HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 01-06-86II.
III.
MINUTES OF A R£GUL~ ~EEI'ING
OF lt~E CIl'f COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 6, 1986
CA}.L TO ORDER/Pi. EDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Greinke at 7:01 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way. The Pledge of Allegiance
was led by Mayor Pro Tom Saltarelli, and the Invocation was given by
Councilwoman Kennedy.
RO~L CA~L
Councilpersons Present
Counctlper~ons Absent:
Others Present:
PR~LA~TIONS
1.
Frank H. Greinke, Mayor
Donald J. Saltarelli, Mayor Pro Tem
Richard B. Edgar
Ronald B. Hoesterey
Ursula E. Kennedy
William A. Huston, City Manager
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
Mar7 E. Wynn, City Clerk
Donald D. Lamm, Com. Development Director
Dale E. Wick, Assistant City Engineer
Charles R. Thayer, Chief of Police
Monda Buckley, Administrative Assistant
Approximately 30 in the audience
LOUIE'S B&~RBER S)~]P - TWENTIEll4 ANNIVERS~.RY YEAR
Mayor Greinke presented a proclamation to Luciano "LouSe" PrintS-
parD, owner of Louie's Barber Shop at 414 East First Street in
recognition of his twentieth anniversar~ year in business. Mr.
Principato thanked the Council. 84
IV. CO~AUNITY NORS
l, C~4. IFORNIA A£~JU)EMIC DECATHLON o FO(O'HILL HIGH SA:~OOL, SECONO PLACE
Mayor Greinke noted that the Foothill High School Academic Decath-
lon team placed second in the California Academic Decathlon held at
Rancho Santiago College on January 3, 1986. He congratulated the
students and the Tustin Unified School District on their achieve-
ments, go
PUBLIC HEJ~IN~S
1. ~P~4. OF CONDITIO#S OF APPROVAL ON USE PERMIT ~. 8~28 - ~8[L
OIL ~MP~Y, 17241 IRVINE ~ULEV~O
Mayor Greinke declared a conflict of interest on the matter. Mayor
Pro Tom Saltare).li assumed the Chair.
Council woman Kennedy noted that due to the absence of the Director
6f Pub]ir Works, she was hopeful the matter would be continued
until her concerns are answered.
Mayor Pro Tom Saltarelli opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m.
George Hillyard, representative of Mobil Oil Company, spoke in
favor of the appeal to waive the ten foot irrevocable offer of
dedication along £rvine Boulevard. He noted that the same problem
has existed with other service stations in the City; Mobil Oil is
not the property owner; and the property owner is opposed to the
dedication.
Steve Inman. dealer of subject service station, spoke in favor of
the appeal.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 2, 1-6-86
There were no other speakers on the matter, and the public hearing
was closed at 7:15 p.m.
Councilman Edgar stated that Council has approved similar appeals
on the premise that ultimate development of some major arterials
needs to be done in its entirety rather than on a piecemeal basis.
In the interest of being consistent, it was moved by Edgar, sec-
onded by Hoesterey, to waive the requirement for a ten foot irrevo-
cable offer of dedication as required by Use Permit No. 85-28.
Councilman Hoesterey expressed concern that Tustin has a tremendous
traffic problem. Council must start to look more closely at these
dedications and take more action to require same so that when
expansion of major arterials is Feasible, the City is able to do it
without financial hardship.
Councilwoman Kennedy was very sympathetic with the applicant's
request. However, she felt traffic is a greater concern. She
feels the solution is to find a very advanced way for Tustin to set
the pace for the rest of the County to demand irrevocable right-
of-way dedications and then allow businesses to expand over them.
Following Council debate, the motion carried 3-I, Kennedy opposed,
GreinZe abstained. 81
Mayor Greinke resumed the Chair.
Mr. Hillyard commended the Council on their sincere interest in the
people that live and work in the community.
2. ZONING ORDINANCE AMEND~ENT NO. 85-7 - REVISIONS TO CO~iERCIAL PARK-
ING STANOARO$- ORDINANCE NO. 963
The staff report and rec~,endation were presented by the Community
Development Director as contained in the inter-cpm dated January 6,
1986, prepared by the Community Development Department.
The Community Development Director responded to Council questions.
The pub]it hearing was opened at 7:27 p.m. by Mayor Greinke. There
were no speakers On the matter, and the public hearing was closed.
