Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 03-07-88MINUTES OF A REGULAR I~ETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA MARCH 7, 1988 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hoestery at 7:06 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Prescott, and the ~nvocation was given by Council man Edgar. II. ROLL CALL Counci 1 persons Present: Counci 1 persons 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 Steve Foster, Captain, Police Department Robert S. Ledendecker, Dir. of Public Works Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director Christine Shingleton, Dir. of Com. Development Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent Laurie Pickup, Associate Planner Approximately 100 people in attendance III. PUI)l. IC HEARING 1. PROPOSED FAIRHAVEN AVENUE ANNEXATION NO. 144 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN Jim Rourke, City Attorney, advised that as of this time we had not received certification from the Registrar of Voters. Continuation until March 21, 1988, Council Meeting. The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Hoesterey at 7:08 p,m. The following spoke in opposition to the subject annexation: Elva Woodland, 13132 Fairmont Way. Wallis Porter, 13231 Fairmont Way. Jeff Schwantes, President Foothill Community. Association. Barbara Green, 17502 Rainer Drive. Raymond Shuey, 12001 12001Theta. Judy Karwelis, 17891 Allegheny. Donald Karwelis, 17891 Allegheny. The following spoke in favor of the subject annexation: Phyliss Spivey Doug Chapman, 13252 Fairmont Way. Doug Chapman also refuted receiving any funds from the City of Tustin, Council Members, City Staff, Foothill Community Associa- tion, or the Municipal Advisory Council (MAC). It was moved by Edgar and seconded I)y Kelly that qince the t,,hula- tion of protests had not been received by the Registrar of Voters, that the matter will be continued to the March 21, 19L~8, Council Meeti rig. 2. PROPOSED PROSPECT AVENUE ANNEXTAION NO. 145 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Hoesterey at 8:12 p.m. There was no one who wished to speak. It was moved by Edgar and seconded by Kelly to continue the subject Hearing until March 21, ~9~8. CITY COUNCIL MINU1 Page 2, 3-7-88 3. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 87-4, CULTURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT. The staff report and recommendation were presented by the Community Development Director as contained in the inter-cam dated March 7, 1988, prepared by the Community Development Depzrtment. The Mayor asked staff if there are lots that are less than 10,000 square feet and if they wanted to update those lots would they be prohibited. The Community Development Department indicated there are lots less than 10,000 square feet and they would not be prohibited from up- dating thei'r property. The Mayor requested a 5 minute break at 8:26 p.m. The Council Meeting was reconvened at 8:32 p.m. Councilman Prescott and Kelly requested to abstain from participa- tion due to the fact they both have property or business in the concerned area. Richard Vining, 400 West Main, submitted a letter from John Knilans, dated October 6, 1987, in favor of the Zoning Ordinance Amendment 87-4. Mr. Vining also stated that implementing the Overlay District would increase the values of the properties, upgrade the neighborhood and increase economic development. Douglas Prescott, 330 West Main, stated he f~lt City done an excellent job preserving Old Town and he ,ioesn't feel we need an Overlay ~istrict. William S. Leinberger, 445 West Main, appreciates what Tustin has done to maintain Old Town but does not feel we need an Overlay District. He feels this is another layer of bureaucracy that is not needed. Joan Hoesterey, 2251Capertree Drive, stated she wouldn't know how to vote at this time but had some questions. How does this affect a homeowner w~o has a home that someone thinks is cultur- ally significant and perhaps he doesn't agree. Is this going to restrict a homeowner in doing what he wants with his own private property? Mrs. Hoesterey stated she has received considerable feedback on this issue and feels some details should be worked out before permanent action is taken. Frank Greinke, 230 South "A" Street, submitted a dog collar, and a briddle. He believes "if it's not broke, don't fix it." We don't need CC&R's in this area and we don't need another layer of bureau- cracy. He doesn't want anyone "horsing" around with his neighbor- hood, leave it the way it is., Robert Edgell, 345 West Main, representing T.R.U.S.T. (Tustin Residents United to Save Tustin) wanted to compliment Christine Shingleton and her staff For doing a fantastic job on this study. Over 80 cities have adopted an Overlay District and have done it successfully. T.R.U.S.T. supports City Staff and feels the Ordi- nance should be approved as submitted. John Sauers, 515 South Pacific, believes the OrdinanCe should be passed in order to preserve our historical sites. Phyliss Spivey, couldn't help but see the similarity with M.A.C., that was to be an advisory body only. Although it may appear to be a good idea at this time, committee's such as M.A.C. have a way of becoming too powerful, more costly and she would hope the City would keep that in mind. .