Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 12-05-88_~£NUTES OF A RE~ULARMEETIN~ OF THE C~TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN~ CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER 2~ 1988 -I. CALL'TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF.ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hoesterey at 7:01 p.m. in the City. Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of -Allegiance Was led by Councilman Kelly and the Invocation was given -by Councilman Edgar. ' II. ROLL CALL Council Present: Council Absent: Others Present: Ronald B. Hoesterey, Mayor Ursula E. Kennedy, Mayor Pro Tem Richard B. Edgar 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 Valerie Whiteman, Deputy City Clerk Approximately 90 in the audience III. PUBLIC HEARING 1. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF VARIANCE NO. 88-7 Christine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, summarized the Planning Commission's denial of Variance 88-7, a request by Dr. Sosin for authorization to install a 24 square foot, double-faced business identification pole sign approximately 12 feet in height for the the Headache Treatment Center, located at the northwest corner of Newport and Mitchell Avenues. Mayor Hoesterey opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. Myra Sosin, 14111 Newport Avenue, Tustin, read a letter to the Council that had been sent to the Community Development Department in July of 1988 and cited reasons for approval of Variance No. 88- 7. These reasons included: current sign is visible to passing motorists for only 2-3 seconds, patients experience difficulty in locating the office, loss of business from "drive by" patients, denial of right to advertise, effectiveness of the logo, and =isual pollution and competition from Alta Dena Dairy trucks and the Circle K store sign. Dr. David Sosin, 14111 Newport Avenue, Tustin, considered the addition of the Circle K sign as competition. He felt his proposed sign was appropriate and gave his medical practice greater visability. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Councilman Edgar said when a professional business was located in a-~ommercial district there was competition with commercial sign standards and this caused an inconsistency. He felt Dr. Sosin's situation created an opportunity for awareness of this inconsistency and perhaps allowed for some concession. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy stated the City had, during the past fifteen years, made a deliberate effort to develop a standard so the business community and the residential community could harmoniously coexist. She felt that the philosophy of everyone having a right to a sign, regardless of size, was incorrect. She was'not persuaded by the argument that'.the Circle K sign was in competition with the headache treatment sign. Additionally, she believed the location of the medical facility, on the corner of Mitchell and Newport Avenues, was an extremely visible address. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 11-21-88 IV. The City was becoming one of the most beautiful in Southern California because the Council had used restraint in the area of signage. For these reasons, she could not support the variance. Councilman Kelly submitted that both the Circle K and the Alta Dena Dairy sell aspirin and, therefore, were in competition with the Headache Treatment Center. He had been tempted to use the Headache Treatment Center but was deterred by the unprofessional logo and, for reasons of consistency, would not support the variance. Mayor Hoesterey thought the area in question was commercial and if this were a commercial property, the sign would be approved. He thought a hardship did exist based on location and the other factors that had been mentioned by Dr. and Mrs. Sosin. He was supportive of the variance. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to approve Variance No. 88-7. Councilman Prescott noted that a new medical facility in the vicinity of Walnut and Newport Avenues had signage in excess of the Headache Treatment Center and he felt that denial of the Variance would be inconsistent policy. Additionally, a City employee had given information indicating the sign would be permissible. The motion carried 3-2, Kennedy and Kelly opposed. PUBLIC INPUT 1. DIAMOND L~,NE S The following members of the community spoke in opposition to Diamond Lanes: Carole Bryant, 15500 Tustin Village Way, Tustin Vera Langlois, 16610 Montego Way, Tustin Sandra Magazzu, 15500 Tustin Village Way, Tustin Their concerns included: requested assistance from Councilmembers in requiring Caltrans and the Orange County Transporatation Commission to provide information to the public; nepotism and conflict of interest within O.C.T.C.; reagendizing the issue of diamond lanes; and completion of the Rte 55 diamond lane test. Councilman Edgar was convinced, based on his own opinion and data, that diamond lanes were effective and the responsibility for the efficient use of freeways resided with Caltrans and the O.C.T.C. It would be difficult for a City Council to have all the necessary expertise and he did not think this was a relevant item for formal Council action. Councilman Prescott wanted the matter agendized for discussion at the December 5, 1988 Council meeting and request that O.C.T.C. release their information to the public. Mayor Hoesterey agreed with agendizing for the next meeting; however', the only action that could result would be to request that O.C.T.C. hold Public Hearings on these concerns. He did not b.e~ieve the long-term, proper forum was to debate the subject at the City Council meetings; it should be dealt with at the O.C.T.C. level where the decisions were made. He suggested O.C.T.C. be notified of the agendizing and 'request their participation. Councilman Edgar clarified that some of the data requested from O.C.T.C. was actually data owned by an agency that provided analysis reports and was not in the possession of O.C.T.C. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy was concerned with juriSdictional lack of power and appropriateness. There were 118 homes in the City that would be impacted and, if.the City tried to also fight the H.O.V. battle, valuable assistance could be diminished. She did not want to diverte the City's energy and perhaps lose both battles. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 11-21-88 V, It was moved by Prescott, seconded by Kelly, to agendize the subject of H.O.V. lanes at the December 5, 1988 Council meeting. As a substitute motion, it was moved by H°esterey, seconded by Kennedy, to agendize the subject of H.O.V. lanes in January and continue the current concentration regarding the Santa Ana (I- 5)/Costa Mesa (Rte 55) transitway and its effect on the home6wners of Tustin Village. The substitute motion carried'3-2, Kelly and Prescott opposed. J. Russelt Calvert, 15401 Williams Street, Tustin, offered his support to the homeowners of Tustin Village. 2. TUSTIN RANCH ROAD/SANTA ANA FREEWAY (I-5) INTERCHANGE (Consent Calendar Item No. 8) Gwen Ferguson, 14872 Alder Lane, Tustin, voiced her opposition to the interchange and suggested a modification to a partial cloverleaf design interchange to serve the Auto Center and the new Tustin Ranch development. This would allow the necessary access to the northerly developments without severely impacting the residents on the south side with noise pollution and decreased property values. She did not feel the interchange was even needed and an improved Jamboree Road could accommodate the traffic. Mayor Hoesterey requested Item No. 8 be removed from the Consent Calendar and any further public comment concerning this issue be expressed at that point in the agenda. Council concurred. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar: Item No. 1 was removed by Councilman Edgar, Item No. 8 was removed by Mayor Hoesterey and Item No. 11 was removed by Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0. 2. APPROVED DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,559,918.90 I~%TIFIED PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $194,267.18 REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-58; CLAIMANT-THOMAS BOIS II, DATE OF LOSS-4/19/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-10/14/SS Rejected subject claim for damages in the amount of $1,000,000.00 as recommended by the City Attorney. 4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-46; CLAIMANT-PAUL EWING, DATE OF LOSS- 7/6/88, DATE FILED WITH CITY-8/2/88 Rejected subject claim for damages of an undetermined amount as recommended by the City Attorney. 5. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 88-61; CLAIMAiNT-SOUTHERNCALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, DATE OF LOSS-6/17/88; DATE FILED WITH CITY-10/28/88 Rejected subject claim for property damage in the amount of $3,937.75 as recommended by the City Attorney. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 88-120 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING SURPLUS AND TRANSFERRING SURPLUS RADIO EQUIPMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY CHAPTER OF THE AM.~R. ICAN RED CROSS FOR USE IN CONNECTION WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES 'Adopted Resolution No. 88-120 declaring surplus radio equipment be transferred to the Orange County Chapter of the American Red Cross for use in connection with emergency services as recommended by the Police Department. 7. DONATION OF AUTOMOBILES TO THE TUSTIN AREA SENIOR CENTER FUND, INCORPORATED Accepted 'two automobiles from Mr. Robert Voorhies as'gifts on behalf of the Tustin Area Senior Center Fund; and authorized. staff to sell the automobiles at auction with the proceeds to be given to the Tustin Area Senior Center Fund, Inc. as recommended by the Community Services Department. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 11-21-88 9. RESOLUTION NO. 88-123 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE - CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 IMPROVEMENTS ON JAMBOREE ROAD FROM I-5 FREEWAY TO IRVINE BOULEVARD Adopted Resolution No. 88-123 accepting said work and authorized the recordation' of the notice of completion as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 10. A~REEMENT WITH HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES IRVINE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, PORTOLA PARKWAY, L~ COLINA DRIVE AND IRVINE BOULEVARD, ~D NO. 86-2 Approved an agreementwith Hunsaker & Associates Irvine, Inc. for construction surveying in the amount of $102,621.00 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. · . Consent Calendar Item No. i - Approval of Minutes, November 7, 1988 Councilman Edgar said the Minutes were precise and did not require correction. However, the voting tally information for Resolution No. 88-118 that was mailed to the cities in Orange County did not reflect his vote of abstention. He asked that a letter reflecting the correct vote be forwarded to the cities in Orange County. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to approve the Minutes of November 7, 1988. The motion carried 5-0. Consent Calendar Item No. 8 - Tustin Ranch Road/Santa Ana Freeway (I- 5) Interchange COoperative Agreement Mayor Hoesterey requested this item be removed from the Consent Calendar to receive input from members of the audience. .The following members of the community spoke in opposition to the interchange-. Carol Haver, 2321 Fig Tree Drive, Tustin Robert Schoenburg, 2271 Silk Tree Drive, Tustin John Butler, 17431 Parker Drive, Tustin Arianne Goff, 2271 Silk Tree Drive, Tustin Kenneth Shallahamer, 2331 Basswood Circle, Tustin Todd Ferguson, 14872 Alder Lane, Tustin Shirley Ruff, 14761 Foxcroft, Tustin Their reasons for opposition included: location of interchange and Tustin Ranch Road adjacent to residential neighborhood; noise and air pollution; safety conditions for community and school children; availability of final E.I.R.; lack of information provided to area residents regarding the project; decreased property values; increased residential traffic; priority completion of Jamboree Road; northerly development only; redesign interchange to partial cloverleaf; and concentration of interchanges in immediate vicinity. Mayor Hoesterey said, in his opinion, the Tustin Ranch Road would not benefit Tustin residents, but was to accommodate flow-through traffic. He felt the expansion and extension of Harvard' Blvd. would be a more viable' traffic solution and the City of Irvine had been very successful in rerouting their traffic into Tustin. This was an oppor%.unity to review the projectand incorporate suggestions from the community for a northbound only interchange. Additionally, there were no funds available, now or in the foreseeable future, for completion of the portion between Walnut and Edinger. Councilman Edgar said the engineering analysis reflected that even with full development of Jamboree Road, Red Hill, and Tustin Ranch Road through to Edinger, it still would not be adequate to solve the current traffic problems. He believed completion of all the roads was necessary in order to deliver to the next generation a successful road system. He was committed to proceeding with the interchange and spending.available fun~s to reduce its impact upon residents. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 11-21-88 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to adopt Resolution No. 88-122 as follows, approve the Tustin Ranch Road interchange cooperative agreement, and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement. RESOLUTION NO,~ 88-122 - A REsoLuTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATION~ FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE TUSTIN RANCH ROAD/SANTAANA (I- 5.) FREEWAY INTERCHANGE AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy said the original plans and approval for the project were done between 1970 and 1973 and the residents in the surrounding communities had previous knowledge of the proposed road. Traffic on Red Hill and Walnut had increased from 3,000 cars per day .to 35,000 per day and when everyone drives automobiles, everyonemust pay the price. The Council and The Irvine Company Mad committed extensive funds to install berms, trees and walls for protection of area homes. She said it was a'difficult and complex problem, but she understood the need for it. She clarified that the Mayor wished to review the possibility of a partial cloverleaf and also review the existing contracts involving the project. She was concerned about making a decision without the proper data. After further Council discussion regarding the logistics of the interchange and its phases, the motion carried 3-2, Hoesterey and Kennedy opposed. Consent Calendar Item No 11 - Agreement with the Keith Companies for Professional Services for Improvement of Tustin Ranch Road between Edinger Avenue and Walnut Avenue It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to approve an agreement with the Keith Companies for preparation of preliminary design and project report for improvement of Tustin Ranch Road between Edinger 'Avenue and Walhut Avenue in the amount of $25,029.00. Mayor Hoesterey said he would vote in favor of this item, because if the road is completed, the Council should have clear understanding of the. mitigation measures. The motion carried 5-0. VI. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION - None VII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None VIII. OLD BUSINESS 1. STATUS REPORT - JWA/CRAS/ASC It was moved by Kelly, seconded by Kennedy, to receive and file subject report. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy asked if the Mayor would be interested in filling the vacancy on the CRAS board at this time. Mayor Hoesterey requested that the issue be agendized as a mayoral appointment. C.b4tistine Shingleton, Director of Community Development, noted that CRAS was only soliciting interest in the vacancy at this time and staff, at Council's direction, would forward their desire to participate. The motion carried 5-0. 2. SANTA ANA (I-$)/COSTAMESA (RTE $5) TRANSITWAY STATUS REPORT The following members of the community addressed the Council .regarding their opposition to the proposed project: Richard Murray, 15500 Tustin Village Way, Tustin Howard Branski, 15500 Tustin Village Way, Tustin CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 11-21-88 IX. William Huston, City Manager, anticipated that the staff's report suggesting potential mitigation measures for the project would be agendized for the next meeting. Two weeks had been an insufficient amount of time to analyze Caltrans' extensive data and staff wanted to insure accurate and comprehensive answers to the concerns of the residents. Mayor Hoesterey stated a response had been received from Senator Seymour's .office. Senator Seymour had sent a letter to Keith McKean, C~ltra~s Director of District 12, requesting that Mr. McKean personally meet with Council, staff and community members regarding this issue. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy reported that Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, had requested that Mr~ Murray participate in the City's meeting with Caltrans. Councilman Edgar clarified that the interchange was designed by Caltrans with a commitment from O.C.T.D. to pay the cost of the transitway. These were O.C.T.D. funds that, by State law,'must be spent on mass transit facilities and could not be legally spent on single-occupant vehicle transportation. Richard Murray requested that the following fourth item be added to the staff's recommendation:- investigate the necessity of the flyover and can the H.O.V. lane be accomplished by the original plan of maintaining the lane at the grade level. Ralph Neal, Caltrans Deputy District Director, stated he had spoken with Keith McKean and Mr. McKean was looking forward to meeting with the Council and he supported the staff's recommendation. I~ was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to authorize staff to meet and discuss with the Caltrans' staff on the following items: (1) potential mitigation measures for the elevated transitwaywith respect to sound and visual impacts, (2) physical mitigation measures for loss of parking spaces (covered and open) (3) definition of actual required right-of-way needs as they relate to the existing condominium development and (4) investi- gatign of alternative flyover alignments. The motion carried 5-0. hEW BUSINESS POLICY ON.TEMPORARY USE PERMITS FOR COLD-AIR BALLOONS It was moved by Prescott, seconded by HoeSterey, to request that the Planning Commission review the policy of approving cold-air balloons for advertising and grand opening events. The motion carried 5-0. 2. AMENDMENT OF TUSTIN CITY CODE TO ALLOW KEEPING OF ANIMALS FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH It was moved by Kennedy, seConded by Hoesterey, to maintain the current Tustin City Code pertaining to animals and the keeping of a~imals for purposes of biomedical research. Mark Yorita, representing Bedford Properties, asked that the Council grant approval allowing staff to review the policy on a case-by-case basis. Bedford Properties had a prospective tenant involved in research for Alzheimer's disease. Due to the CitY's current .code, the tenant was forced to locate in another city ...resulting in loss of business for Bedford Properties. Dennis Demeis, representing R.B. Allen Group, asked the Council to be open-minded and allow tenants an opportunity for Conditional Use Permits. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 11-22-88 Councilman Edgar said this type of use had requirements that were atypical of many industrial areas and requiring staff to interpret, on an individual basis, how~these sophisticated uses would relate in an industrial setting would involve excess time and attention. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy said Tustin, because of its s~ze and humber of staff, would be unable to provide the proper monitoring and enforcement. Councilman Prescott did. not feel it would be a problem to amend the City Code and judge the requests on a case-by-case basis. He thought businesses should have the right to submit requests for consideration. Councilman Kelly agreed that it would be fair to judge requests on a case-by-case basis and the City should be proud to participate in medical research. As a substitute motion, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by EdGar, to reagendize the item at the December 19, 1988 Council meeting and survey surrounding cities regarding current policy. The substitute motion carried 4-1, Kennedy opposed. 3. NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, stated staff's concern was the original estimate of maintenance cost had increased from $220,000 to $395,000 and the City's portion percentage also increased from 10% to 16% and staff felt possibly the City should consider withdrawing from the program. No action was required from Council at this time and staff could submit a future detailed report. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy wanted to meet the City's commitment for this year and then withdraw. She did not feel it was responsible to immediately withdraw nor did she wish to expend funds beyond the City's fair portion. Councilman Edgar said there had to be an equitable percentage of contribution. Discussion followed between Councilman Edgar and Mr. Ledendecker regarding how the percentage was derived. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, that Councilman Edgar meet with Mr. Ledendecker regarding the prorata percentage and return with a staff recommendation. The motion carried 5-0. 4. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD BETWEEN IRVINE BOULEVARD AND TUSTIN RANCH ROAD It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to award a contract to Sully Miller Contracting Company in the amount of $4,309,315.55 for the above-referenced project. The motion carried 5-0. 5. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD, PORTOLA PARKWAY, LA COLINA DRIVE AND IRVINE BOULEVARD It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to award a contract to Sully Miller Contracting Company in the amount of $5,157,062.90 for construction of the above-referenced project. The motion carried 5-0. 6. STOP SIGN REQUEST AT LAURIE LANE AND MALENA DRIVE AND AT ANGLIN DRIVE AND MALENA DRIVE It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Kelly, to adopt the following Resolution No. 88-124 designating the placement of certain stop signs: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 11-21-88 Xo RESOLUTION NO. 88-124 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING PLACEMENT OF CERTAIN STOP SIGNS (LAURIE LANE AND ANGLIN DRIVE AT MALENA DRIVE) The motion carried 5-0. 