It was then moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordi-
nance No. 963 have first reading by title Only. Carried 5-0.
Fo)lowing first reading of Ordinance NO. 963 by title only by the
City Clerk, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordi-
nance No. 963 be introduced as follows:
OROINANCE NO. g63 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING
TO COMMERCIAL PARKING STANDARDS
?he motion carried 5-0. 109
Mayor Greinke recessed the meeting at 7:24 p.m. to allow set-up for the
next item. The meeting was reconvened at 7:30 p.m. with all members
present.
VI.
ORAL PRESENTATION
~. BOTTLENECK FEASIBILITY STUOY- SHARON GqEENE, ORANGE COUNTY TRANS-
PORTATION COMMISSION
The Community Development Director introduced Sharon Greene, staff
member, Orange County Transportation Commission.
MS. Greene defined the 8ottleneck Feasibility Study as two studies
in .one. First, it is a Foothill/Eastern t-5 Bottleneck analysis
study - looking at whether a direct connection between the existing
freeway system and newly-proposed freeways IFoothill and Eastern
corridors) is feasible. Secondly, it is a toll road feasibility
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3, 1-6-86
study - looking at whether toll financing of.Foothill and Eastern
corridors is acceptable for corridor costs left over in association
with the MT & BFP adopted by a nunfoer of jurisdictions.
She identified the study area boundaries and purposes of the
bottleneck study. She ~t~ted that the study is ~l~rly being con-
ducted in full recognition of the fact that it involves a heavily
developed area, and the entire issue of financial feasibility and
cost are being taken into consideration.
She noted the four study alternatives:
1) "No project";
2) Freeway Connectors;
3) Arterial Connectors; and
4) Upgrade of Existing Facilities.
Ms. Greene closed by stating that preliminary findings will be
reported to the technical information exchange group and policy
committee on January 23. She extended an invitation to a public
open house on study results to be held on January 30 at Santiago
Junior High School in Orange at 5:00 p.m., with a formal meeting at
7:00 p.m.
Kia Mortazavi, member of the Orange County Transportation Commis-
sion, explained how the four alternatives were developed. With
MS. Greene's assistance, Mr. Mortazavi then identified the various
alternatives on wall maps.
MS. Greene stated that the draft final report will. be completed by
June, if not earlier.
Ms. Greene responded to questions.. Following Councilman Edgar's
personal thanks, Mayor GreinKe thanked MS. Greene and Mr. Mortazavi
for their presentation.
VII. PU81. I¢ INPUT
l. FORT1JNE TE).LIN(; BUSINESSES - OROINANC£S NO. gsa), 959 AND 960
Dewey Adams, doing business at Newport and McFadden, stated that
he felt Section 3818(c)(2) pertaining to a $10,000 bond is exces-
sive. He requested Council input on the matter.
The City Attorney responded that subject matter is on this eve-
ning's agenda. His recommendation will be to continue the ~atter
tO January 20 to allow staff review of additional amendments which
have been prepared by his office.
VIII. CONSENT CALENOAR
Item No. 7 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Edgar; Kennedy
abstained on Item No. 1 - Minutes of the December 20, 1988, Special
Meeting. It was then moved by Saltare)li, seconded by Edgar, to
approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 5-0.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUI'ES - DECEMBER 16, lg85, REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 20, lg85, SPECIAL MEETING
(Kennedy abstained)
2. APPROVAL OF DE.NOS IN THE AMOUNT OF $938,928.58
APPROVAL OF DEMJ~NOS IN THE AMOUNT OF S29,875.00
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $128,389.98
RA?IFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $130,896.71 50
3. REJECTION OF C~AIM NO. 85-48; ~AI)IANT: G~.qY d. 80YKO; DATE OF
LOSS: 8/23/85; [~I'E FILED WIll4 CITY: 11/19/85
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney. 40
4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 85-49; CLAI~NT: /~qTHUR WILLIA~I ~UER; DATE
OF LOSS: 8/23/85; OAllE FILEI) WITH CITY: 12/2/8B
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney. 40
IX.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page ¢, i-6-86
5. RESOLUI'ION NO. 86-2 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ISJSTIN, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP 85-196 LOCATED AT THE NORTH-
EASTERLy CORNER OF VALENCIA AND DEL ANO AVENUES
Adopt Resolution No. 86-2 as recommended by the Community
Deve]opment Department.
