Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 08-01-88MINUTES OF A REGULAR ~E,..,G OF ll~E CITY COUNCIL OF ll4E CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA JULY 18, 1988 I. CALL ll) ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was callE,d to order by Mayor Hoes'terey at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. T~,e Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy, and the Invocation was given by. Councilman Edgar. I I. ROLL C~ALL Councilpersons Present: Ronald B. Hoesterey, Mayor Ursula E. Kennedy, Mayor Pro Tern ~ Ri chard B. Edgar John Kelly .Earl J. Prescott Council persons Absent: None Others Present: 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 100 in the audience AGENDA ORDER IX. NEW BUSINESS 1. TUSTIN RA~iCH ROAD At Mayor Hoestere¥'s request, this item was considered out of agenda order for the benefit of membePs of the audience. Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, restated the staff's recommendation and indicated that the entire project would cost apF,roximately $4,000,000. This total included the right-of-way cn~ts 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 ai lowed 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 Walnut Street, excessive noise level, additional air pollution, threatened safety and security for adults and school children, lack of proper planning by the City, bypassing of 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 A1 der Lane, Tustin Guido Borges, President, Laurelwood Homeowners Assn. Steve Johnson, 1852 Pennington, Tustin John Swain, 14311 Raintree, Tustin Joe Langley, 14782 Hil'lsboro Place, Tustin Larry .Bales, 2264 Juniper Rd., Tustin Carl Casslick, 2352 Caper Tree, Tustin Patrick Crab, 2371 Silk Tree, Tustin CITY COUNCIL MINUT 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 Shaheen, 14611 Alder Lane, Tustin M~rgaret Hope, 14572 Westfall Rd., Tustin Peer Swan, 14351 Morninglory, Tustin In addition to voicing his concer, ns, Larry Bales submitted oa petition opposing the construction of the Tustin Ranch Road/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 limited 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 Hig. hway funds and was very complex financial planning. He wanted a study to intelligently incorporate the significance of Jamboree 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 community and because no one can predict the precise impact, it needs to be professionally analyzed. He was supportive of the staff recommendation with the addition of an updated traffic analysis incorporating the significance of the compl eti ons of Jamboree Road and the Eastern Transportati on Corridor. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy informed the audience that ~his 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 provid~ 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- ment of Irvine. The City of Tustin had taken a position against the rezoning of the I VC and lost. There will now be over a million and 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 major 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 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 7-18-88 is goi.ng to be an overpass at Tustin Ranch Rd., that the off ramp 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. Councilman 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 Ra6ch interchange. In order to be consistent, he would have had to vote against those assessment districts and the funding of the interchanges. 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, lie recognized their importance ~nd 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 Hill. 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. It was moved by Ed~).a.r, seconded by Prescott, to authorize the fol 1 owing: (1) Selection of a consu!tane for the prenaration of the project design report for Tustin 'Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and Edinger 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) Direction of staff to pursue funding sources to implement said roadway construction. (5) Direction of staff to update traffic analysis to determine the effect on traffic after completion of all roads. The motion carried 4-1, Hoesterey opposed. AGENDA ORDER IX. NEW BUSINESS 2. CONSIDERATION OF A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AT 175 MOUNTAIN VIEW, TUSTIN 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 bi/ .Kellj/, that the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for 175 Mountain View be granted. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy asked staff if any direction from Council was- needed to complete the remaining details. 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 MINUTFr Page 4, 7-18-88 schedule a final inspec.tion of those i~terior building related items of the structure. The written agreement for a time schedule on completion of all other exterior and site improvements would be executed. Staff would work with the property .owner and the City Attorney's office regarding the agreement. With those conditions, staff recommended approval. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that the property owner be allowed to' extend the time schedule to November of 1989. ~ Both Mayor Hoesterey and Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy commended the owners for the outstanding renovation and improvements being done with this historical property. The motiQn carried 4-1, Prescott abstained. Jennifer Shumar, 175 Mountain View, Tustin, thanked staff and the Council for their time and support. ~ III. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. ADDENDUM 88-01 TO EIR 84-2, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CHANGE 88-01 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-201 FOR THE PROP~ AUTO CENTER EXPANSION Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development January of 1985, the City Council approved the Tustin project. Included in the project was approximately reservation area for the I-5 Freeway widening and a full )-01, ZONE. SED TUSTIN stated in Jto Center an acre of cloverleaf design Tustin Ranch Road interchange. Since that time, C(ltrans has determined that a partial cloverleaf design is acceptable' and released that portion of the reservation area. The proposal to rezone the area would reclassify the existing properties from Planned Commercial/Residential to Planned Commercial and the General Plan Map Amendment would rezone the property from Planned Community to Planned Community/Commercial. The Planning Commission's action al so 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 Irvine Company concurred wi th 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 moved bi/ Ed~ar,.seconded bY. Kell..j/, 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 RESOLUTION NO. 88-72 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 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 by Edgar, seconde, d bi/ Kelly, that Ordinance No. 1010 have first reading by title only. The motion carried 5-0. Following first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 10)~0'6y the Deputy City Clerk, it was moved b.y...Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 1010 be introduced as follows: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 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, THE EXISTING SOUTHERLY BORDER OF TIlE AUTO CENTER AND WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AND INC-LUDING THE INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EAST TUSTIN AL)TO CENTER The motion carried 5-0. It was then moved by. Ed~)ar, seconded by. Kennedy, to adopt the following: RESOLUTION 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. ADOPTING THE CITY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 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,I seconded by Kennedy, to adopt the following with the additions of Items 2 and 3 of the staff report- RESOLUTION NO. 88-82 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE CITY BUDGET AND APPROPRIATING REVENUE OF ~,r CITY '~ ,~,,- FOR TH[ F~CAL YEAR 1988-89 (2)-$121,500 added to the Water Enterprise Fund for a Geo 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 line-by-line review of the budget, he discovered the operating expenditures ha.d doubled from 1986 to 1988 and the spending 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 fl oodi ng, the rel ocati on of national and CITY COUNCIL MINUI 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 only 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 ha)~ always encouraged department heads to cover their costs through revenues such as building and developer fees. He noted that the irkine 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 cahnot 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 o~ flooding or removal of graffi'ti. 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 ~,'~ant the City in a position of bankruptcy; forced to cut back programs for fi nanical reasons and unable to supply even basic health ~nd 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 a $6~1,000,000 budget. When reviewed the budE)et, he critically examined whether the ~jrowCh 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, ~uch 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 of 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 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 7-18-88 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 buUget session he' had c.omplimented 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 outsider, s 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,~ nit 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, l'ustin, 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. I 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. 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 A1 der Lane, Tustin, asked the status Of the pipeline behind A1 der 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 Irvine 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 discussions. 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 MINUTr- Page 8, 7-18-88 There w_ere no other speakers on the matter and the Public Hearing was cloosed by Mayor Hoesterey at 9:15 p.m.. It was moved bi/ Edgar., seconded bi/ Kelly, to adopt the following: RESOLUTION NO. 88-80 - 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. 