Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 07-18-88MINUTES OF A I~E~ULAR I~EETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CN. IFORNIA JULY 18, 1988 .:~ CAI~L TI) ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANOE/INVOCATION The meeting was 'called to order by Mayor HoeSterey at 7:00 p.m. in the. City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy, and the Invocation was given by Councilman Edgar. II. ROLL CALL Councilpersons Present: Councilpersons Absent: Others Present: Ronald B. Hoesterey, Mayor Ursula E. Kennedy, Mayor Pro Tem Ri chard B. Edgar John Kelly Earl J. Prescott None William A. Huston, City Manager James G. Rourke, City Attorney Christine Shingleton, Dir. of Comm. Development Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works Royleen White, Dir. of Comm. & Adm. Services Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk Lloyd Dick, Building Official Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent Approximately [00 in the audience AOENDA ORDER IX. NEW BUSINESS 1. TU~TIN RA~O~ ROAD At Mayor Hoesterey's request, this item was considered out of agenda order for the benefit of members of the audience. Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, restated the staff's recommendation and indicated that the entire project would cost approximately $4,000,000. This total included the right-of-way costs from the Marine Corps, the bridge structure spanning the flood control channel, the railroad right-of-way and Edinger Avenue. The roadway portion of the project would be funded as outlined in a previous agreement with the Irvine Company. Mayor Hoesterey asked that members of the audience be allowed to speak on this matter even though it was not a Public Hearing item. Council concurred. The following members of the audience spoke in opposition to the Tustin Ranch Road project and their concerns included increased traffic and gridlock on ~alnut Street, excessive noise level, additional air pollution, threatened safety and security for adults and school children, lack of proper planning by the City, bypassing ef traffic gridlocks by using residential streets, delay of Council action until after the November election, location of the interchange, increased taxes and lack of solicited community i nvol vement: Todd Ferguson, 14872 Alder Lane, Tustin Guido Borges, President, Laurelwood Homeowners Assn. Steve Johnson, 1852 Pennington, Tustin John Swain, 14311 Raintree, Tustin Joe Langley, 14782 Hillsboro Place, Tustin Larry Bales, 2264 Juniper Rd., Tustin Carl Casslick, 2352 Caper Tree, Tustin Patrick Crab, 2371 Silk Tree, Tustin CITY COUNCIL MINUTM Page 2, 7-18-88 Anthony Trejo, 201 Kingsboro Circle, Tustin Terence Hickey, 1762 Roanoke, Tustin Audrey Rodriguez, 1741 Roanoke, Tustin A. G. Saltarelli, 2332 Fig Tree, Tustin Ed Shal~een, 1461! Alder Lane, Tustin Margaret Hope, 14572 Westfal 1 Rd., Tusti n Peer Swan, 1¢35! Morninglory, Tustin In addition to voicing his concerns, Laery Bales submitted a petition opposing the construction of the Tustin Ranch Roed/I-5 Interchange Project. Councilman Edgar said he was committed personally to reducing traffic on Red Hill and Walnut but felt that having heavy traffic on a very 4imited number of roads was not the best direction. The recommendation was not for a study, but for a project design report. Once a philosophical commitment to a road has been made, then it is critical to go through engineering analyses. He pointed out that traffic relief for the affected areas would be eased in the future by the extension of Jamboree Road to Chapman Avenue and passage from Irvine Blvd. to Edinger through the Marine Corps Air Station. The City had targeted, through careful planning, the sum of approxi- mately $15,000,000 for this passage. This was not taxpayers' money, but Federal Aid to Urban Highway funds and was very complex financial planning. He wanted a study to intelligently incorporate the significance of JanYooree Rd. mitigating traffic on Red Hill and Walnut and also the impact of the Eastern Corridor. Some of that impact would be beneficial to the c~mnunity and because no one can predict the precise impact, it needs to be professionally analyzed. He was supportive of the staff recmmnendation with the addition of an updated traffic analysis incorporating the significance of the completions of Jamboree Road and the Eastern Transportation Corridor. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy informed the audience that this project had started in 1972 with the vote for funding taken in 1984. The Council had worked with the City Engineer in an effort to re-route the road through the industrial complex. But the planning was too late; the cost was prohibitive and not humanly possible. In an effort to live with a bad situation, the Council lobbied staff and the Irvine Company for mitigation and was promised that large trees would be planted, earth berms provided and walls built to limit noise. She stated that the City of Tustin is considered by some as "paradise". People move into the area and purchase homes adjacent to freeways in order to live here and that included homes on Tustin Ranch Road and Jamboree Road. Residents learn to mitigate in order to live in a City that does have heavy traffic. She herself lives 200 ft. from Red Hill Avenue and, to mitigate, planted trees at her own expense; that is the price paid to live in Tustin. Her commit- ment was to complete the road to Edinger and, with the information available to her, this will provide many choices for the community. But everyone who lives in Tustin must bear some of the burden. Mayor Hoesterey stated that this was not a new discussion and, election time or not, he had held the same view for twelve