6. RESOLIXFION NO. 8~-3 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAp 85-197 LOCATED AT 1361
VALENCIA AVENUE
Adopt Resolution No. 86-3 as recommended by the Community
Development Department.
8. R£S474) D~YEI. OP~NT 99
Approve the Developer Participation Agreement between the City
and Red Hill Edinger Partnership and authorize its execution by
the Mayor and City Clerk as recommended by the Community Oevel-
opment Department.
45; 86-1
9. RES~J) DEVELOPI~ENT
Approve the agreement between the City and RESCO Development
Company for payment of Circulation improvement fees for :he
Chelsea Cafe at 1481 Edinger Avenue; and authorize its execu-
tion by the Mayor as recommended by the Community Development
Department.
45; 86-2
C~$ent Calendar Item No. 7 - Undergrounding Agrtm~m~tlt Nth Edison
Company . £t was mOved ~d~a~, seconded by Sa)tarelli, to adopt the
following:
7. ~ESOI. UI'ION NO. 864 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ENCOURAGING THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION TO
APPROVE THE PROPOSED REVISION TO THE RULE 20A ALLOCATION FORMULA
FOR UNDERGROUNDINO OF ELECTRICAL POWER LINES
In response to Councilman Edgar, the Assistant City Engineer stated
that staff is in the process of preparing the legal description for the
Newport Avenue underground district. District boundaries should be on
the Council agenda for approval next mOnth.
Councilman Edgar requested a report regarding the undergrounding ~und
account showing the beginning balance, the projected cost of Newport
Avenue undergrounding, and :he ending balance available for the next
project. The Assistant City Engineer responded that the Director of
Public Works plans to present Same to Council in the near future.
The~motion carried 5-0.
104
ORDINAN(~ES FOR IIEFRODUC~FiON
None,
ORDINANCES FOR Al)OPTION
ZONIN(i ORDINANiCE ~NO~ENT NO. 85-6 - LOCATION
PROFESSIONAL/INDUSTRiAL ZONES - ORDINANCE NO. g67
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Ed~a,, that Ordinance No.
957 have second reading by title only. ~arried 5-0. Following
second reading by title only of Ordinanc~ No. 957 by the City
Clerk, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edga,' that Ordinance
No. 957 be pas~ed and adopted as fo)lows:
ORDINANCE NO. 957 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 85-6 AUTHORIZING SCHOOL USES,
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, IN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (Pr)
AND INDUSTRIAL {M) DISTRICTS
Roll call vote:
AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
I09
XI.
XII.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 5, 1-6-86
AJ~IENOMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAl. COOE- REGULATIONS OF FORTUNE TELLINO
BUSINESSES - OROINAN~ES NO. g~B, NO. g59 ANO NO. g~o
As recommended by the City Attorney, it was moved by Hoesterey,
seconded by Kennedy, to continue consideration of the following to
January 20, 1986:
ORDINANCE NO. 968 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 86-9) AMENDING
SECTION 9232b AND SECTION 9233c OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING
TO THE OPERATION OF FORTUNE-TELLING BUSINESSES
O~U)INANCE NO. 959 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2523 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE
(FORTUNE TELLING)
ORDINANC~ NO. 960 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA REGARDING THE PRACTICE OF FORTUNE-TELLING
The motion carried 5-0.
F~RST ~I~ET SPECIFIC MAN (SPECIFIC MAN NO. [0) - ORDINANCE
It wes moved by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, that Ordinance
No. g6! have second reading by title only. Carried S-O. Following
first reeding by title only of Ordinance NO. 961 by the City Clerk,
it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, that Ordinance No.
961 be passed and adopted as follows:
OROI~ANCE NO. g6! - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING LAND USE ANO DEVELOPMENT REGULATION
SECTIONS OF THE FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
Roll call vote:
AYES: Edgar, Greinke. Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES: None
ABSENT: None 81
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW
BUSINESS
INSTALLATION OF NO PARKIN~ SIGNS FOR STREET ~EEPING PURPOSES
{ROSELEAF AVENUE, PACIFIC STREET & MIMOSA LANE)
AS recommended in the inter-tom dated December 26, ~985, prepared
by t~e Engineering Division, it was moved by Edgart seconded by
Hoesterey, to authorize the installation of no parking signs for
street sweeping purposes from 6:00 a.m. to Noon on Fridays on Rose-
leaf Avenue between Yorba Street and Mimosa Lane, Pacific Street
northerly of Roseleaf Avenue, and Mimosa Lane between Vinewood and
northerly of Roseteaf Avenue.