88-81 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF ~TUSTIN, CALIFORNI/',, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CITY OF TU'STIN 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. IV. PUBLIC INPUT 1. PRESENCE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AT COLU~US 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 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING CO~MISSION PUBLIC HEARING ON .COUNTY'S G~OWll4 ~NAGEMENT PLAN 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 19, 1988, at 1:30 p.m. Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, st~.ted 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 Hi le'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 bi/ Kennedy., seconded by ..Edgar, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0. (Hoesterey abstained on Item No. 1 only.) 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 5, 1988, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS 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 BIDS Adopted Resol uti on No. 88-85 approving the plans and specifications for subject project and directing the City to advertise for bi ds as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9, 7-18-88 5. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 86-2 UTILITY AGREEMENTS WITH IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT Approved the agreements with Irvine Ranch Water District for construction of domestic water, sanitary sewer, and reclaimed water facilities for Assessment DistriCt No. 86-2 within the following streets: Tus~cin Ranch Road between Irvine Boulevard and Jamboree Road, La Co]ina 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 Works Department/Engineering Division. 6. TUSTIN SENIOR CENTER - CONTRACT FOR ~ LINE EXTENSION Approved the Southern California Gas Company Contract No. 05003499/U-37621 and authorized the Mayor to execute salt contract as recommended by the Publ i c Works Depa rt- ment/Engi neeri ng Division. 7. ASSESSMENT DISTRI.~CT NO. 85-1, CONTRACTS FOR GAS LINE EXTENSIONS Approved the Southenn California Gas Company Contracts No. 05004009/)~)-43~77 in the amounts of $15,403.77 and $1,336.32 and authorized the Mayor to exectlte said contracts as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. · 9. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-39; CLAIMANT-KATHERINE MOORE, DATE OF LOSS.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. 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. Consent Calendar Item No. 8 - Settlement of Claim No. 87-40, Claimant: Mark Ferchlahd ' i I Mayor Hoesterey stated that action was no longer-necessary on this item. Consent Calendar Item No. 4 -Resolution No. 88-84 RegardingwTranscripts o'f Meetings I I 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 meetings. 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. Gregory/ 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 .bi/ Kennedy/, seconded b~/ Hoesterey, to adopt the following with the d'eletion 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' CITY COUNC I L MINUT Page 10, 7-18-88 C~nsent - Calendar Item No. 11 - Authorization for Profess(onal s'ervices/St~{~ral Iplan C~eck and Infrastructure Services It was moved by Edgar, 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. Council concurred to have a five-minute recess and the meeting resumed at 9:45 p.m. VI. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION- None VII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION- None VIII. OLD BUSINESS 1. STATUS REPORT - JWA/CRAS/ASC It was moved b~/ .Edgar, second.ed, by.. Kelly, to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. Mayor Pro Tern Kennedy requested that staff analyze the Alternate Plan, FAA Airport Traffic. 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 arnanged. 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 ti me schedules for vacation. Councilman Edgar requested that staff provide the Council with a report as soon as possible on what the rigKt-of-way impact will be for the I-5 widening from Newport easterl ¥. It was moved by Edgar, seconded bi/ Hoestelr.ey,, 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. 3. MULTI-HAZARD FUNCTIONAL PLAN It was move.d by Edgar, seconded by Kennledy to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 4. AD-HOC STREET NAME CO~ITTEE - EAST TUSTIN Each Council member nominated their choice for the Street Name Committee as follows' 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. 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. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11, 7-18-88 James Rourke, City Attorney, indi'cated 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 Hoeste. r..ej/, 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. 6. STEVEN'S SQUARE PARKING GARAGE It was m~oved bi/ Prescott, seconded by Kennedy.,' to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 7. RESOLUTION TO BE PRESENTED TO lEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES RELATED TO CO#MUNITY CARE FACILITIES It was moved bi/ Ed~)ar, seconded bi/ 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 ac~',ompany the draft resolution for.forwarding to all Orange County Ci ',y Counci 1 s. Ma ,or Pro Tern Kennedy suggested that Parauraph 2 of the draft be · ch. raged to indicate Care Facilities cannot be within 1,000 feet re, ardless of the jurisdiction. CoUncilman Prescott asked to be assured that the five specific ho~ses in question would receive copies of all correspondence and re~)orts. Council concurred. The motion carried 5-0. 