years. He. personally did not approve of either section of the road because the City was being asked to absorb the burden for the overdevelop- merit of Irvine. The City of Tustin had taken a position against the rezoning of the IVC and lost. There will now be over a million ~nd one-half sq. ft. of office space and 40,000 people moving into West Park. One of the successful goals set when he was involved in the homeowners association was to have the m'ajor thoroughfare redirected from what is now Tustin Ranch Rd. and connected from Barranca and Jamboree to pass those two communities, intersect with the freeway and have that road moved to where Myford Rd. is today. The major thoroughfare coming through the Base now intersects to Myford, which has been renamed Jamboree, to provide the north-south corridor. Now the City has been told that that corridor is insufficent and he is not pleased because Harvard Avenue is still two lanes and the people in College Park fight to keep that from going over the freeway. He personally would like to see a redirection of efforts that, if there ~TY COUNCIL MINUTES ;ge 3, 7-18-88 is going to_be an overpa_ss at Tustin Ranch Rd. that the offramp and direction of travel be limited to the north. 'He wanted the traffic that was not generated here to be redirected around the City. Those were his reasons for opposition and he still wanted a way to change the overcrossing. Councflman Prescott stated he considered this a public safety issue and Walnut had become a very dangerous street, and will become more dangerous in the future. He felt that, to ease traffic and increase safety on Walnut, Tustin Ranch Rd. should be completed through to Edinger as soon as possible. The project should be "fast tracked" to take the traffic off of Walnut and redirected to Tustin Ranch Rd. through to Edinger. He took exception to comments made by the Mayor when the Mayor had voted several times to fund the assess- ment districts in East Tustin which will be used to build the Tustin Ranch interchange. In order to be consistent, he would have had to vote against those assessment districts and the funding of the t ntercl~anges. Councilman Kelly said he knew the importance of carrying out the wishes and needs of the residents in Tustin Meadows, Laurelwood and Peppertree because he had lost the votes of that precinct due to his position on the bullet train. He recognized their importance and would like to carry out their will when possible. There is a lot of problems along Walnut and the biggest problem, one that had frustrated him for several years, was the corner of Walnut and Red HI11. The corner had been neglected and before any further action or study was done on the Tustin Ranch Road, he wanted the corner of Walnut and Red Hill corrected regardless of political consideration. Matt Nisson, 1¢¢62 Red Hill, Tustin, spoke to the Council regarding his property at the corner of Red Hill and Walnut Street. It was moved by Ed~ar~ seconded by Prescott, to authorize the fol 1 owing: (1) Selection of a consultant for the preparation of the project design report for Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and Edi nger Avenue. (2) Budget appropriation of $25,000 for Tustin Ranch Road project design report. (3) Direction of staff to commence negotiations with MCAS for required roadway right-of-way. (4) Di. rection of staff to pursue funding sources to implement said roadway constructi on. {5} Direction of staff to update traffic analysis to determine the effect on traffic after completion of all roads. The motion carried ¢-1, Hoesterey opposed. 95 AGENDA ORDER IX. NEW BUG[NESS Z. CONSIDERATION OF A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AT 175 NOUNTAIN VIEW, T1JSTIN At Mayor Hoesterey's request, this item was considered out of agenda order for the benefit of members of the audience. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Kelly, that the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy'for 1'75 Mountain View be granted. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy asked staff if any direction from Council was needed to complete the remaining detai 1 s. Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, stated that some of the interior building improvements had not been completed. Staff was assured by the property owner that these items would be completed before final occupancy of the house and staff would CITY COUNCIL MINUTr~ Page 4, 7-18-88 schedule a final inspection of those interior building related items of the structure. The written agreement for a time schedule on completion of all other exterior and site improvements would be '~' execOted. Staff would work with the property owner and the City Attorney's office regarding the' agreement Wit~ those conditions ' staff recommended approval. ' , Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that the property owner be allowed to extend the time schedule to November of lg8g. Both Mayor Hoesterey and Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy commended the owners for the outstanding renovation and improvements being done with this historical property. The motion carried 4-1, Prescott abstained. Jennifer Shumar, 175 Mountain View, Tustin, thanked staff and the Council for their time and support. III. PUBLZC HEARINGS 1. AOOENOuN 88-01 TO EIR 84-2, GENERAL PLAN AMENOMENT 88-01, ZONE CHANGE 88-0! ANO TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP 87-20! FOR THE PROPOSEO TUSTIN AUTO C~NTER EXPANSION Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, stated in danuary of 1985, the City Council approved the Tustin Auto Center project. Included in the project was approximately an acre of reservation area for the I-5 Freeway widening and a full cloverleaf