After a question-and-answer period, the motion carried ¢-1, Salta-
relli opposed.
Recognizing persons in the audience wishing to speak on the matter,
Council concurred to reconsider subject item.
Bruce Traywick, 14651 Pacific Street, felt that the street sweeping
policy was a misapplication in this instance and spoke in opposi-
tion to the recommendation.
Tony Mealey, Sycamore Street resident, expressed interest in
enforcement of the street sweeping policy on his street. He was
referred to contact the Administrative Assistant.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 6, 1-6-86
Keith Koster, 17331 Vinewood, expressed concern that vehicles
restricted From parking on adjoining streets may overflow onto
Vinewood. He spoke in favor of restricting parking on Vinewood.
Because the survey resulted in a tie, Vinewood was not included in
the restricted parking, and he requested a resurvey be conducted to
contact the two property owners who did not respond.
Mr. Koster was informed of the procedure and policy for conducting
another questionnaire survey.
Nan HocKer, Vinewood resident, spoke in oOpo$ition to restricted
parking on Vinewood.
The original motion carried ¢-l, Saltaretli opposed. 75
REQUEST FOR REMOVAl. OF NO'PARKING SIGNS FOR STREET SWEEPING ON BOTH
SIDES OF PASADENA AVENUE FROM 15500 PASADENA TO 15657 PASADENA
It was moved by Edger, seconded by Hoesterey, to deny the request
for rmnova) of no parking signs for street sweeping purposes on
both sides of Pasadena Avenue from 15500 Pasadena to 15657 Pasadena
as recommended by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer in the
inter-rom dated December 26, 1985. Carried 5-0. 75
AUTHORIZATION TO AOVERTISE FOR BIDS - POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING
EXPANSION OF OUTSIDE PROPERTY STORAGE A~EA - RESOLUTION NO. 86-5
As recommended in the inter-com dated December 17, 1985, prepared
by the Chief of Police, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by
Edgar, to adopt the following:
RESOLUTION NO. 86-5 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIC OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
BUILDING EXPANSION OF THE PROPERTY STORAGE AREA - POLICE DEPARTMENT
FACILITY AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
Motion carried 5-0.
XIII. REPORTS
1.
XIV.
Pt. ANNIN~ CO~I$$ION ACTIONS - DECF, MBER 23, 1985
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy, to ratify the
entire Planning Commission Action Agenda of December 23, 1985. The
motion carried 5-0. 80
OTHER BUSINESS
1. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 8~-t {PHASE II) IMPROVEMENTS - BRYAN AVENUE &
BROWNING AVENUE
The City Attorney stated that Council awarded the contract for sub-
ject project to Fleming Engineering, Inc., Buena Park, in the
· amount of $562,535.75 at its December 16, 1985, meeting. To date,
Fleming Engineering has advised that they have been unaPle to com-
ply with specifications regarding insurance.
The second lowest bidder, Sully Miller Contracting Co., Orange
($564,045.50), has been contacted by the Engineering Department.
They have advised that they are able to comply with specifications
regarding insurance.
It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded By GreinkP, to place Fleming
Engineering on notice that if they cannot comply with insurance
requirements by 5:00 p.m., January 8, 1986, their bid award will be
revoked and the contract awarded to the second lowest bidder, Sully
Miller Contracting Co., Orange, in the amount of $564,0A5.50.
Motion carried 5-0. 25
REQUEST FOR C).OSEO SESSION
The City Attorney requested a Closed Session for discussion of
legal matters.
XV.
XVI.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7, 1-6-86
3. W[L~81~ TO OIR£Cl'O~, IRVINE RA#CN ~TER OI~'TRICT
Mayor Sreinke welcomed and recognized Peer Swan, Oirector of the
Irvine Ranch Water District. Mr. Swan thanked the Mayor.
4. ORA/IG~ COU~fFY CENTIENNIAL COMNI[TEE
Mayor Greinke referenced a letter from the Orange County Centennial
Ca.mittee requesting a representative to serve in culmination of
the celebration of Orange County's lOOth birthday in 1989. He out-
lined some of the duties involved. The Mayor stated he would be
making an appointment to subject committee in the near future.