[.~ FY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 3-7-88 John Knilens, 175 South "A" Street, spoke over a year ago and submitted a letter dated October 6, 1986, concerning the proposed development of 405, 425, 525 West 6th Street. He would like to know why we have absentee homeowners in the area. He believes we have them because they are speculating as to what is going to happen to the area and if we pass this Ordinance, they will either clean up their property or sell to someone who will. Jeff Thompson, 405 West 6th, wants to preserve the area, hut wants to be left alone, but protected at the same time. S-ally Vining, 400 W. Main, stated that the City Council has final approval over the advisory committee and she wants an advisory committee of the people who live in the downtown area. The Public Hearing was closed at g:18 p.m. Mayor Hoesterey stated that he feels Jeff Thompson hit it on the head, leave us alone but protect us. He stated that he feels more work should be done on this issue before a final decision is made. Councilman Edgar stated that City Staff has done a very fine job and he is in support of an Overlay District. However, work is still needed on this issue. He feels the Historical Society should have a me, er on the Advisory Comnittee. MJ's. Georgia Lawrence, 145 South Pasadena, said that last year Cal Trans came to her home and told her they were going to extend Freeway and take her home. She asked City Council to help her. The Mayor referred_her to Bob Ledendecker for information as to what plans have been se~ctled, what plans are still open, and what some of her options are. Councilwoman K~nnedy stated that she believes the Advisory Com- mittee should be made up of 3 members who own homes in the downtown area and 2 members who own businesses and live in Tustin. The Committee should set up criteria for design. Councilman Edgar stated that he is not prepared to support the Ordinance as written. He is prepared to support the concept of an Overlay District with modifications. He would like the Plan- ning Commission to re-evaluate the different elements in light of tonight's discussion. The Director of Community Development stated that would be approp- riate if you wish modifications, however, she asked that direction be given to the Planning Commission for restructuring of the advi- sory committee and boundary cl ari fi cati OhS. Mayor Hoesterey stated that he feels the homeowners have done an excellent job in the downtown area but we need an element of pro- tection without taking away an individual's property rights. Also there is .not a clear cut definition of what the Advisory Committee is going to be and what its ultimate responsibilities will be. The people of the area have a right to know these answers p.rior to any action. He believes the areas North of First Street should not he in the Overlay District, but the commerical district should. He suggested that we get a closer history of what the City of Orange has experienced and find out how some of their problems were resol red. Councilman Edgar stated that he is not prepared to make any deci- sions until he has a specific set of detailed recommendations from City Staff. He is supportive of an Advisory Committee to give advice to the City Council. CITY COUNCIL MINUT~ Page 4, 3-7-88 Mayor Hoesterey is looking at ways to protect the "uniqueness" of the downtown area. Nancy Edvill, 3~[5 W. Main, stated that they have been working on the project for two years and asked if the Overlay District, with- out approving the formation of a Committee, could be approved? Councilman Edgar stated that the changes would be substantial and he didn't feel he has legal authority to approve it. '. The Director of Community Development stated that the City Council would not have the legal capabilities to modify the body of.the Ordinance without referring it back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission would then report back any modificati~ons. Mayor Hoesterey stated that the items to be referred' back to the Planning Commission are: 1. Areas North of First Street, and 2. Pasadena to the Freeway. Councilman Edgar stated that he is in favor of an updated plan for E1 Camino to match what we presently have on First Street and an Overlay District of the residential area from "C" Street to the Freeway and Sixth Street to south of First Street. Mayor Hoesterey indicated that he would like some clarification as to the composition, the power, and the character of the ~dvis- ory co~mnission in conjunction with this Ordinance. )lc would like to also clarify what State Law dictates. Councilwoman Kennedy stated th,~t the o~tly two year terms and meetings four times per year. Council agreed that-they would like to see this as an Advisory Group regarding rules and regulations and implemented by the Counci 1. Councilwoman Kennedy asked if the Council agreed that every member should be a resident of the City of Tustin? Council agreed unani- mously. Councilwoman Kennedy asked if Council agreed that three members should be residential