design Tusttn Ranch Road interchange. Since that time, Caltrans has determined that a partial cloverleaf design is acceptable and released that portion of tl~e reservation area. Tile proposal to rezone the area would reclassify the existing properties from Planned Commercial/Residential to Planned Commercial and the General Plan Map A~nendment would rezone the property from Planned Community to Planned Community/Commercial. The Planning Commission's action also included a tentative parcel map reconfiguration for those existing two parcels to include the additional reservation area that had been released by Caltrans. The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Hoesterey at 8:30 p.m. Daniel Mispagel, representing the Irvine Company, stated that the 1trine Company concurred with the staff recommendation and recommended approval. No one else wished to speak on the matter and the Public Hearing was closed at 8:31 p.m. It was m_oved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to adopt the following: RESOLUTION NO. 88-73 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR 84-2 AND ADDENDUM NO. 88-01 AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ~ESOLUTION NO. 80-72 , A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~JE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-01 AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO CENTER, AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL The motion carried 5-0. It was then moved b~, Ed,)ar, seconded by Kelly, that Ordinance No. 1010 have first reading by title only. The~motion carried 5-0. Following first reading by title only of Ordin~ce No. 1010 by the Deputy City Clerk, it. was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 1010 be introduced as follows: 'ITY COUNCIL MINUTES ~age 5, 7-18-88 ORDINANCE NO. 1010 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 88-01 FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, TIlE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER oF TIlE AUTO CENTEI( AND ICEST OF TIlE I-iL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AND INCLUDING THE INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER The motion carried 5-0. · It was then m..oved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adopt the fol 1 Dwi ng: RESOI. tlT[ON NO. 88-79- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE I-5 FREEWAY, EAST OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, SOUTH OF THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF THE AUTO CENTER AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL The motion carried 5-0. 81 2.ADOPTING l}lE CITY BUDGET FOR FISCAL EAR 1988-89 Ronald Nault, Director of Finance, gave a brief staff report indicating that Council had attended several budget workshops. The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Hoesterey at 8:36. There were no speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adopt the following with the additions of Items 2 and 3 of t~e-staff report: RE~4)LIJTION NO. 88-82 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE CITY BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING REVENUE OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 {2) $121,500 added to the Water Enterprise Fund for a GeD Base Mapping System and other department equipment. (3) $300,000 added to the proposed Debt Surcharge Fund Expenditures tO reflect the redemption of the 1991 TWW Bonds. Councilman Prescott said he did not feel the three budget workshops were public workshops because, at times, the City Hall doors were locked and there was not full Council attendance at all workshops. After the completion of the third workshop, he studied the "line item budget" and the budgets from the past two years. He felt the operating expenses of Tustin were out of control and "marbled with fat" with a daily expenditure of $68,500. The revenue, or tax receipts, in Tustin are growing at a phenomenal rate; but the appetite to consume them is also growing at an equally phenomenal rate. He said the citizens of Tustin deserved some form of tax relief such as a tax rebate or City-paid trash collection. The Council is the custodian of public funds and was avoiding their responsibility if the taxpayers were not protected. During his 1,ine-by-line review of the budget, he discovered the operating expenditures had doubled from 1986 to 1988 and the spendinc] of taxpayers' funds to offer classes in bellydancing, cake decorating and weight control. Instead of wasting the money on projects like these classes, the City should pay for the trash collection or give the residents a tax rebate. As a substitute motion, it was moved by Prescott, seconded by Kelly, to reject the 1988-89 City Budget and direct staff to recommend specific forms of tax relief for residents. Mayor Hoesterey responded that changes in the City such as the expenditure of over $3,000,000 for redevelopment of the downtown area to prevent flooding, the relocation of national and CITY COUNCIL MINUT. Page 6, 7-18-88 international employers to the City, and the addition of a new commercial area does add to City expenditures. It is not feasible to make conclusions from or~ly one side of the budget. The City had also set a goal several years ago that the Parks and Recreation Department would gain at least 66~ of its own revenue. The Council has always encouraged department heads to cover their costs through revenues such as building and developer fees. He noted that the Irvine Company spends millions of dollars every year in the processing of fees and applications for the East Tustin area. The offset to the current period of growth is the expense side. You cannot look at one without the other. He found that generally there is a