S, LAFCO APPOINTNENT
Council discussed the upcoming appointment to t~e Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO). Council concurred to authorize
Councilman Edgar to conduct an informal poll of the Counci;, and
vote accordingly at the January 9 League meeting at which subject
appointment wi;1 be made. 2¢
Councilwoman Kennedy expressed her recommendation for Phil Schwartz
or Evelyn Hart for appointment.
5. 0RA,~G~ C~UNT¥ CITY SELECTIO# CO~I~I'FrEE BY-LAwS
As requested by the Orange County. League of Cities, Council con-
cuffed to approve the proposed changes to the by-laws of th'e Orange
~City Selection Committee. 68
7.RKn HILL AVENUE RAILROAD C~OSSIN6
Councilwoman Kennedy relayed problems with the Red Hill Avenue
railroad crossing, specifica]ly half-hour traffic de)ays and the
surface condition over the crossing. She requested that the Engi-
neering Department contact the appropriate parties regarding same.
101
RECESS - REDEVE].OPf, E~T - RECONVENED
At 8:35 p.m. it was moved by Hoesterey~ seconded Saltarelli, to recess
to the Redevelopment Agency. The motion carried 5-0.
Fo)lowing adjournment of the Redevelopment Agency meeting, a recess was
called at 8:39 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:¢7 p.m. with all
members present.
~Kk'I'ING POLICY FOR TUSI'[N
Mayor Greinke explained that in an effort to relay a positive message
to the public from Tustin on its heritage and future, he formed a com-
mittee with Walt Fredricksen and Dan O'Connor to market this idea. He
reflected on elements which are unique to Tustin which have made it
what it is today. The committee then contacted The Irvine Company ~or
assistance, and a concept presentation is to be made this evening.
He then introduced Cora Newman, The Irvine Company, and RoOin White-
sides, Intercom, who presented the general marketing concepts to Coun-
cil which include:
I) A Positioning Statement;
2) A brochure for use by the Chamber of Commerce and City for new
residents and businesspersons;
3) A calendar for marketing which could be used as a City fund-raiser;
4) A script outline for a slide show presentation; and
5) A public relations consultant with a media plan.
Mayor Greinke thanked both Cora Newman and Robin Whitesides for the
presentation.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 8, 1-6-86
XVII. RECESS - CLOSED S[SSION - AI)dOURNMI~NT
At 9:07 p.m. the meeting was recessed to a Closed Session for discus-
sion of legal matters as announced during the Redevelopment Agency (see
Redevelopment Minutes of January 6, 1986}; and thence adjourned to the
next regular meeting on January 20, I986, at 7:00 p.m. by unanimous
informal consent.
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
MINUllES OF A RE.AR ~k-rING
OF ll4E REDEYELOPMENT AGENCY OF
ll4E CITY OF TUSTIN. ?.~LIFORNIA
JANUARY 6, 1986
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 8:35 p.m. by Chairman Greinke in the
City Council Chambers, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California.
Agency Members Present:
Agency Members Absent:
Others Present:
Frank H. Greinke. Chairman
Donald J. Saltarelli, Chairman Pro Tem
Richard B. Edgar
Ronald B. Hoesterey
Ursula E. Kennedy
None
William A. Huston, Exec. Director/City Manager
James G. Rourke, City Attorney
Mary E. Wynn, Recording Secretary/City Clerk
Donald D. Lamm, Community Development Director
Charles R. Thayer, Chief of Police
Dale E. Wick. Assistant City Engineer
Monda 8uckley, Administrative Assistant
Approximately 10 in the audience
3. APPROVAL OF MI~S
It was moved b~ Saltarelli, seconded by Hoestere¥, to approve Minutes of
the Dece~er 16, 1985, Regular Meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
4. RE$O D~YELOP~NT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
The Community Development Director stated that the developer has requested
modification in the agreement whereby payment for actual cost of con-
strutting off-site public improvements could be drawn as completed.
As suggested by the Community Development Director, it was moved by Salta-
relli~ seconded by Edgar, to:
1) Approve the Development Participation Agreement between the Tustin
Community Redevelopment Agency and the Red Hill Edinger Partnership;
2) Amend Page ll, Section V-C-(503) whereby the City could authorize
fifty percent payment upon completion of one-half of the pub)it
improvements with the balance due upOn completion and final account-
ing; and
3) Authorize execution of the agreement by the Agency Chairman and Secre-
tary.