7. EL CAMINO REAL BETWEEN BROWNING AVENUE AND 300+ FEET EASTERLY OF TUSTIN EAST DRIVE It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to authorize the installation of the following improvements along the northerly side of E1 Camino Real between Browning Avenue and 300+ feet easterly of Tustin East Drive. The motion carried 5-0. REPORTS 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AGENDA - NOVEMBER 14, 1988 It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to ratify the Planning Commission Action Agenda of November 14, 1988. The motion carried 5-0. MAIN STREET AND EL CAMINO REAL INTERSECTION TRAFFIC STUDY It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Prescott, to approve the following: E1 Camino Real - Implement a split phasing of the traffic signal operation which will cause some delay to the motorists, estimated cost $17,000 for new traffic controller and pavement markings (Staff recommendation Alternative B); and · Main street - Implement a split phasing of the traffic signal operation which will cause some delay to motorists, estimated cost $17,000 for new traffic controller and pavement markings (Staff recommendation Alternative D). The motion carried 5-0. Council commended Mr. Ledendecker for an excellent report. RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES FOR RECREATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file subject report. Councilman Prescott requested that the report be distributed to all interested parties. The motion carried 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS 1. ADJOURNMENT IN MEMORY OF JOSHUA E. STEWART, JR., MINISTER OF VINEYARD CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP CHURCH Councilman Kelly requested that the meeting be adjourned in memory or--Joshua Stewart. Mr. Stewart.was Minister of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship Church in Tustin and died on November 15, 1988. PROCLAMATION HONORING THEATRE ARTS DEPARTMENT AT TUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested Council concurrence in awarding a congratulatory proclamation to the Theatre Arts Department of Tustin High School for winning the 1988 Golden Bell Award. Council .concurred. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9, 11-21-88 ., 3. VIDEO ADVISORY BOARD Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested agendizing, for a Council meeting in January, the possibility of appointing a Video Adv, isory. Board .to generate and organize volunteers and community interest in American Cable. 4. TRAFFIC STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE, YORBA AVENNUE/HEIGHTS DRIVE Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy reported residents on the east side of Yorba Avenue had not received the traffic study questionnaire and input she had received from area residents indicated total opposition to restricted parking. . Robert Ledendecker, Director of Public Works, reported on the current status of the questionnaire and stated that residents easterly of Yorba Avenue had not been included in the survey area. After further discussion between Council and Mr. Lededecker, it was determined that a more extensive survey would be completed and the subject would be reagendized at the January 16, 1989 Council meeting. 5. FINING OF CANDIDATES FOR FAILURE TO REMOVE POLITICAL SIGNS Councilman Edgar suggested that a specific date be determined for removal of political signs and, if the signs were not removed by the candidates, staff would be directed to remove the signs and charge the candidates accordingly. Council concurred to obtain an opinion from the City Attorney before proceeding. '$. COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR WATER DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS Councilman Edgar wanted to set a date for an analysis workshop on the Water Department. council concurred to have a 5:30 p.m. workshop prior to the January 16, 1989 Council meeting. 7. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT STUDY SESSION Councilman Edgar suggested that a study session for all other capital improvements be held sometime in February or March, 1989. S. IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT RETAIL WATER SERVICE Councilman Prescott requested an update on the transfer of the Irvine Ranch Water District retail water service to the City. 9. NEW ADDITION TO THE PRESCOTT FAMILY Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy congratulated Councilman Prescott on the recent birth of his fourth child, a son, named Samuel Dominick Lieb Prescott. 10. M~YOR HOESTEREY AND UNDERPRIVILEGED CHILDREN VISIT DISNEYLAND Ma~or Hoesterey reported on the pleasant experience he had visiting Disneyland with twenty underprivileged children from the City. The visit was sponsored by Disneyland in honor of Mickey Mouse's 60th birthday and Mayor Hoesterey thanked staff for coordinating the event. CLOSED SESSION MayOr Hoesterey announced the City Council would recess to a Closed Session to meet with its designated representatives .regarding labor relations matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54967.6. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10, 11-21-88 XIII. ADJOURNMENT At 9:50 p.m., the meeting recessed to the Redevelopment Agency, then to the above Closed Session, and then adjourned in memory of Joshua E. Stewart, Jr. to the next Regular Meeting on Monday, December 5, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. . MAYOR CITY CLERK