8. OPEN AND CLOSED SESSIONS OF CITY COUNCIL AND MINUTES AND RECORDINGS 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 meeti rigs. It was moved b~l Prescott, seconded by Kennedy, that an ordinance be prepared for introduction on August 1, 1988, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.2. with Council concurrence as to choice of a written record or a taped recording. Mayor Pro Tern 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. James 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 MINUT' Page 12, 7-18-88 After the City Attorney responded to the legal questions of the Council, Councilman Prescott requ.ested 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 for not protecting citizen rights. It was moved b~, Edgar, seconded b~l Hiioester. ey, to direct the City Attorney to return with a report addressing confidentiality, retention and safeguards of confidential information. The motion carried 5-0. IX. NEW BUS I NESS 1. TUSTIN RANCH ROAD (Refer to pages I through 3 of these minutes). 2. CONSIDERATION OF A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AT 175 MOUNTAIN VIEW,"TUSTIN (Refer to pages 3 and 4 of these minutes). 3. VACANCY - TUSTIN WATER CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Council concurred to set up the procedure for a selection 'process u'tilizing the media and Water Corporation to fill the vacancy on the Tustin Water Corporation Board of Directors. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR MANUFACTURE AND DELIVERY OF REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE TO TUSTIN RANCH PROJECT, ASSESSMENT .DISTRICT NO. 86-2 It was moved bi/ Edga, r,,, seconded bi/ Kenne,dj/, to approve the following: (1) Reject the bid by Pacific Corrugated Pipe Company as it does not comply wi th the specifications and bidding requirements. (2) Award a contract to Hurst Concrete Products for Project No. i 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. 5. STREET TREES ON VINEWOOD AVENUE It was moved b~/ Kennedj/, .seconded5doby.Edgar' to receive and file subject report. The m0tlo6 carri'ed .... X. REPORTS 1. PLANNING C01~ISSION ACTION AGENDA - JULY 11, 1988 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 13, 7-18-88 Item No. 7 was removed from the Planning Commission Action Agenda by Hoesterey. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoestere.v, to ratify the remainder of the Planning Commission Action Agenda of July ~1, 1988. The motion carried 5-0. . It was moved bi/ Hoeste. r. ej/, seconded 'by Edg.ar, 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. 2. INTERVIEW~ OF PARKS AND RECREATION CO~ISSIONERS Because of a conflict wi th the Town Center Redevelopment Plan Workshop, the Council ~dll adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, August 2, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. to conduct the Parks and Recreation Commission i ntervi ews. After a brief Council discussion regarding the selection process, Council concurred theft names be drawn for interview order and election of the Commissic~ners to take place at the August 15, 1988 Council meeting. 3. SKATEBOARDING 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 enf'orcement and Council will readdress the issue if problems continue. 4. AO,JUSTEO SOLID WASTE COLLECTION RATES It was moved b~, Edgar., seconded b~, Kenlnedy, 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. 5. COMMERCIAL PA~KING ON I~DFORD AVENUE It was movled bY Edgar, seconded by Kennedj/, to receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 6. CAMPAIGN REFORM 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 election. Councilman Kelly was dissatisfied that this ordinance would' not have an effect on the November 8, 1988, election. CITY COUNCIL MINUTr 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, el'ection. XI. OTHER BUSINESS 1. HOESTEREY ELECTED AS VICE CHAIRMAN OF JOINT SANITATIgN 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 LEI'~ER REGARDING COUN~CIL'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 REGARDING OFF-SHORE OIL SITE Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy said that the Senate Appropriations Committee had approved an accelerated action which would allow the off-shore oil site and she wanted a letter written to the Federal Government representati v,~.s opposing this acti on. 4. CLARIFICATION OF SIGN ORDINANCE REGARDING REMOVAL OF SIGNS Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy noted that several campaign signs from the recent Congress'ional race were still posted in the City and requested clarJfication of the sign ordinance regarding removal of signs and the right to charge for the removal. 5. WATER ANALYSIS WORKSHOP Councilman Edgar requested that a workshop regarding water analysis be sc'heduled fc~, a date in November. 6. REHOVAL OF GRAFFITI ON MARSHALL BUILDING' Councilman Prescott requested the removal of all graffiti on the Marshall BuilJing. XI I. ADJOURNMENT At 11:36 p.m., it was moved bi/ Ed~)ar, seconded b~v Kennedj/, to recess to the Redevelopment AgenCy, and ~ch6n to the next Regular ~eeting on August 1, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. The mot.ion carried 5-0. MAYOR