With the City Attorney's acceptance, the motion carried 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
None,
6. AN~EM£Kr OF CLOSED SESSION
Chairman Greinke announced that the City Council will recess to Closed
Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with the
City Attorney regarding pending litigation which has been initiated for-
mally and to which the City is a party. The title of the litigation is
Lopez & Ports vs. City of Tustin, et al, Orange County Superior Court.
7. AOJOURNM~NT
At 8:39 p.m. the meeting was adjourne~ to the next Regular Meeting on
Monday, January 20, 1986. at 7:00 p.m. by unanimous informal cogsen~t~. ~
,_Xy~.,,~A ~, ~"~"'~'~'"~ CHAIRMAN
AGENDA OF A REGULAJ~ I~EETING
OF ll4E TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 CENTENNIAL WAY
JANUARY 6, 1986
7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TI) ORDER/PLEDGE OF ~LEGIANCE/INVOCATION
II. ROLL CAI_L
III. PROCLAJ~mJ~TION
1, LOIJIE'S BAJ~BER SHOP - llWENTIETH A31NIVERSAJ~Y YEAR
IV. PUBLIC HEJ~RI NGS
1. APPE~ OF CONDITIONS OF A,°PROV~ ON USE PERMIT NO. 85-28 - MOBIL OIL
COMPA,NY, 17241 IRVINE BOULEVAJ~D
Recommendation: Pleasure of the City Council.
2. ZONING ORI)II~ANCE AI~ENDI~NT NO. 85-7 - REVISIONS TO COI~4ERCI~ PA.RKING
STAJIDAJ~DS - ORDINANCE NO. g63
ORDINANCE NO. 963 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE T1JSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING TO
COMMERCIAL PARKING STANDARDS
Recommendation: M.O. That Ordinance No.
title only.
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 963 be introduced.
963 have first reading by
V. Ot~AL PRESENTATION
1. BOI'I1. ENECK Fl~A~SIBILITY SllJDY - SHARON GREENE, ORANGE COUNTY ll~ANSPORTA-
TION COI~ISSION
VI.
PUBI. IC INPUT
(For City of
Water Service
procedures.)
Tustin Residents and Businesspersons on any matter, and for
Customers having a concern unresolved by Administrative
VII.
CONSENT CAJ. ENDAJ~
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items
prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Council,
staff or public request specific items to be discussed and/or removed from
the Consent Calendar for separate action.
1. APPROV~ OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 16, 1985, REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 20, 1985, SPECIAL MEETING
APPROVAJ. OF DEMAJ(DS IN THE AMOUNT OF $938,928.58
APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,875.00
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $128,389.98
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AJvlOUNT OF $130,896.71
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 1 1-6-86
REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 85-48; CLAIMANT: GARY J. BOYKO; DATE OF LOSS:
8/23/85; DATE FILEO WITH CITY: 11/19/85
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney.
REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 85-49; CLAIMANT: ARTHUR WILLIAM BAUER; DATE OF
LOSS: 8/23/85; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 12/2/85
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney.
RESOLLFFION NO. 86-2 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP 85-196 LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERLY
CORNER OF VALENCIA AND DEL AMO AVENUES
Adopt Resolution No. 86-2 as recommended by the Community
Development Department.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-3 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING FINAL PARCEL MAP 85-197 LOCATED AT 1361 VALENCIA
AVENUE
Adopt Resolution No. 86-3 as recommended by the Community
Development Department.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-4 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ENCOURAGING THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION TO APPROVE
THE PROPOSED REVISION TO THE RULE 20A ALLOCATION FORMULA FOR
UNDERGROUNDING OF ELECTRICAL POWER LINES
Adopt Resolution No. 86-4 as recommended by the Director of Public
Works/City Engineer.
RESCO DEVELOPMENT
Approve the Developer Participation Agreement between the City and
Red Hill Edinger Partnership and authorize its execution by the
Mayor and City Clerk as recommended by the Community Development
Department.
RESCO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Approve the agreement between the City and RESCO Development Company
for payment of circulation improvement fees for the Chelsea Cafe at
1481 Edinger Avenue; and authorize its execution by the Mayor as
recommended by the Community Development Department.
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION
None.
