HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES 10-10-85II.
III.
IV.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Greinte at 7:01 p.m. in the
City Council Chammers, 300 Centennial Way, Councilwoman Kennedy led
the Pledge of Allegiance. The Invocation was gtven by Mayor Pre Tem
Saltarelli.
RDLL CALL
Councilpersons Present:
Councilpersons Absent:
Others Present:
P~I.A~TION
1.
Frsnk H. Greinte, Mayor
Oonald J. Saltarelli, Mayor Pro Ten
Richard B. Edgar
Ronald B. Hoesterey
Ursula ~. Kennedy
None
William A. Huston, City Manager
James G. Router, City Attorney
Ma~ E. Wynn, City Cleft
Donald D. Lamm, Com. Development Director
Robert S, Cedendecker, Dir. of Public Worts
Royleen A. White, Oir. of Com. & Admin. Styes.
Approximately 50 in the audience
FII~ P!~VENTION WEEK o OCTOBER 6-12, 1985
Mayor Greinte read a proclamation designating October 6-12, I985,
as "Fi re Prevention wee~." Battalion Chief Whitesman accepted the
proclamation and thanked the Council. ~
TUSTTN LIONS ~UB - "WHI"TT CANE OATS'
A proclamation acknowledging Cions White Cane Days was presented by
Mayor Greinke to Lions n~ember and former Mayor/Councilmember Tony
Coco. Mr. Coco thanked the Council. 84
PUBLIC I~PUT
Sherrt Lynn Miller, 131 Hall Circle, ~54, spoke in favor of the pro-
posed ordinance to regulate smoking in public places and places of
employment which Council will consider on October Z1. Ms. Miller
reduested that the Director o? Co~unity and Administrative Services
contact cities with effective ordinances on the matter, particularly
Irvine's Assistant City Manager. The Director indicated staff has
already been in contact with same. Ms. Miller added that her employer
will be relocating to Tustin. She noted that she has a petition with
39 co-workers' signatures in favor of the proposed ordinance, 88
V. . PUBLIC HF_ARI~G
NAJOR II40RIYdGHFARE & ~IDGE FEE PI~OGRNM (/~T & BFP) FOR ll4E
FOOT14ILJ./E~ERN ll~A~ISP~TATION CORRIDORS - RESOLUTION NO. 85-102;
ORDINANCE NO. 948; RESOkUTION NO. 85-103
The Director of Public Works presented the staff report and recom-
mendation as contained in his inter-com dated OctoDer 2, 1985.
The Director added that the ~eting with the other ~mbers (seven
cities and County) of the proposed Joint Powers Authority nas been
set for October 18, 1985. He commented that the actual Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA) is an additional document to be considered
should Council decide that Tustin will participate in the program.
He noted that there are five agencies within the area of benefit
that have adopted the jPA, so it is a recognized authority at this
point.
C:TY COUNCIL MINUTE:
Page 2, 10-10-85
The Director of Public Works and the City Manager responded to
Council questions. To date. Anaheim, Orange, San Cie manta, Yorba
Linde, and the County have approved the JPA.
Kan Smith, Manager of Transportation Planning, County of Orange
Environmental Management Agency, stated the City of San Juan
Capistreno has adopted the enabling ordinance to allow them to
adopt the MT & BFP but has continued the hearing to adopt the Fee
program itself to later in October/November.
[rvine has a hearing scheduled on October lB and is expected to
adopt the program.
Mayor Greinke opened the public hearing at 7:lg p.m.
Bill Speros, commercial property owner in Tustin, resident of
[trine, and Chairman of the C~,,lttee of Seven Thousand (C.O.S.T.),
spoke in opposition to the program. C.O.S.T. has circulated the
initiative position which deals with ~tizens' right to vote on
free~ay projects to be funded similarly to the MT & BFP. Mr.
Speros stated that the proposed fee structure can be changed at any
time and as often with no limitations. The only way to dissolve
the JPA is by a majority vote of the members or 2/3 vote of the
State Legislature (which he feels is impossible).