property owners? Councilman Edgar stated that he felt City Staff should come back as to whatI the State requires. The Director of Community Development stated that the Planning Commission would not have to make that decision as long as they have discussed the alternatives. Councilwoman Kennedy asked if the Council agreed that a member of the Planning Commission should not sit on the Overlay Comnittee? Council agreed with Mayor Hoesterey stating if it was within the legal requirements of the Committee. Councilwoman Kennedy suggested that $25.00 per meeting was not unreasonable to cover the expenses of a con~nittee mne)~her. Council concurred. Councilwoman Kennedy asked about the duties of the co,n,~ittee. Mayor Hoesterey stated he wanted City Staff recommendations, however, he believes the committee should be advisory as a policy board as opposed to a permit review board. Councilwoman Kennedy asked if the Council agreed that the City Council would award the certificate of appropriateness or whatever the proper, term is and not the City Staff for reason that it is a tough position to put City Staff. Councilman Edgar stated he felt once a set of standards are established such as a use permit, the staff would have the authority to issue 'those types of permits and would have the appeal process. COUNCIL MINUTES 5, 3-7-88 It was agreed that policy guidelines would be established by the Council, staff would ad~nintster, and should there be a proble, it would come before the Council. Councilwoman Kennedy then asked if this Committee would they set standards and guidelines? It was agreed that they would advise the Council of the setting of standards. They would do the research and then bring it to Council for approval. The Director of Community Development stated that it would b~ appropriate to allow the Planning Commission to hold an Open Hearing to review any changes they want to recommend and then they can renotice this Hearing so Council would not have to continue it within the 30 day period. Mayor Hoesterey asked that the Planning Commission bring this back to Council as soon as possible It was moved by Edgar.,...seconded by Kennedy, that the Public Hearing be closed and directed that the Planning Commission react to Council's comments. Mo%ion carried i 3--0, Kelly and Prescot abstai ni rig. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy, to direct Staff to solicit consulting proposals for preparation of an inventory of the area. Motion carried 3-0, Prescott and Kelly abstaining. Councilwoman Kennedy moved to advertise for appointments. motion died for lack o a~r'~"~'econd. The 4. PROPOSED LA COLINA/BEVERL¥ GLEN ANNEXATION NO. 142 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN The Staff report and recommendation was presented by the Community Development Director as contained in the inter-tom dated March 7, 1988, prepared by the Community Development Department. In response to Mayor Hoesterey, the City Clerk said protests had been fi 1 ed. The Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Hoesterey at 10:10 p.m. Carol Schrieder, 12172 Ranchwood Rd., Santa Ana, presented 63 pages of petitions that were delivered to the City Clerk's office. The City Clerk acknowledged receipt of the petitions from Mrs. Schri eder. The following spoke in opposition to the subject annexation: Carol Schrieder, 12172 Ranchwood Rd. Gale Wipple, 120~2 Skyline Dr. Joe Herzig, North Tustin Homeowners Corporation. Ray Shuay, 12001Theta Phil Anderson, 12261 Browning At 10:40 p.m. it was moved by EdQar, seconded by Kelly, to conCinue the subject Hearing until March' 21, 1988. Motion carried 5-0. . 5. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 87-5 TO ALLOW CHURCH USES IN THE PLANNED INOUSI'RIAL OISTRICT (PM) OROINANCE NO. 1003 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT SECTION 9241 (b.) OF PART 4 OF CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 9, OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE TO ALLOW CHURCHES IN THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL (PM) DISTRICT SUB- JECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CITY COUNCIL MINUTFc Page 6, 3-7-88 The Staff report and recommendation was presented by the Community De~ielopment Director as contained in the inter-com dated March 7, 1988, prepared by the Community Development Department. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:43 p.m. Ch'arles Anderson, 255 West Sixth Street, Tustin, spoke in opposi- tion, and stated that parking and traffic congestion would be a major impact in his neighborhood. Richard Vining, 400 West Main, Tustin, spoke in opposition to sub- ject Ordinance, and presented a petition with four signatures and stated his neighbors were concerned about traffic congestion and what impact an aggressive church would have in an industrial area and his neighborhood. Pastor Josh Stewart, Senior Pastor of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship of Tustin, stated he was there to answer any questions, but most of the questions would be' answered in detail during the conditional use permit. Councilwoman Kennedy had questions about their goals, if they were planning a