Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 10-22-86MINUTES OF A REGUL~U~ NEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF llJE CITY OF llJSTIN, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 6, 1986 CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION The meeting was called to order by Mayor Saltarelli at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilwoman Kennedy, and the Invocation was given by Mayor Saltarelli. II. ROLL CALL · IV. Councilpersons Present: Councilpersons Absent: Others Present: III. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEFIENTS Donald J. Saltarelli, Mayor Ronald B. Hoesterey, Mayor Pro Tem Richard B. Edgar John Kelly Ursula E. Kennedy None William A. Huston, City Manager James G. Rourke, City Attorney Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Robert S. Ledendecker, Dtr. of Public Works Charles R. Thayer, Chief of Police Ronald A. Nault, Finance Director Susan Jones, Recreation Superintendent Rob Balen, Planning Consultant Jeff Davis, Acting Senior Planner Janet Hester, Administrative Secretary Approximately 105 in the Audience Ye 1. t~ARGARET BYRD'S 88TH BIRTHDAY Mayor Saltarelli announced that on October 6, 1898, Margaret Byrd was born in Coronado, California, who is a friend and most faithful attendee of City Council meetings. The Council and audience joined the Mayor in extending birthday wishes to Mrs. Byrd with applause. 84 2. TUSTIN TILLER DAYS Mrs. Cherrill Cady presented Councilmembers with Tustin Tiller Days visors and badges, which will be held October 10-12, 1986. She also presented them with a program of events and left copies in the Council Chambers for the audience. She encouraged everyone to attend the weekend's events. 84 PROCLJU~TIONS 1. FIRE PREVENTION MEEK - OCTOBER 5-11, 1986 Battalion Chief Buck Henderso.n, Orange County Fire Department, accepted a proclamation from Mayor Saltarelli designating October 5-11, 1986, as "Fire Prevention Week." He thanked the Council on behalf of Fire Chief Larry Holmes. Battalion Chief Henderson then presented former Mayor Frank H. Greinke, Sr., with a plaque and letter from Fire Chief Larry Holmes in appreciation for his public service as Councilman and in recog- nition of his continuous service to the City of Tustin from 1982- 86. On behalf of Chief Holmes, he extended personal thanks and best wish in all future endeavors. Mr. Greinke expressed his thanks. 84 PUBLIC HFJU~I~ 1. PROPOSED ANNEXATION NO. 138 RANCHWOOD/BELLEWICK - RESOLUTION NO. B6-11B CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 10-6-86 The staff report and recommendation were presented by the Planning Consultant as contained in the inter-com dated October 6, 1986, prepared by the Community Development Department. The Mayor opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Gerald Feldman, 13191 Wickshire Lane, representing, the Bellewick Community Association, spoke in favor of subject annexation. There were no other speakers on the matter, and the public hearing was closed at 7:10 p.m. It was then moved by Edgar, seconded by Kelly, to adopt the follow- ing: RESOLUTION NO. 86-118 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS RANCHWOOD/BELLEWICK ANNEXATION NO. 138 The motion carried 5-0. 24 RECESS - CLOSED SESSION - RECONVENED As announced by Mayor Saltarelli, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to recess to Closed Session to consider personnel matters pur- suant to Government Code Section 54957, and to confer with the City Attorney regarding pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Sec- tion 54956.9(b)(1). Carried 5-0. The meeting was recessed at 7:11 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 7:26 p.m. with all members present. The City Council considered Public Hearings 2, 3 and 4 in conjunction. 2. ZONE CHANGE 86-1 - 335, 345, 355, 365, 405, 415, 425, 435, AND 445 SIXTH STREET - ORDINANCE NO. 976 3. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 11 - 335, 345, 355, 365, 405, 415, 425, 435, AND 445 SIXTH STREET - ORDINANCE NO. 977 4, APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT 86-26 - 405, 415, 425 SIXTH Sl~EET - RESOLUTION NO. 86-121 The Planning Consultant introduced Jeff Davis, Acting Senior Plan- ner, who presented the staff report and recommendation for each item as contained in the inter-com dated October 6, 1986, prepared by the Community Development Department. A question-and-answer peri od followed. Mayor Saltarelli opened Public Hearings 2, 3 and 4 simultaneously at 7:44 p.m. Arthur Nisson, 17491 Irvine Boulevard, requested that Councilman Kelly consider not voting on the issues because he publicly announced a prejudiced and preconceived opinion on the matter. Mayor Saltarelli referred the matter to the City Attorney who indi- cated he had reviewed a transcript of the September 15, 1986, Coun- cil meeting. He stated that Councilman Kelly did express opinions at subject meeting, but he did not see anything that would dis- qualify him from hearing the matter. Councilman Kelly responded to Mayor Saltarelli that his intent was to fully participate in the public hearings. Mark Ainslie, applicant, provided chronological historical back- ground on the project from June, 1985, to the present. He spoke in favor of the project. John Knilans, 175 South "A" Street, spoke in opposition to the zone change. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 10-6-86 Bob Edgell, 345 West Main Street, spoke on behalf of TRUST (Tustin Residents United to Save Tustin), and recommended denial of the zone change application. Richard Vining, 400 West Main Street, spoke in opposition to the zone change. He expressed concerns over the manner in which staff processed the project, and stated the area should remain R-1. John Knilans, read into the record Section 5, General Development Standards, of the Specific Plan pertaining to development of multi- ple lots. John Sauers, 515 South Pacific, presented photos to Council of Mr. Ainslie's property, and spoke in opposition to rezoning to PC Resi- dential. Lyn Van Dyken, 235 South "A" Street, emphasized the uniqueness of the Old Town Tustin area. She spoke in favor of retaining the zon- ing as is. George Broomell, 440 Pacific Street, was opposed to the project. Walter Raymond, Academic Specialties, Sixth Street, spoke in favor of the project. He felt it would enhance the Sixth Street commer- cial area. Charles Anderson, 255 West Sixth Street, spoke in opposition to the project. He. reported an unpleasant visit by Dr. Ernest Ainslie, during which he felt he was being intimidated to approve the proj- ect. Ernest Ainslie, 1052-A Walnut Street, rebutted Mr. Anderson's com- ments. He spoke in favor of the project. John Cargile, owner of property at 355 West Sixth Street, spoke in favor of the project on behalf of his parents who reside at 355 West Sixth Street, and his great-aunt Ruth, who resides at 365 West Sixth Street. Ed Gage, 405 West Main Street, spoke in opposition to the project. Brad Thomas, real estate appraiser, spoke at the request of Trudy Sauers. Mr. Thomas stated his opinion that the change in density would adversely effect adjacent properties. Mark Ainslie, applicant, responded to comments by speakers opposed to the project and explained why the project was designed as pre- sented. Eileen Vining, 400 West Main Street, spoke in opposition to the zone change. She stated that the neighbors would welcome six homes instead of the eight proposed. She introduced Martha Linker, 435 West Sixth Street, and Jim Hawthorne, 445 West Sixth Street, as area residents opposed to the project. Arthur Nisson, 17491 Irvine Boulevard, delineated the pros and cons of project approval. He stated that he knows of only two property owners within the area who would be directly affected by this zone change who are not in favor of same. There being no other speakers, the public hearing was closed at 9:21 p.m. RECESS - RECONVENED Mayor Saltarelli recessed the meeting at 9:21 p.m. at 9:33 p.m. with all members present. The meeting was reconvened Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey stated that the proposal is better than what is there. However, it nibbles away at the uniqueness of the downtown area, which he would like to see preserved. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 10-6-86 It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kelly, to deny Zone Change 86-1. Councilman Edgar stated his opposition to the PC zone element of the project. He then engaged in discussion with area residents Bob Edgell and John Knilans on the matter. Mr. Edgell responded that it was his best guess that residents had greater fear of the unknown in the PC zone designation than in six vs. eight residen- tial units. Mr. Knilan stated that the primary interest of the group is to retain the uniqueness of the area, and the quality and character of the project is inconsistent with same. Mayor Saltarelli felt the project was significantly damaged by including all 'nine properties in the zone change proposal. He therefore suggested Council withdraw the overlay PC zone from the 115 ft. lot frontage on all nine lots, and then deal with the pro- posal itself. Council discussion followed on the technicalities of such action and Councilman Edgar's attempt to move same. The City Attorney stated that such a motion would simply not adopt the Planning Commission/staff recommendation before Council at this time. If Councilman Hoesterey's motion is adopted, Council is still not precluded from taking further actions of rezoning or whatever Council wishes to do at this point. The Acting Senior Planner responded to Councilwoman Kennedy that if Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey's motion is acted upon, the Zone Change would be disapproved, the Specific Plan would have to be denied, which in turn would require action of denial of Planning Commission approval of Use Permit 86-26. After further Council discussion, the City Attorney noted that since Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey's motion was to deny the proposed zone change, that does not preclude a motion for a different or more restrictiv~ zone change than what was recommended. Mr. Ainslie provided Councilwoman Kennedy with his calculations and plot maps indicating that an area south of First, west of Myrtle, north of Sixth, and west of "B" Street contain a total of 45 lots which are deficient from the standard of the R-1 district, i.e., 7200 square feet. The Director of Public Works responded to Councilwoman Kennedy that CalTrans' latest plans for I-5 freeway widening indicate they will not widen on the northerly side of the freeway in the vicinity between "B" Street and the west cul-de-sac end of Sixth Street. Widening is predominantly on the freeway's south side, shifting to the north side just beyond and to the east of "B" Street. In response to Councilwoman Kennedy, Mr. Ainslie described the two different floor plans. He indicated a willingness to modify the home fronts to make each unit unique. Mr. Ainslie responded that trash trucks could enter the private street for curb-side pickup and exit onto Sixth Street without doing any backing at all. Fur- ther, the project is in complete compliance with the setback and sidewalk requirements from Sixth Street. The motion carried 5-0. Consequently, the following was NOT ADOPTED: ORDINANCE NO. 976 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON SIXTH STREET BETWEEN "B" STREET AND PACIFIC STREET AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-1 TO PLANNED COMMUNITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (P.C. RES.) It was then moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, to deny Spe- cific Plan No. 11. The motion carried 5-0. Consequently, the following was NOT ADOPTED: cITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 10-6-86 ORDINANCE NO. 977 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY CO.UNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ADOPTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 11 REGULATING DEVELOPMENT UPON CERTAIN PROPERTIES ON SIXTH STREET BETWEEN "B" STREET AND PACIFIC STREET AS INDICATED ON EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by ,,Kennedy, to deny Use Permit 86-26. Carried 5-0. Consequently, the following was NOT ADOPTED: RESOLUTION NO. 86-121 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT 86-26 AUTHORIZING DEVELOPMENT OF EIGHT (8) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS IN CONFORMANCE WITH SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 11 (405, 415, 425 SIXTH STREET) Mayor Saltarelli congratulated Mr. Ainslie on being so responsive -to people's concerns and meeting with adjoining property owners. He hoped that Mr. Ainslie would come back with a proposal to include six houses of good quality, higher price, that will still be economical to develop under existing zoning. The Planning Con- sultant stated that Mr. Ainslie would only need to submit a tract map to develop six units. Councilwoman Kennedy requested clarification on the interpretation of whether the private street should be counted in the square foot- age for R-1 lot configurations. Following Council and staff dis- cussion, the Mayor stated that it is very clear that the policy has never been to allow anyone to come into City Hall and pull permits and include in the lot size the street, public or private. He has never seen that happen before. Therefore, on the basis of what Council has done this evening, Mr. Ainslie has the approval to build six units on his property in some form or fashion. If he wishes to do anything else other than that, he will have to go through the process of obtaining approvals other than what a stan~ dard R-1 development would be. VI. PUBLIC INPUT 1. CITY OF TUSTIN - ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE POLICY Rudy Mena, President of Tustin Police Officers Association, assured Council that they are also concerned with the national problem of drug abuse and want to do their part to eradicate same. He stated that over the last month representatives from both City employee groups met with management on an alcohol and drug abuse policy. After all was said and done, he felt the policy was written in a way in which both sides walked away with a feeling of fairness to all. He publicly commended the Police Chief and the Director of Community and Administrative Services for their active role to insure fairness. He requested that the City and community be very cautious and cog- nizant of the issue of rights, as we enter this form of drug deter- rence, and the possible infringement of those rights, whether they be civil, state or constitutional. Until the judicial system reaches decisions on issues which establish guidelines necessary to proceed, he asked that we move cautiously. Officer Mena stressed that employees are on the same side as Council and want to do their part to rid the nation of this ever-apparent problem. 