved in this speculative real estate transaction
was wrong. .
Mayor Pro Tem Edgar stated the whole philosophy of a Redevelopment
Agency was commitment to spending money' in blighted areas with the
anticipation that by spending that money, revenue to the City would
be enhanced. There are those that can make a profit without the
assistance of the Redevelopment Agency, but the areas in question
were properties in need of enhancement. The benefitderived by the
City was more than just the repayment of funds, the City would
benefit from this project for many years° The benefit would enable
the City to maintain its strong financial position and he'viewed
this as an opportunity to continue that sound financial base.
Mayor Kennedy said it had taken her years to appreciate how a City
could change its image through the Redevelopment philosophy and it
was a tool used by people who were serious about the beautification
and economic health of the City. It was also a tool to enhance
areas so tangled in blight or other problems that only the
assistance of the Agency could give a developer the courage to begin
a project such as this one. The Agency was assisting the developer
during the first few years and then requesting complete repayment
in the tenth year. This could not be called a "give away", it was
a way to give the citizens of south Tustin something in which to be
proud by ridding the City of two terribly blighted areas and she
enthusiastically supported the project.
Councilman Prescott further objected to the assistance based on the
fact that the initial exclusive right to negotiate was granted by
the City Council on a non-competitive basis. He said there was a
"cozy" relationship between staff and the developer and, on a 5-0
vote, the Council voted to grant that exclusive right to negotitate
on a non-competitive basis and he thought the City was in violation
of their public trust if the non-competitive agreement was followed
by a $1,000,000 subsidy.
William Huston, City Manager, responded that the "cozy" relationship
was factually inaccurate. Mr. Cody Small had an interest in the
o .
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
Page 3, 6-1-9-89
property and that was the basis to request from the City an
exclusive right to negotiate. When a property owner asked for that
right, it had been the practice to comply.
Mayor Kennedy replied to Councilman Prescott that the word "cozy"
was offensive to the professional staff and she requested that,
although his objection was worthy of discussion, he word his
comments in a manner that did not insinuate staff was engaged in
illegal activity.
The motion carried $-~, Kelly and Prescott opposed.
6. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, EL CAMINO REAL
45
It was moved by Hoestere¥. seconded by Edqar, to authorize the
renewal of the Landscape Maintenance Contract for E1 Camino Real
with Porshia Alexander of America (PAA) and amend the contract to
reflect the current annual Consumers Price Index which currently
reflects an increase of five percent (5%) for the period from April
1988 - April 1989.
The motion carried 2-0.
OTHER BUSINESS - None
45
At 10:35 p.m., the meeting adjourned to the next Regular Meeting on
Monday, July 17, 1989, at 7:00 p.m. (There would not be a
Redevelopment Agency meeting on July 3, 1989).
.~~RDIN~ SECRETARY
CHAIRPERSON