high level of overall satisfaction in the community. There are certain areas where expenditures have increased 30% but revenues have increased 47%. Because of the careful and fiscal conservancy of monitoring expenditures and revenues and bringing tax bases to the community, the City is able to meet the needs of the public when they are concerned with the control of flooding or removal of graffiti. This monitoring has also allowed the City to have one of the first Police Departments in Orange County with a canine unit for protection of citizens, to update the computer services, and to acquire a water works department. He felt the Council had been very fiscally responsible and would not want the City in a Position of bankruptcy; forced to cut back programs for finanical reasons and unable to supply even basic health and safety protection for the community. Councilman Edgar stated he had attended all the budget sessions, personally analyzed the budget prior to the sessions, contributed input and had questions answered. He thought it was a reflection of trust in the Council°s judgement when no speakers came forward with comments prior to the approval of ~ $6,q.000,000 ht~dqet. When reviewed the budget, he critically examined whether ~he growth the budget matched the population served. This made particular sense in the hiring of police officers and this budget included additional officers. He also critically examined whether the City had intelligently targeted the renovation of projects inherited from the past, such as an expensive storm drain on Pacific and Sixth Streets. Additionally, there was a figure of $400,000 for renovation of streets because the City methodically invested in the surfacing of roads to prevent deterioration when there were many surrounding communities without funds to maintain their roads. There had been ample opportunity in the budget sessions to review, line by line, any unreasonable item. In regard to trash collection fees, the City previously had paid trash collection for a limited portion of the City, but as the City grew, particularly in East Tustin, there was a built-in deficit and a need for consistency. He was proud of and supported the budget, but if there were errors or inconsistencies, he would be willing to reevaluate on a line-item basis. Councilman Kelly, responding to Councilman Edgar's comments, stated that because few people from the general public attended the budget workshops, he did not think it meant the public trusted the Council. Because he cared deeply about the heritage and tradition pf the community, he was eager to join Councilman Prescott and pare back some of the unnecessary burdens placed on the taxpayers in the community. The general citizens are overburdened with county, state and federal taxes and it was time, at the Council level, to reduce the budget. The community needed to be encouraged to participate in greater detail. He also thought the school district needed aid because they had not been blessed with revenues and many of the same taxpayers are involved with the schools. He encouraged the Council to reconsider the budget with reductions. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy emphasized that her duties as a Councilmember were not to return to a "bare bones" budget. The City is part of a society that requires proper police protection. The Police Depart- ment is asked if they need anything, because the Council is there to provide services to the residents. She would not cut a budget that provides essential services. The City has more green arrow '-"TY COUNCIL MINUTES age ?, ?-18-88 protected turns than any other Orange County city, the best-kept roads, the best lighting systems and "we" have to pay for it. All of this can be done because the Council and staff, one of the most advanced in Orange County, found ways to obtain revenue. This included the auditing of local businesses to insure proper State reimbursement to the City. Regarding the Community Services' classes referred to by Councilman Prescott, she noted that during the budget session he had complimented staff for providing this wonderful service to the City and the staff pointed out that these classes are almost self-supporting because the City charged a resident one fee, while outsiders who use City services, pay more. The budget and hiring is increasing due to the recent annexations and added population. The Council spent almost six hours reviewing the budget on a department-by-department basis and that was the time to bring'these matters forward, not when election time had begun. She had studied, supported, and approved of the budget; but would not be opposed to a committee, of Councilman Prescott and anyone else who would like to serve, suggesting budget reductions to the Counci 1. Jerry Weil, 1701 Summerville, Tustin, defended the budget and specifically mentioned the staff recommendations to Council that had resulted in major savings to the City by reducing the bond indebtedness and that the public would have come forward to express negative opinions if that was the case. The substitute motion failed 2-3; Edgar, Hoesterey, and Kennedy opposed. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy suggested that a subcommittee be formed to review the budget· Mayor Hoesterey stated that a subcommittee does exist and meets twice a month for concerns to be addressed. The original motion carried 3-2, Kelly and Prescott opposed. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, that the following Item No. 1 of the staff report be added to the budget: (1) $25,000 has been added to the General Fund for the Tustin Ranch Road Design Report. The motion carried 4-1, Hoesterey opposed. Council concurred to agendize' the establishment of a finance subcommittee for the August 1, 1988 Council meeting. 