79 2. CITIZEN INQUIRY REGARDING RESIDENTIAL TRASH BILL Fred Helling, 14582 Emerywood Road, questioned his recent tax bill which includes $64.20 for refuse disposal for the entire fiscal year. He stated he already paid for September and October of this fiscal year and requested a refund in the amount of $10.70. Following input from the Finance Director, the Mayor indicated the matter would be on the October 22 agenda. 102 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 10-6-86 VII. CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. 4 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Edgar. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. w APPROVAJ. OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 15, 1986, REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 29, 1986, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING APPROVAL OF DElWm/U~DS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,460,505.03 RATIFICATION OF PAYROU. IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,1.97.65 50 COOPERATIVE AilREEHENT - SAR DIEGO CREEK SEDIMENT MONITORING PRO- Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute subject amended agreement; and authorized a supplemental budg~ appropriation of $4,400 for fiscal year 1986-87 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 45 86-58 5. RESOLUTION NO. 86-122 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (1985-86 SIDEWALK AND CURB REPAIR PROGRAM) [Dudley Masonry, Inc.] Adopted Resolution No. 86-122; and assuming no claims or stop payment notices are filed, authorized payment of final 10% retention amount 30 days after recordation of Notice of Comple- tion as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. 94 aa REJEC~TION OF CIJ~I# ND. 86-11; CLAIHANT: LAUI~ ICREIFELS, STEVE BARISH & MEIJUiIE GRAVES; DATE OF LOSS: 12/29/85; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 4/2/86 Rejected subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney. 44) RESOLUTION ND. 86-120 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR COLUMBUS TUSTIN ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHTING (David-Richards Construction Company) Adopted Resolution No. 86-120 as recommended by the Community Services Department. 77 RESOI. UTION NO. 86-117 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR COLUMBUS TUSTIN BACKSTOP RENOVATION (Wakefield Associates, Inc.) Adopted Resolution No. 86-117 as recommended by the Community Services Department. 77 RESOLUTION NO. 86-119 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THE APPLICATION OF THE MASTER PROPERI~f TAX TRANSFER AGREEMENT TO THE PROPOSED RANCHWOOD/ BELLEWICK ANNEXATION NO. 138 Adopted Resolution No. 86-119 as recommended by the Communi'ty Development Department. 24 10. A~ENDMENT NO. I TO THE PACIFIC BELL AGREEi~ENT Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute subject agree- ment as recommended by the Community Development Department. 45; 86-59 11. RESOLUTION NO. 86-112 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR A CHILD CARE CENTER LICENSE IN ACCORDANCE WITH HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SEC- TIONS 1540 AND 1541 AND OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS Adopted Resolution No. 86-112; and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement to permit application for a state child care license as recommended by the Community Ser- vi*ces Department. 41 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 10-6-86 12. RESOLUTION NO. 86-123 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE JOINT EFFORTS OF THE TUSTIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE TUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT TO MAKE DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE PREVENTION A HIGHEST PRIORITY FOR THE 1986-87 SCHOOL YEAR AND BEYOND Adopted Resolution No. 86-123; and directed staff to forward a copy of same to the Attorney General's Crime Prevention Center as recommended by the Police Department. 