IX. ORDINANCES FOR AOOPTION
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 85-6 - LOCATION OF SCHOOL USES IN
PROFESSIOMAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONES - ORDINANCE NO. 957
ORDINANCE NO. 957 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 85-6 AUTHORIZING SCHOOL USES, SUB-
JECT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, IN THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (Pr) AND
INDUSTRIAL (M) DISTRICTS
Recommendation: M.O. - That Ordinance No. 957 have second reading by
title only.
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 957 be passed and adopted. (Roll Call Vote)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 2 1-6-86
OF FORTUNE TELLING
A~NDMENTS TO TRE MUNICIPAL CODE RESULAT!ONS
BUSINESSES - OROI. NANCES NO. 958. NO. ~59 AND NO. 960
ORDINANCE NO. 958- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, (ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 85-9) AMENDING SEC-
TION 9232b AND SECTION 9233c OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING TO THE
OPERATION OF FORTUNE-TELLING BUSINESSES
CE NO. 959- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ORDINAN ........ ~u~u ING SECTION 2523 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE (FOR-
TUSTIN, CALI~U){m~,
TUNE TELLING)
ORDINANCE NO. 960- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA REGARDING THE pRACTICE OF FORTUNE-TELLING
Recommendation: M.O. - That Ordinance No. 958 have second reading by
_ Vote)
~-{t 1 e only.
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 958 be passed and adopted. (Roll Call
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 959 have second reading by title only.
M.O. That Ordinance No. 959 be passed and adopted. (Roll Call Vote)
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 960 have second reading by title only.
M.O. That Ordinance No. 960 be passed and adopted. (Roll Call Vote)
FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIF).C pLAN NO- 10) - ORDINANCE NO- 961
ANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ORDINANCE NO. 961- AN ORDIN . OPMENT REGULATION SECTIONS
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING LAND USE AND DEVEL
OF THE FIRST STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
Recommendation.: M.O. - That Ordinance No. 961 have second reading by
Title only.
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 961 be passed and adopted. (Roll Call Vote)
X. OLD BUSINESS
None.
X1.
HEW BUSINESS
1. ),NSTAJ. LATXON OF NO pARKING SIGNS FOR STREET SWEEPING PURPOSES (ROSELEAF
AVENUE, PACIFIC STREET & MIMOSA LANE)
Recommendation: Authorize the installation of no parking signs for
~reet sweepiJ~g purposes from 6:00 a.m. to Noon on Fridays on Roseleaf
Avenue between Yorba Street and Mimosa Lane, Pacific Street northerly of
Roseleaf Avenue, and Mimosa Lane between Vinewood and northerly of Rose-
leaf Avenue.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Page 3
1-6-86
INSTALLATION OF NO PARKING SIGMS FOR STREET SWEEPING PURPOSES (SAN JUAN
STREET, MYRTLE AVENUE & MITCHELL AVENUE)
Recommendation: Authorize installation of no parking signs for street
sweeping purposes as recommended by the Engineering Division as follows:
1) 15962 and 16002 Myrtle Avenue between 6:00 a.m. to Noon on Monday;
2) 1777 Mitchell Avenue between 6:00 a.m. to Noon on Monday; and
3) Northerly side of San Juan Street between Red Hill Avenue and~620 +
feet easterly between 6:00 a.m. to Noon on Thursday -
REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF NO PARKIN6 SIGNS FOR STREET SWEEPING ON BOTH
SIOES OF PASAOENA AVENUE FROM 15500 PASAOENA TO 15657 PASAOENA
Recommendation: Deny the request for removal of no parking signs for
street sweeping purposes on both sides of Pasadena Avenue from 15500
Pasadena to 15657 Pasadena as recommended by the Director of Public
Works/City Engineer.
AUTHORIT. ATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIOS - POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING EXPAN-
SION OF OUTSIOE PROPERTY S'FORAGE /LREA - RESOLUTION NO. 86-5
RESOLUTION NO. 86-5 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE BUILDING
EXPANSION OF THE PROPERTY STORAGE AREA - POLICE DEPARTMENT FACILITY AND
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 86-5 as recommended by the Chief
of Police.
XII.
REPORTS
1. PLANNING COI~qISSION ACTIONS - DECEMBER 23, 1985
All actions of the Planning Commission become final unless appealed by
the City Council or member of the public.
XIII. OTHER BUSINESS
1. CITY )tANAGER
2. CITY AI'FORNEY
3. CITY COUNCIL
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
To the next Regular Meeting on Monday, January 20, 1986, at 7:00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Page 4 1-6-86