50 3. CITY OF TUSTIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2 Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, gave a brief staff report and informed Council that Gary Dysart of Willdan and Associates was present to answer any questions. Mayor Hoesterey opened the Public Hearing at 9:10 p.m. · Ed Shaheen, 14611 Alder Lane, Tustin, asked the status of the pipeline behind Alder Lane. Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, responded that staff, due to the complexities of the storm drain ditch, the need for improvements, and disposition of the property, will explore these issues with the 1trine Company. The Irvine Company had asked for additional time for the exploration and staff will return the matter to the City Council. The Planning Commission has continued the matter for 60 days and property owners will be noticed of any future di scussi OhS. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy asked if the revised agenda given to Council that evening had been properly noticed. James Rourke, City Attorney, indicated that the agenda had been posted 72 hours prior to the meeting as required. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 7-18-88 There were no other speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing was closed by Mayor Hoesterey at 9:15 p.m. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly~, to adopt the following: RESOLUTION NO. OB-80- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR .THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN, 'THE FINAL EIR FOR THE .NORTH-SOUTH ROAD AND THE I-5/TUSTIN RANCH ROAD INTERCHANGE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION ARE ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT EIR FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-2 AND ALL FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT AND RECERTIFYING ALL THE ABOVE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED DOCUMENTS. RESOLUTION NO. BB-B!- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF'TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2, ORDERING THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE, AND DESIGNATING THE CITY TREASURER TO COLLECT AND RECEIVE MONEY The motion carried 5-0. 25 IV. PUBLIC INPUT ],. PRESENCE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AT COLUI~iUS TUSTIN PARK SITE Marie Schultz, 17731 Westbury Lane, Tustin, was concerned about the use of heavy construction equipment and the resulting dust at the Columbus Tustin Park site. Mayor Hoesterey directed staff to investigate the matter. 2. CITY REPRESENTATION AT OI~ANGE COUNTY PLANNING COI~IISSION PUBLIC HEARING ON COUNTY'S GROWTtl MANAGEMENT PUkN Gregory Hile, 644 W. Third Street, Tustin, asked if the City would testify or participate at the Orange County Planning Commission Public Hearing on the County's Growth Management Plan being held on July lg, 1988, at 1:30 p.m. Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, stated the City had received notification of the Public Hearing late that day and staff did not have a copy of the Growth Management Plan, which had been requested from the County. After further brief discussion, it was determined that a staff member would attend the Public Hearing. CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. 4 was removed from the Consent Calendar at Gregory Hile's request, Item No. 8 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Hoesterey and Item No. 11 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Edgar. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The moti~on carrie~ 5-0. {Hoesterey abstained on Item No. ol. on 1 y. ) 1. APPROVA4. OF MINUTES - JULY 5, 1988, ADJOURNED ~lEGULAR MEETING 2. APPROVAL OF DEMA24DS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,071,222.68 3. RESOLUTION NO. 88-85 -A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STREET RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS ON GREEN VALLEY, UTT DRIVE, AND PUBLIC ALLEY SOUTH OF BONITA STREET, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR DIDS Adopted Resol uti on No. 88-85 approving the pl aris and specifications for subject project and directing the City to advertise for bids as recommended by the Public Work. s Department/Engineering Division. 86 ITY COUNCIL MINUTES .'age g, 7-18-88 5. ASSESSI~IENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2 UTILITY AGREEMENTS WITH IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT · Approved the ~greements with Irvine Ranch Water District ~or construction of domestic water, sanitary sewer, and reclaimed water facilities for Assess. merit District No. 86-2 within the following streets: Tustin Ranch Road between Irvine Boulevard and Jamboree Road, La Colina Drive between Tustin Ranch Road and the westerly City boundary, Irvine Boulevard between Jamboree Road and the westerly City boundary, and Portola Parkway between Jamboree Road and Tustin Ranch Road; and authorized the Mayor to execute said agreements and the expenditures of $31,923.50 to Irvine Ranch Water District for plan check and inspection fees as recommended by the Public Work, s Department/Engi neeri ng Di vi si on. 45 6. TUSTIN SENIOR CENTER - CONTRACT FOR GAS LINE EXTENSION Approved the Southern California Gas Company Contract No. O$O034gg/U-37621 and authorized the Mayor to execute said contract as recommended by the Public Works Depart- ment/Engi neeri ng Di vi si on. 45 7. A~SESSMENT OISTRICT NO. 85-1, CONTRACTS FOR GAS LINE EXTENSIONS Approved the Southern California Gas Company Contracts No. 05004009/U-43277 in the amounts of $15,403.77 and $1,336.32 and authorized the Mayor to execute said contracts as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 45 g. REJECTION OF O. AIM NO. 88-39; CLAII~ANT-KATHERINE NOORE, DATE OF L0S$-1/13/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-6/22/88 Rejected subject claim for personal injury in the amount of $6,225.25 as recommended by the City Attorney. 