82 Consent Calendar Item No. 4 - It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Salta- relli, to approve the following: NORTH-SOUTH ROAD (jNqBOREE ROAO) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) Approved and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute two agreements pertaining to preparation of subject EIR between Irvine Boulevard and Chapman Avenue as follows: 1) Agreement between The Irvine Company and City of Tustin designating the City as the administrator of the Consultant Services Agreement and providing reimbursement for same; and 2) Consultant Ser- vices Agreement between L.S.A. and City of Tustin for prepara- tion of EIR as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engi- neering Division. The Director of Public Works responded to Councilman Edgar that the consultant {L.S.A.) has acknowledged that certification of the EIR can be completed in March, 1987, even though there has been a three-month lag in the original date for authorization to proceed. The motion carried 5-0. 45 86-60 VIII. IX. X. ORDINANCES FOR INll~OOUCTION - None. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION - None. BUSINESS 1. NAIN STREET LANOSCAPEO I~EDIAN ISLANDS Following consideration of subject inter-com dated .September 30, 1986, prepared by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Kelly, that the landscape median islands along Main Street not be installed. Motion carried 5-0. 92 2. EASTERN/FOOTHILL TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS JOINT POWERS AGENCY It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar,'to receive and file subject item dated October 1, 1986, prepared by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. Councilwoman Kennedy requested a copy of the JPA minutes since Tustin became a member, and a list of Committee assignments. Council discussion followed regarding the status of Irvine's request to rejoin the JPA. All fees have been collected and impounded until the courts reach a decision on the matter. The relevant issue is if they are allowed to join the JPA with some type of pre-conditioned veto power over alignments. The expecta- tion is that no JPA member would accept that. The Mayor and the City Manager have established a procedure of informing Council of Irvine's positions on these items by meeting with Irvine Mayor Agran prior to each JPA meeting. At this point, Mayor Agran indi- cated that all "bets were off," and they would restudy all poten- tial alignments and work through the JPA to try to come up with solutions acceptable to all members. The motion carried 5-0. 100 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 10-6-86 XI. NEg BUSINESS 1. MITCHELL AVENUE - HEJ~THERFI~O DRIVE TRAJ:FIC CONCERNS It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to direct staff to send a letter questionnaire to all potentially affected residents along Heatherfield Drive to determine how many residents would be in favor of the permit parking program as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in the inter-com dated September 17, 1986. Carried 5-0. 75 AUTHORIZATION TO UPGRAOE CURRENT HP3000 THROUGH LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT As recommended in the inter-com dated September 29, 1986, prepared by the Finance Director, it was moved by Hoestere~, seconded by Edgar, to authorize the Finance Director to enter into a lease pur- chase agreement with Hewlett-Packard to upgrade the existing Series 33 taking advantage of Hewlett-Packard's trade-in upgrade program. The motion carried 5-0. 50 3. WAIVER OF LIGHT FEES FOR YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAMS Joe Laqgley, 14782 Hillsboro Place, spoke in opposition to the City's present policy of charging organized youth sports groups a fee for use and lighting of ball diamonds and multipurpose fields. He felt it is unjust that lighted tennis and handb~ll courts are provided at no expense to individuals. Mr. Langley suggested that guidelines be established wherein all fees should be waived to groups of children 18 years and younger, with no registration fees, with no income into that group, and it is strictly voluntary for their benefit. If there are registration fees and expenses for participation, then lighting fees would be justifiable. However, he thought user fees should be waived for youth groups. The Recreation Superintendent and Director of Community Services responded to Council questions. Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey agreed that fees shoul.d be waived for com- munity youth sports groups that do not charge participation fees. The Director of Community and Administrative Services clarified that use of Columbus-Tustin fields cannot be limited to Tustin residents because County and State grant funds were allocated for improvements. Mayor Saltarelli favored waiving fees on an age basis if the groups consist of 50% or more Tustin area residents. Groups with 50% or more members outside of the Tustin area would have to pay fees. There was major Council consensus (4/5) to direct staff to meet with Mr. Langley and other interested parties on the matter, taking into consideration Council direction, and come back with a recom- mendation at the October 22 meeting to provide fee exemptions for youth sports group activities. 