Mr. Speros noted that if new development slows, the amount of fee
income could drastically stop, and bonds would have to be sold. In
that case, who would insure the bonds, and what would the City's
liability and risks be? If a member exits the JPA it must continue
to co$1ect fees for four years, but there is no indication of lia-
bility upon exit. Mr. Speros felt there must be more direct
responsibility to the electorate on the JPA. Lastly, he noted that
in the past, all roads were built with gasoline tax dollars. From
those gasoline tax dollars, Orange County receives a dispropor-
tionate share/percentage of what it generates, and the MT & BFP
would worsen that situation.
Mr. Speros responded to qpestions ?rom Mayor Pro Tam Saltarelli.
Daniel O'Connor, 1681 Loma Road, Santa Aha, spoke in opposition to
the program stating that the fees are usurious, punitive and a
simple form of special taxation. He noted that there is currently
a Federal tax on gasoline sales for road maintenance and construc-
tion which now goes into the General Fund. Since the passage of
Prop 13 in 1976, agencies at all levels are imposing a variety of
creative assessment fees and increasing service charges that are
excessive, prohibitive and inflationary. Mr, O'Connor recognized
that while some fees are reasonable and necessary, their net effect
can be detrimental to the community good, especially in blighted
areas, where fees can make the difference as to whether the project
goes forward or not.
Matt Nisson, 14462 Red Hill Avenue, spoke in opposition to the pro-
posed fees. He stated that instead of penalizing those who build,
upgrading should be encouraged on remaining undeveloped parcels
within Tustin. He noted Chat the Eastern Corridor will encourage
more building in Riverside County and generate more traffic through
Tustin. He recon~nended that Council at least exclude from the pro-
gram all Tustin properties west of Browning Avenue.
Tony COCO, no address given, expressed concern regarding the Fund-
ing, dissolution restrictions, and Flexibility to change the fee
structure from that initially approved in the JPA. Mr. Coco stated
his political philosophy that users should pay, not the general
public, and suggested Funding major corridors via electronic meter-
ing or "s~opless toll billing."
Bill Moses spoke in opposition to the program, and cautioned the
Council to proceed carefully. He requested Council delay taking
any action for approximately 30 days or more to study the matter in
depth, and asked the Council to submit the matter Co a vote by the
people.
C COUNC IL M[NUT[S
There were no other s~eakers on the ~atter, and the public hearing
was closed at
Councilman Hoesterey noted the pros and cons of joining/not joining
the Joint Powers Authority.
Councilwoman Kennedy stated she is not sympathetic with developers,
because any tax or fee is passed on to buyers. She noted that
whether or not Tustin joins the JPA will not halt freeway develop-
ment. Her main interest in whether to join the JPA is if it will
gtve Tustin input on the proposed freeways. Staff responded that
each member city of the JPA will have one vote, regardless of popu-
lation or size. If Tustin does not join the JPA, it will have no
say regarding the location, sco~e or nature of the three corridors.
Councilman Edgar stated that traditional sources of funding have
been wiped out. The JPA represents a ~echanism for a new funding
source that is radically different. He was in favor of joining the
JPA and felt Tustin can Dave positive influence on the Eastern
Corridor location.
Mr. Smith, County EMA, responded to Councilwoman Kennedy's ques-
tions.
Counts 1/staff dtscussion fol 1 owed.
Bill Moses rebutted co~ents by Counctlmombers Edgar and Kennedy,
and again urged Council to proceed with caution.
Mayor PrO Tom Saltarelli stated that the established area of bene-
fit and formula for payment are unfair. Tustln has unsuccessfully
fought both. However, something ~ust be done about traffic - it is
intense, the noise level is high, there are many accidents, and it
is destroying the quality of life. Tustin is in the geographic
center of Orange County, and traffic must be diverted around
Tustln. In reference to the Bottleneck Study, he stated that the
Council and residents of North Tustin must take a firm stand to
StOp the extension of the Garden Grove Freeway through Tustin and
the unincorporated area north of Tustin.
Mayor Pro Tom Saltarelli requested a continuance of the matter to
introduce an ordinance that would be acceptable to the other JPA
cities which would allow Tustin to exempt projects that are
taxpayer-subsidized. He felt exceptions should be made for
business~eople and residents to grant watvers to some degree of
subject fees so that there would be no disincentive for then to
improve their progerties.
Mayo6 Greinke commented that there has been ~ore growth in the
unincorporated area north of Tustln than in Tustin itself. He
recognized the extremely difficult decision Council must ~ake to
take action one way or another.