40 10. RESOLUTION NO. 88-77 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 88-179 Approved Final Parcel Map 88-179 by adoption of Resolution No. 88-77 as recommended by the Community Development Department. g9 Consent Calendar Item No. 8 - Settlement of Claim No. 87-40, Claimant: Mark Fe'rchl and Mayor Hoesterey stated that action was no longer necessary on this item. 40 Consent Calendar Item No. 4 - Resolution No. 88-84 Regarding Transcripts of ~4eeti rigs Gregory Hile wanted to know specifically what the Resolution involved and requested a staff report. James Rourke, City Attorney, responded that the Resolution was prepared in accordance with Council direction to provide tapes or transcripts of meeti rigs. Councilman Prescott expressed discomfort with Item No. 2 of'the Resolution regarding the permission of three Councilmembers required prior to providing a transcript requested by a member of the Council. Grego, ry Hile felt it was a problem because staff reports were not available for the public during meetings. Mayor Hoesterey reiterated the background behind the Resolution, which was extensive staff time spent typing 90-page transcripts. After further Council discussion as to what would be an appropriate number of pages of a transcript that could be requested by Council, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Hoesterey, to adopt the following with the deletion of Item No. 2: 4. RESOLUTION NO. 88-84 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, PRESCRIBING CITY POLICY REGARDING TRANSCRIPTS OF MEETINGS OF CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Council concurred to have two books containing the agenda and staff reports available for public use during Council meetings. The motion carried 5-0. 38 CITY COUNCIL MINU Page 10, 7-18-88 Censent Calendar Item No. 11 - ~thorization for Professional Services/Structural Plan Check and Infrastructure Services It was moved i,by Ed,)ar, seconded by Prescott, to create a subcommittee consisting of Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy and Councilman Edgar to review the selection process, return in 30 days with recommendations, and extend the existing contracts. The motion carried 5-0. 45 Council concurred to have a five-minute recess and the meeting resumed at 9:45 p.m. VI. O~DINANCES FOR INllOOUCTION - None VII. ORgIMANCES FOR A~OPTION- None VIII. O~ BUSINESS STATUS REPORT - ,1WA/C~AS/ASC It was moved by Ed,)ar, secondedI by Kelly_, to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that staff analyze the Alternate Plan, FAA Airport Traffic. 101 2. PROPOSED SAN JUAN STREET VACATION Councilman Prescott requested that the Council have a joint dinner with the Tustin Unified School District to discuss this item. William Huston, City Manager, indicated staff will be polling Council on available dates so the dinner can be arranged. Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, stated that staff did not require a specific action from Council at this time. As indicated in the staff report, there are three proposed time schedules for vacation. Councilman Edgar requested that staff provide the Council with a report as soon as possible on what the right-of-way impact will be for the I-5 widening from Newport easterly. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to continue this item at the August 1, 1988, meeting, and set a date to meet with the Tustin Unified School District. The motion carried 5-0. 105 3. MULTI-+lAZARD FUNCTIONAL PLAN It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 86 4. AD-HOC STREET NAME COI~IITTEE - EAST TUSTIN Each Council member nominated their choice for the Street Name £ommittee as fol lows: Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy: Councilman Edgar: Councilman Prescott: Councilman Kelly: Francis Logan Jerry Feldman Ed Pankey Shirley Doig Mayor Hoesterey will submit his choice at a later date. 96 5. OPTION OF THE CITY PRINTING AND MAILING THEIR OWN CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS FOR THE NOVEMBER 8, 1988, CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Councilman Prescott stated it was his understanding that the deadline for a separate mailing document had passed and this option was no longer available to the City. ,ITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page il, 7-18-88 James Rourke, City Attorney, indicated that the deadline for approving a Resolution allowing a 400-word campaign statement had passed, but' the option of a separate mailing, in his opinion, was still available. It was moved by Edgar, seconded, by Hoesterey, to direct the City Attorney to investigate the options and, if allowable, the City will have a separate mailing of campaign statements. The motion carried 4-1, Prescott opposed. 48 6. STEVEN'S SQUARE PARKING GARAGE It was moved by Prescott~ seconded by Kennedy, to receive and file subject I~e~ort. The motion 6arried 5-0. 74 7. RESOLUTION TO BIt PEESENTED TO LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES RELATED TO COI~I~I~ CJUU[ FACILITIES It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to authorize transmittal of the draft resolution for consideration by the League of California Cities and the Mayor to prepare a cover letter to accompany the draft resolution for forwarding to all Orange County City Councils. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy suggested that Paragraph 2 of the draft be changed to indicate Care Facilities cannot be within 1,000 feet regardless of the jurisdiction. Councilman Prescott asked to be assured that the five specific houses in question would receive copies of all correspondence And reports. Council concurred. The motion carried 5-0. 57 8. OPEN ANI) CLOSEO SESSIONS OF CITY COUNCIL ANO MINUTES AND RECOROINGS THEREOF Councilman Prescott commented that whenever the Council meets as a deliberative body, it should meet "on the record" with the public aware of those meetings and a written or taped record be made of the meetings. It was moved by Prescott, seconded by .Kennedy, that an ordinance be prepared for introduction on August l, 1988, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.2. with Council concurrence as to choice of a written record or a taped recording. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy stated she could not support the motion unless it was agreed upon by the Council that a tape would be sealed. Councilman Edgar was supportive of a sealed taped recording of Closed Session meetings with the tape being opened only for legal reasons. ~ames Rourke, City Attorney, stated that the tapes would not be open to the public and Council could set limitations regarding other uses. The tape would be available to a judge when action had been taken regarding a Closed Session held in violation of the Brown Act. Mayor Hoesterey felt that a tape recording of Closed Session discussions was a violation of attorney-client rights. There are situations under the law, when Council meets in Closed Session, for discussions under attorney-client privilege. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that the City Attorney educate the Council as to what occurs during a confidential session and what the Council is allowed to say. CITY COUNCIL MINU' Page 12, 7-18-88 After the City Attorney responded to the legal questions of the Council, Councilman Prescott requested a two-page report from the City Attorney's office regarding confidentiality and disclosure thereof. As an addition to the original motion, Councilman Edgar suggested that authorization to create a sealed tape be included in the ordinance. The motion carried 5-0. Mayor Hoesterey supported the motion with the understanding that the tape be properly protected and will not be used to jeopardize the City loP, not protecting citizen rights. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterez, to direct the City Attorney to return wi th a report addressing confidentiality, retention and safeguards of confidential information. The motion carried 5-0. 38 IX. NEW BUSINESS 1. TUSTIN RAN(M ROAD {Refer to pages 1 through 3 of these minutes). CONSIDERATION OF A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AT 175 HOUNTAIN VIEW, TUSTIN {Refer to pages 3 and 4 of these minutes). 3. VACANCY - TUSTIN WAlt'R CORPORA:rION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Council concurred to set up the procedure for a selection process utilizing the media and Water Corporation to fill the vacancy on the Tustin Water Corporation Board of Directors. 107 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR MANUFACTURE AND DELIVERY OF REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE TO TUSTIN RANCH PROJECT, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2 It was moved by Ed~ar~ seconded by Kennedy, to approve the following: (1) Reject the bid by Pacific Corrugated Pipe Company as it does not comply with the specifications and bidding requirements. (2) Award a contract to Hurst Concrete Products for Project No. 1 in the amount of $729,027.32. (3) Award a contract to United Concrete Pipe Co. for Project No. 2 in the amount of $604,197.31. (4} Award a contract to Hydro Conduit, Inc. for Project No. 3 in the amount of $759,897.65. · . (5) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the three contracts. The motion carried 5-0. 86 5. STREET TREES ON VINEWOOD AVENUE It was moved lb)` Kenned),, seconded b)` Edgar, to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 86 REPORTS 1. PLANNING COI~IISSION ACTION AGENDA - JULY 11, 1988 ITY COUNCIL MINUTES age 13, 7-18-88 Item No. 7 was removed from the Planning Commission Action Agenda by Hoesterey. It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Hoesterey, to ratify the remainder of the Planning CofmrllSslon Action Agenda of July 1988~ The motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to appeal the Planning Commission's decision on Item No. 7, Design Review No. 88-13 regarding Daddy-O's Restaurant, and agendize for Council discussion on August 1, 1988. The motion carried 5-0. 8O 2. XIII~RVIEWS OF PAIUCS ~ I~ECREATION COI~IISSIONERS Because of a conflict with the Town Center Redevelopment Plan Workshop, the Council will adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, August 2, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. to conduct the Parks and Recreation Commission interviews. After a brief Council discussion regarding the selection process, Council concurred that names be drawn for interview order and election' of the Commissioners to take place at the August 15, 1988 Council~meeting. 76 3. SICATEBOARDI NG After a brief discussion, regarding the safety and enforcement ramifications of skateboard use in the Civic Center Complex, the Council concurred to direct the Police Department to continue their enforcement and Council will readdress the issue if problems continue. 82 4. ADdUSTED SOLID II~STE COLLECTION RATES It was moved iby Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to receive and file subject report. Councilman Prescott again stated this would be a good tax rebate for the citizens if the City paid this fee. Mayor Hoesterey pointed out that it would only be a rebate for a selected portion of the City. Councilman Prescott suggested an equitable formula be established. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy felt it was more responsible to install a flood control channel, improve dump sites, etc. rather than give each resident a small rebate. The motion carried 5-0. 5O 5. COI~IERCIAL PARKING ON ~EDFORD AVENUE ~.was moved by Edgar, seconded by .Kennedy., to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 75 6. CAHPAIGN REFORH ORDINANCE Mayor Hoesterey stated it would be adding to the bureaucracy of the city by attempting to duplicate safeguards already in the system. The State Fair Political Practices Commission sets laws and guidelines governing campaigns. Additionally, he felt that proposals at this time could not be enacted until after the coming electi on. Councilman Kelly was dissatisfied that this ordinance would not have an effect on the November 8, 1988, election. Gregory Hile and Jerry Well addressed the Council regarding the Cam- paign Reform Ordinance. CITY COUNCIL MINUT-K Page 14, 7-18-88 After further Council discussion that included members of the audience, Council concurred to postpone the ordinance until after the November 8, 1988, election. 48 ., XI. OTHER BUSINESS 1. HOESTEREY ELECTED AS VICE CHAIRI~N OF JOINT SANITATION BOARD Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy congratulated Mayor Hoesterey on his recent election as Vice Chairman of the Joint Sanitation Board. 2. M.C.A.S. COLONEL'S LETTER REGARDING COUNCIL'S OPINION OF THE BASE Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that the Mayor respond to a letter published in the Los Angeles Times from a Colonel expressing his belief that the City was attempting to eliminate the Base. 3. LETTER FROM COUNCIL REGAROING OFF-SHORE OIL SITE Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy said that the Senate Appropriations Committee had approved an accelerated action which would allow the off-sNore oil site and she wanted a letter written to the Federal Government representatives opposing this action. 4. CLARIFICATION OF SI(gl ORDINANCE REGARDING REMOVAL OF SIGNS Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy noted that several campaign signs from the recent Congressional race were still posted in the City and requested clarification of the sign ordinance regarding removal of signs and the right to charge for the removal. 5. ~ATER ANALYSIS WORKSHOP Councilman Edgar requested that a workshop regarding water analysis be scheduled for a date in November. 6. REMOVAL OF ~AFFITI Oil MARS~ BUILDING Councilman Prescott requested the removal of all graffiti on the Marshall Building. XI I. AI~OURNMERT At 11:36 p.m., it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to recess to the Redevelopment Agen~, and then to the next Regular Meeting on August 1, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. The motion carried 5-0. 1. CALL TO ORDER MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CZTY OF llJSTIN, CALIFORNIA JULY 18, 1988 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hoesterey at 11:36 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California. .. ROLL CALL e Agency Members Present: .Agency Menbers Absent: Others Present: Ronald B. Hoesterey, Chairperson Ursula E. Kennedy, Chairperson Pro Tern Ri chard B. Edgar John Kelly Earl J. Prescott None William A. Huston, City Manager James Rourke, City Attorney Christine Shingleton, Dir. of Comm. Development Fred Wakefield, Acting Chief of Police Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works Royleen White, Dir. of Comm. & Adm. Services Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk Lloyd Dick, Building Official Susan Jones, Recreation Supervisor Approximately 7 in the audience APPROVAL OF MINUTES - dqJLY 5, 1988, ADJOURNED REGULAR ttEETING It was moved _.by Edgarr seconded by Prescott, to approve the minutes of July 5, 1988. The motion carried 4-0, Hoesterey abstained. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AJ~OUNT OF $1,944.84 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to approve subject dmnands in the amount of $1,944.84. The motion carried 5-0. 5. WORKSHOP - TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PLA3( AJ4ENOMENTS It was moved by Edgar, seconded byI Prescott, to schedule a workshop presentation on this matter on August l, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. The motion carri ed 5-0. ALLEY RECONS'TRUCrION SOUTH OF BONITA STREET BETWEEN NEWPORT AVENUE AND ORANRI~ STREET It was moved byI Kennedy, second.ed by Edgar, to authorize the City to administrate the bid advertisement, contract award, and construction phase of the alley reconstruction/improvements located south of Donita Street between Newport Avenue and Orange Street. The motion carried 5-0. 7. PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTING THE AGENCY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 Mayor Hoesterey opened the Public Hearing at 11:40 p.m. No one wished to speak on the matter and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adopt the following: RESOLLF~ION NO. ROA 88-5 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF TIlE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, ADOPTING THE AGENCY BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING REVENUE OF THE AGENCY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 The motion carried 5-0. 8. OTHER BUSINESS - None REDEVELOPMENT AGENu, MINUTES Page 2, 7-18-88 9. ADdOURNHENT At 11:43 p.m., it was moved by Ed~a.r, seconded by Ken.ned,, to adjourn to the. Town Center Redevelopment Plan Amendments Workshop on August 1, 1988, at 5:00 p.m. and then to the next Regular Meeting on August 1 1988, at 7:00 p.m. The motion carried 5-0. '