41 4. SEVENTEENTH STREET BETWEEN COSTA I~SA FREEWAY TO PROSPECT AVENUE - RESOLUTION NO. 86-124 As recommended in the inter-com dated September 29, 1986, prepared by the Director of Public Works/Engineering Division, it was moved by Hoestere~, seconded by Saltarelli, to 1) Adopt the following: RESOLUTION NO. 86-124 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO INCREASE THE ALLOCATION FROM THE ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FINANCING PROGRAM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SEVENTEENTH STREET BETWEEN THE COSTA MESA FREEWAY AND PROSPECT AVENUE (NORTH) ~ITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9, 10-6-86 XII. 2) Approve AHFP Project Administration Agreement No. 1173 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same subject to City Attorney's final review; and 3) Authorize a supplemental budget appropriation for Fiscal Year 1986-87 in the amount of $87,700. Motion carried 5-0. 54 45; 86-61 5. PUROIASE OF WATER TRUCK It was moved by Hoestere¥, seconded by Saltarelli, to reappropriate $12,500 from the 1985-86 fiscal budget into the 1986-87 fiscal budget; and authorize the purchase of a used 1981 water truck from Hertz Rental in the amount of $17,500 as recommended by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in the inter-com dated October 1, 1986. The motion carried 5-0. 87 REPORTS 1. m~.ANNING CO~ISSION N~TIONS - SEPTEMBER 22, 1986 There was Council/staff discussion regarding several items. Councilwoman Kennedy registered concern regarding the architecture of the Tustin Pavilion Cafe in the French Quarter center on 17th Street. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Saltarelli, to ratify the entire Planning Commission Action Agenda of September 22, 1986. Carried 5-0. 2. TUSTIN RANCH ROAD (dAI~OREE) RIGifl' OF WAY It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Saltarelli, to receive and file subject report dated September 17, 1986, prepared by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. Motion carried 5-0. 95 3. CITIZEN CONCERN - TREE TRICING ON PARKER DRIVE It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to receive and file subject report dated September 17, 1986, prepared by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. The motion carried 5-0. 86.1 4. NEWPORT AVENUE ~DIAN ISLAND U~NDSCAPING It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to receive and file subject report dated September 22, 1986, prepared by the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. Carried 5-0. 92 5. FRONTIER PARK INFANT SWING It was moved by Ed~ar~ seconded by Saltarelli, to direct staff to respond to the citizen making the inquiry; and to receive and file subject report dated September 26, 1986, prepared by the Community and Administrative Services Department. Motion carried 5-0. 77 6. CITIZEN INQUIRY - RELOCATION OF AP~IY NATIONAL GUARD HELICOPTERS TO TUSTIN MARINE CORPS AIR STATION As recommended in the inter-com dated October 6, 1986, prepared by the City Manager, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, to direct staff to respond to the citizen making the inquiry; and receive and file subject report. The motion carried 5-0. 101 XIII. OTHER BUSINESS 1. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION The City Manager requested a Closed Session to consider personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10, 10-6-86 SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER Councilman Edgar was informed that plans for the Senior Center were returned to the architect from plan check for corrections. 41 NOISE LEVELS IN TUSTIN Councilman Edgar indicated that the FAA has reported that monitored noise in Tustin is 50 dB CNEL, which is 15 dB less than the State standard. Therefore, he felt any discussion regarding aircraft noise is irrelevant since there is no numerical standard against which to complain. 101 4. OFFICIAL ADJOURNlWlENTS - FORFIER COUNCILMAJ( WILLIAI~ H. GRAY & FORMER CITY RECTRICAL BIJILOI~ INSPECTOR GUS THOMPSON Council concurred to adjourn the evening's meeting in memory of William H. Gray (who served on the Tustin City Council from February g, 1949, to November 10, 1952) and Gus Thompson, who served as the City's electrical inspector for many years. ~ 5. LEFT-TURN PHASE SIGNAL AT NEWPORT & SYCA#ORE AVENUES Councilwoman Kennedy thanked the Director of Public Works for the new left-turn phase signal at subject intersection. 94 6. PACIFIC BELL BRPLOYEE WORK SCHEDULE Councilwoman Kennedy requested that staff investigate whether Pacific Bell has completed a plan for staggered employee work hours so that traffic on Red Hill is not adversely impacted. 