day care center, would they be having funerals or wed- dings at the site, and how would they control the traffic. Her concerns were the impact o~ the neighborhood. Pastor Stewart stated their goal was to he as hig as possible that traffic control would be done by his staff. He doubted that anyone would want to get married of have a funer'al in a warehouse, but they would perfonn that service if requested. A day center is not 'in their five year plan but if the need arises they would consider it. The Public Hearing was closed at 10:58 p.m. Mayor Hoesterey indicated that he didn't feel this particular site was appropriate for an aggressive church. He stated that the impact on the neighborhood with the potential growth would create too many problems. It was mo~ed by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy that application for Ordinance No. 1003 be denied. After further discussion, a substitute motion was made by Prescott seconded by Kelly, to approv~Ordinance No' 1003.I The substitute~ motion carried 3-2~ Hoesterey and KennedyI opposed. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, that Ordinance No. 1003 have first reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following first reading by the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kel),),, to introduce Ordinance No. 1003. '" Carried 3-2 Hoesterey and Kennedy opposed. ' 6. ESTABLISHMENT OF A BUILDING PERMIT FEE PROGRAM TO FUND CERTAIN IMPROVEINENT$ TO SERVE TIlE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. The Director of Community Development presented the staff report and recommendation as contained in the inter-corn dated March 7, 1988, prepared by the Community Development Department. She responded to Council questions. The Mayor opened the public hearing at 11:08 p.m. 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: RESOLUTION NO. 88-12 - A RESOLUTION OF TI4E CITY COUNCIL OF ll4E CITY OF llJSTIN ESTABLISi4ING A FEE PROGR/Uq TO FUND CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE TTIE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAJI AREA. The Motion carried 5-0. COUNCIL MINUTES 7 ,' 3-7-88 IV. V. PUBLIC INPUT - None. CONSENT CALENDAR. Item No. 5 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Prescott. It was moved by Kennedy,, seconded by Kelly, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as follows. The motion carried 5-0. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 1, 1988, REGULAR MEETING AND FEBRUARY 16, 1988, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING. 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,103,176.24 RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $172,696.05 3. RESOLUTION No. 88-21 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP 87-370 LOCATED AT 2, 33, 21 AUTO CENTER DRIVE Adopted Resolution No. 88-21 as recommended by the Community Development Department. 4. PROPOSED CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR PROVISION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS - 13TH YEAR HOUSING AND COI~UNITY DEVELOP~N? PROGRAM Approved subject contract as recommended by the Co~nunity Development Oepa6tment. O. PLANNING COI~14ISSION REQUEST FOR 7:00 P.M. I~EETING TIME Directed staff to prepare an Ordinance to regular Planning Co~mnission meeting frmn 7:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. as recommended by the Cmmnunity Development Department. 7. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT FOR 'USE OF ANAHEIM STADIUM PARKING LOT Approved executi on of the proposed Hold Harml ess Agreement with the City of Anaheim for use of Anaheim Stadium parking lot in connection with driver training for police motorcycles as recommended by the Police Department. 8. EAST1ER# TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR ANALYSIS. Authorized a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $10,150.00 from general' fund monies for the completion of the Eastern Transportation Corridor Analysis currently being performed by the Cities of Tustin, Irvine and Orange, and the Irvine Company as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 9. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN OF STORM DRAINS IN PROSPECT AVENUE AND IN ED[NGER AVENUE. Approved subject professional services agreement with GPS Consulting Civil Engineers and authorized execution by Mayor and City Clerk as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 88-23 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICA- TIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTIONi OF WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS ON EDINGER AVENUE, WINDSOR LANE, CATALINA DRIVE, DEL REY DRIVE, AND LA BELLA DRIVE. Adopted Resolution No. 88-23 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engi neeri ng Division. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 88-24 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI4E CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR TI4E ANNUAL PAVEMENT MARKING PROGRAM AND DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS. Adopted Resolution No. 88-24 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. CITY COUNCIL MINUT' Page 8, 3-7-88 12. RESOLUTION NO. 88-25 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ANNUAL CONCRETE PAVEMENT REPAIR PROGRAM. Adopted Resolution No. 88-25 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 13. RESOLUTION NO. 88-26 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS AT WALNUT AVENUE AND CHERRY- WOOD LANE. Adopted Resolution No. 88-26 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engine,ri,rig Division. 14. RESOLUTION NO. 88-27 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (SLURRY SEAL PROJECT, 1987-88 FISCAL YEAR). Adopted Resolution No. 88-27 as recommended by the Public WBrks Department/Engineering Division. 15. RESOLUTION NO. 88-28 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (ASPHALT CONCRETE REHAB- ILITATION AND OVERLAY PROJECT, 1987-88 FY). Adopted Resolution No. 88-28 as reco~mnended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. Consent Caldenar Item No. 5 - PROPOSED CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF ORA~IGE FOR PROVISION OF REIIABILITATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTIES - 13114 YEAR HOUSING AND COI~IUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Councilman Prescott_asked if residents of Tustin have used these funds in previous years? The Director of Community Development stated that the City has expended significant resources. Staff will provide an update of all the private resources in previous years and an update of all the private improvement loans that have been made to property owners. Councilman Prescott requested that Staff let the citizens of Old Town Tustin know of the availabiity of these funds. It was moved by Prescott, seconded by Kenned), to approve the fol 1 Dwi ng: . PROPOSED CONTRACT WIl~l COUNTY OF OP. RNGE FOR PROVISION OF REHABILITATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTIES - 13TH YEAR HOUSING AND COld, UNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. VI. The motion tarried 5-0. · ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION 1. AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 999 - ORDINANCE NO. 1004. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 1004 have first reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following first reading it was moved by Kennedy, seconded §~' Ed(jar, that Ordinance No.1004 be in~'roduced as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1004 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 999 {SAN DIEGO PIPELINE FRANCHISE. The motion carried 5-0. VII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 1. AMENDING FRA~IL'HISE FOR A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM - ORDINANCE NO. 1002. (-,-'V COUNCIL MINUTES g, 3-7-88 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy,, that Ordinance No. 1002 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1002 by the City Clerk, it was m.oved by Kennedy, seconded Hoesterey that Ordinance No. 1002 he passed and adopted as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1002 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA. AMENDING THE FRANCHISE FOR A CABLE TELEVI- SION SYSTEM GRANTED TO CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION, INC., A CORPORATION Roll Call. Vote: AYES: Hoesterey, Kennedy, Edgar, Prescott, Kelly NOES: ~'None VIII. OLD'BUSINESS 1. JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE NONITORING PROGRAM - STATUS REPORT. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kelly to receive and file subject rePOrt dated March 7, lg88. MOtion carried 5-0. REQUEST FROM TUSTIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR USE OF VACANT WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING AT 245 MAIN STREET. Mayor Hoesterey abstained from bhis issue due to possible conflict Councilwoman Kennedy was asked to ~onduct this item. The Director of Con~nunity'Development stated that there was no further information other than what is in the report. The City Manager stated that he would like to add ofle item to the ruport. If the Council considered use of the building by 'the 14istorical Society, it would have to be acted upon by the Water Board, because they technically on the assets of the water system which includes the house. Councilman Kelly indicated his displeasure due to all the "nicks" that have occurred as he feels .very strongly that Council had indicated that Council wanted the Historical Society to utilize the bui 1 ding. Councilwoman Kennedy stated that she had not seen a direction by Council to staff on this matter. Councilman Edgar recognized Mr. Vining. Mr. Vining stated that the Historical Society had done an excellent job with the Heritage Walk and the Museum and they had done so much to enhance the City that he feels the City should donate the build- ing to them. Councilman Edgar stated that donating the building .is a good idea. However, certain improvements would have to be made and then who pays for the improvements? He suggested that Council receive and file the information and ask the Historical Society to react to the report in terms of the cost. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Prescott, to receive and file subject report dated March 7, 1988. Councilman Prescott stated he felt this is just Chapter one of probably ten Chapters in finding a home for the Historical Society and that everyone should work toward preserving our historical heritage. Councilwoman Kennedy stated that the Historical Society is a most valuable society in Tustin. It is a Tustin area Historical Society so hopefully is funded by the County as well as the City. Her con- cern was how can the City donate to one group without taking into consideration the other charitable, worthwhile groups, especially CITY COUNCIL MINUTE~ Page 10, 3-7-88 IX. when the City offices are in need of space. The motion carried 4-0, Hoesterey abstaining. 3. NEWPORT/MCFADDEN AVENUE UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 10 In response to Council concerns about the property owners in the previous E1 Camino Real Underground Utility District No. 5 being required to fund the cost of the conversions, The Director pf Public Works said he had researched the E1 Camino District and the residents were to pay off the assessments over a 10 year period. There are three alternatives for subject District: 1. Redevelop- ment Agency to pay resident's costs; 2. The residents pay out- right for the costs; and 3. Residents pay outright with an assessment district. Councilwoman Kennedy suggested that the owners of subject parcels pay the costs and that during an advertised hearing, the three property owners would have the opportunity to speak. Councilman Edgar stated that if Council has the authority to pay from the Redevelopment funds then he would like to direct staff to go retroactive and pay the residents' fees from seven years ago. Councilman Hoesterey said that undergrounding does add increase in property value and instead of asking for the monies now, add an assessment when the property is sold and collect the monies at that time. At least the property owner would have both options. Councilman Edgar asked the City Attorney if that was legal. City Attorney Rourkf-said he thought that could be structured, how- ever, he is not sure if Council can reimburse the residents fees from seven year ago. i A motion was made by Hoesterey, that any expenses made for the underground be paid by the individual property owners but give them a choice of either paying up front or asses, sing the fee when the property is sold. After further discussion, an amended motion was made by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to readvertise for a Public Hearing with the above constraints. Motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS 1. PRO-A~M GRAND PRIX KART RACING EVENT IN TUSTIN. City staff was approached in early January by Mr. Cliff Poulson of the Boy's and Girl.'s Club of Tustin and Mr. James Kinder, President of the Championship Kart Racing Association requesting that the City host a mini-Grand Prix Kart Race to be held over the 4th of July weekend on a City street course of approximately 1/2 mile. The Director of Co~mnunity Development gave a report dated March 7, 1988, submitted by the Community Development Department, indicating that Staff does not currently feel it is feasible, from the City's perspective, to hold a Kart Racing event on the 4th of July weekend. Mr. James Kinder, 10892 Pembroke Dr., Santa Ana, submitted a report to Council mitigating the concerns of staff including a copy of the Certificate of Insurance that is used for this type of event. He also presented a petition of over 200 signatures in support of this event. The following spoke in favor of the Grand Prix Racing Event: COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11, 3-7-88 deffery E. Hornsby, 501E. Orangthorpe, Anaheim William Maynard, 2279 Bonita Ave., La Verne Greg Trachy, 17871 Lucero Way, Tustin Nell B. Fedderson, 7730 Burnet Ave., Van Nuys William T. Clingen, 9420 Reseda Blvd., Northridge James R. Madrid, 113 Ave. Mesita, San Clemente Annette Hilsber, 1632 Oarcy Circle, Tustin Ed Archer, address unknown John Kinder. 10892 Pembroke Dr., Santa Aaa Mayor Hoesterey stated his concerns were insurance, as Tustin would be "deep pocket~"; closure of the streets for over two days; and the impact of putting 12,000 to 15,000 people On "A" and "B" street. He was also concerned that the 4th of July would not be an appropriate date, as the City has it's own cel ebrati on. Mr. Kinder stated that the streets would not be closed for the full three days, just .during the r~ces and then barricades would be removed. He stated that City Staff would be involved to make sure that the volunteers would be doing their job. Police Officers would be involved to supervise the street closures which is a potential liability situation. Councilwoman Kennedy indicated her concerns are street closures, what area of town they might consider, insurance and staff coordination. Perhaps the downtown area may not be the best area. Councilman Kelly indicated his support of this project and said perhaps the City should cancel the Chili-Cookoff. Captain Foster of the Police Department said when you bring 12,000 to 15,000 people into a City, you have problems directing traffic in and out of the City. The Cth of July is our busiest weekend of the year vdthout this event. The fiscal impact would be .a factor to consider. Councilman Edgar stated that he was ready to support it providing the details could be worked out. Councilman Edgar made a mottont seconded by Kelly, to support the concept and direct s6aff to wor~ with the Association to work out the concerns of the Council. Motion carried 5-0. 2. AI#U~) OF CONTI~A~ FOR WATER MAIN INPROVEMEIfTS (lei MYRTLE AVENUE, "C" STREET, KENO ORIVE AND KEII)I PL/UCE. Moved.l,by Edgar, seconded b), Kennedy, to award the contract for subject project to R.L.T. Construction, Inc. of Santa Ana, California, in the amount of $160,797.§0. Motion carried 5-0. X. REPORTS 1. PI.~UINING (:OMISSION ACTION AGENOA - FEBRUARY 22, 1988 All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. It was moved by Kennedy~ seconded .by .Eid~ar, to ratify the entire Planning Commission Action Agenda dated February 22, 1988. Motion carried $-0. 2. JAMBOREE ROAD EXTENSION THROUGH MCAS/RELOCATION OF HELICOPTER HEAVY LIFT OPERATION. It was moved by Edgar~ seconded by Kelly, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUT Page 12, 3-7-88 2, AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS ON MYRTLE AVENUE, "C' STREET, KENNETH DRIVE AND KEITH PLACE. Moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to award the contract for subject project to R.L.T. Construction, Inc. of Santa ARa, California, in the amount of $160,797.50. Motion carried 5-0° X. REPORTS 1. PLANNING CO~w~ISSION ACTION AGENDA - FEBRUARY 22, 1988 All .actions of the. Planning Commission become final unless appealed by the City Council or member of the public. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar_, to ratify the entire Planning Commission Action Agenda dated February 22, 1988. Motion carried 5-0.. JAI~OREE ROAD EXTENSION THROUGH MCAS/RELOCATION OF HELICOPTER HEAVY LIFT OPERATION. It was mpved by Edgar~ seconded by Kelly, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. 3. UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 7 (NEWPORT AVENUE) AND NO. 8 (HOLT/IRVINE) It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to receive and file subject report. Notion carried 5-0. 4. UNDERGROUND UTIkITY DISTRICT NO. 9, FIRST STREET BETWEEN PROSPECT AVENUE'AND NEWPORT AVENUE It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kellz, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. 5. SYCAMORE AVENUE ll~J~FFIC ENGINEERING STUDY. The Director of Public Works gave his report at the request of Council regarding emergency vehicles being able to pass on Sycamore Avenue during heavy traffic. After discussion, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. REPORT ON REQUEST FOR SPECIAL SIGNING AT ALL SIGNALIZED INTER-' SECTIONS WITHOUT PROTECTED LEFT TURN PHA~SES. The Director of Public Works gave his report on the subject. Councilwoman Kennedy has some interest in the subject and requested that it be agendized for the March 21, 1988, Council Meeting. It was moved by Edgar, seconded hy Hoestere~v, to agemlize for March 21, 1988, Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. 7. JAMBOREE ROAD STATUS REPORT UPDATE It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file subject report. Motion carried 5-0. 8. CITY HALL TREE REPLACEMENT The Director of Public Works said that City Staff had not received any feedback concerning local groups participating in this program. Asked Council if the California Redwood Tree was appropriate. COUNCIL MINUTES Page 13, 3-7-88 After discussion, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to purchase the largest tree possible with allocated funds. Motion carried 5-0. XI. OTHER BUSINESS CLOSED SESSION - Due to the late hour, the City Manager said the Closed Session regarding personnel matters and pending litigation would be postponed until the next City Council Meeting on 3-21-88.' 2. PROCLAMATION FOR TUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL TEAM Councilwoman Kennedy stated the Tustin High School Basketball Team has gone higher in the play offs than any other team since 1937. She proposed a Proclamation for the team and coach. Councilman Edgar suggested a Proclamation be proposed when the team has gone as far as it can go in the play offs. It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar to issue a Proclamation at the appropriate time' Motion carried 5~0. 3. PAY OFF OF WATER 80NOS Councilman Edgar stated the cash balance for the debt repayment of the Water Bonds that are due March 23, 1991, is such 6hat we can afford to pay them off on July 1, 1988. It was moved by Ed.qar, seconded h,y Kenned,¥ to ,~9endizt: for next Council Meeting. Motion carried 5-0. 4. SEI'FING A DATE FOR _CAPITAL BUDGET gORKSHOP The City Manager said to agendize for the next City Council Meeting to set a date for the subject workshop. 5. SET APPOINTHENTS TO THE AUDIT CO~w~ITTEE. Councilman Prescott requested City Staff to set appointments for the Audit Committee as soon as possible. XlI. AOJOURNMENT At 12:52 a.m. it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy, to ad- journ to the next regular meeting on Monday, March 21, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. MAYOR' ~/