81 7. RANCHWOOD/BELLEWICK ANNEXATION NO. 138 The City Manager responded to Mayor Saltarelli that Council. this evening adopted Resolution No. 86-118 which initiates proceedings for subject annexation. 24 Mayor Saltarelli announced that LAFCO approved without opposition the other two island annexations off of Red Hill Avenue. 8. TUSTIN TEENS The Director of Community and Administrative Services responded to Mayor Saltarelli that one of staff's goals this year is the assess- ment of teen programming needs and establishment of a teenage pro- gram. Council concurred. 41 9. CITY OF TUSTIN ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE POLICY It was move¢ by Saltarelli, seconded by Hoesterey, to approve the City of Tustin Alcohol and Drug Abuse Policy. The motion carried 5-0. 79 10. MANDATORY DRUG TESTING PROGRAN Mayor Saltarelli reported that Senator Seymour is conducting hear- ings on Senate Bill 2175. If enacted into law, SB 2175 would allow an employer to conduct testing of employees, including random, on- the-spot, for company-wide testing in the following circumstances: Once in every 12-month period regardless of employee's job classi- fication; and up to three.times in any 12-month period in the case of employers whose jobs involve the operation of vehicles in public transit, the operation of heavy construction, handling of hazardous substances, or any job in which impairment due to alcohol or con- trolled substance would present a safety hazard to employees or members of the public. 79 11. CHANGES IN GENE~ AVIATION REGULATIONS - JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey referenced subject inter-com dated September 23, 1986, which he authored. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11, 10-6-86 As recommended in subject report, it was moved by Edg~r, seconded  Kennedy, that a letter be sent to the FAJk expressing viev~ of e Tustin City Council that: 1) The pilot licensing requirement of ten hours of solo flight be increased to at least 20 hours. With the unusually high traf- fic in the Orange County area, individuals learning how to fly have the extra burden of constant surveillance. 2) Due to the extensive mixture of commercial, general aviation and military aircraft within the airspace of Orange County, particularly over the Tustin area, traffic patterns of all air- craft must be better regulated and monitored. Operational and equipment changes required to enhance air safety should be identified and implemented. For example, transponders and com- munications radios should be mandatory equipment on all general aviation aircraft; and 3) As commercial aviation increases at John Wayne Airport, there should be consideration given to reducing the number of general aviation tie-downs to minimize an overall increase in trans- actions, thereby minimizing the possibility of mid-air colli- sions. The motion carried 5-0. 101 12. PROPOSITION 61 In response to Mayor Pro Tem Hoesterey's concerns regarding a Coun- cil policy direction should Proposition 61 gain voter approval, staff was requested to obtain a copy of the Sanitation District's extensive report on the matter for Council review. 79 13. CO~RCIA). AIRCRAFT NOISE - ~OHN W~YNE'AIRPORT Councilman Kelly expressed support of Council action regarding Other Business Item No. 11. However, he is still very concerned with commercial aircraft noise. He believes the sound monitors were not moved because it would prove the planes are in violation. He reported that there will be individual citizen-sponsored actions against intrusive noise pollutiop from commercial aircraft. Mayor Saltarelli reminded Councilman Kelly that he could act as a private individual, but to specify that his actions do not repre- sent the position of the City Council. 101 XIV. RECESS - REDEVELOPMENT; CLOSED SESSION - RECONVENED At 8:28 p.m., it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Saltarelli, to recess to the Redevelopment Agency; and thence to a Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. Carried 5-0. The meeting was reconvened at 11:12 p.m. with all members present. XV. AA'TIONS FROM ~OSED SESSION 1. MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE COMPENSATION It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to appropriate $19,250 for management incentive compensation and authorize the City Manager to distribute the funds pursuant to the Performance Recognition Plan. Carried 5-0. 79 2. GENE~ LEAVE COMPENSATION - CIl"~ MANAGER It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoestere~, to authorize the City Manager to be compensated for 141.5 hours of accumulated General Leave. Carried 5-0. 79 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 12, 10-6-86 XVI. AI~IOURN~IENT At 11:13 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on Wednesday, October 22, 1986, at 7:00 p.m. by unanimous informal con- sent. MAYOR CITY CLERK