It was then moved by Greike, seconded by Hoestere7, to continue the
Major Thoroughfare & Bridge Fee Program and consideration of the
following items to October 21, 1985:
RF..SOt. UTION NO. 85-102 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TlJSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
PROPOSED AREA OF BENEFIT AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PRO-
GRAM
OROIRANCE NO. 948 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN ADDING SECTION 2800 TO THE CITY CODE ADOPTING A MAJOR
THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM
RESOLUTION NO. 85-103 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN ESTABLISHING THE AREA OF BENEFIT AND THE MAJOR
THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM FOR THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN FRANS=
PORTATION CORRIDORS
The motion carried 5-0. 100
CITY COUNCIL MINUT~
Page 4, lO-lO-a5
¥I. CO~E~¢I'
Item No. i was removed by Kennedy. It was moved by Edgar, seconded b~
Saltarelli, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. The
motion carried S-O.
APPROVAL OF OEWUM~DS IN THE AMOUNT OF $532,270.88
~ATIFICATIOW OF PAYROLL IN THE ~OUNT OF $12¢,¢45.33
5O
3. RESOLUTION NO. 85-100 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 'T~E
CITY OF T1JSTIN, APPROVING REVISED I~NTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 8451
(South of Oow Avenue, WeS1 of Tustin Boundary, North of Moulton
Parkway)
Adopted Resolution No. 85-100 as reco~nended by the Con~nunity
Development Department. g9
NO PARKIN6 SIB~(S ~ Sll~E~"F ~EPI~ ON CLOVE~BROOK
Authorized the installation of signing prohibiting on-street
parking during the hours of street sweeping between 6:00 a.m.
and 12 noon on Monday on both sides of Cloverbrook Drive as
recommended by the Engineering Division. 75
~O.ARATION OF SURPt. US VEHICLES
Found that ten vehicles, motorcycles and equipment as detail ed
in subject r~ort are not required for public use and declared
them surplus items as r~commended by the Director of Public
Works. 87
VII.
Consent Calendar Item No. 1 - Minutes of S~utember 16, 1985, Regular
Me,ting - Councilwoman Kennedy referred Council to Page 7, Report No.
2, in subject Minutes. She stated that "unanimous informal consent"
did no~ represent the 2-2 Council sp)it during discussion of the car-
pool lane idea. She added that while she and Councilman Edgar spoke of
the necessity to at least consider HOV lanes, Councilmembers Hoesterey
and Saltaretli were o~posed to the idea. Mayor Greinke then attended
the Corridor Operation Advisory Committee meeting and voted against
NOV lanes, w~ich reflected ~ m~jortty view with his vote. However, he
was not present at the September 16 meeting to vote on same, and she
felt it was not handled properly.
Councilman Edgar noted that "unanimous informal consent" was to receive
and file the status report, and there was no fomal vote on the HOV
lane ~ltter. Mayor Pro Tam Saltare)li stated that what transpired was
the consensus of Council at the September 16 meeting. Mayor Greinke
reported on the meeting of the Operation Advisory Co~mnittee. He stated
that he voted as Mayor of Tustln against the HOV lane, and noted that
the consensus was 3-2 (Edgar and Kennedy opposed). Councilwoman
Kennedy stated she would be more precise in the future on such matters.
It was then moved by Kenned~ seconded by Edgar, to approve the follow-
ing:
1. APPROVAL OF MINtFrE$ - SEPTEMBER 16, 1985, REGULAR MEETING
The motion carried ~-0, Greinke abstained. 38
ORDIRA/(CES FOR INTRODUCTION
~one.
VIII. OROI~NCIrS FOR ~OOPTION
1. RE¥ISION TO BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE FOR COLLECTION OF PEN~J_T¥
FEES - ORDINANCE NO. 943
It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded Dy Edgar, that Ordinance No.
g43 have second reading Dy title on]y. Carried 5-0. Following
second reading by title only of Ordinance NO. 943 by the City
Clerk, it was moved by Sa]tarelli, seconded by Kennedy, Chat Ordi-
nance No. 943 be passed and adopted as follows:
IX.
COUNEIL MINUTES
Page 5,-10-10-85
O(~)[IIiMIC[ NO. 943 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN. CALIFORNIA, AMENDING sECTION 2521 OF THE I'USTIN CITY CODE,
RELATIVE TO BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES
Roll call vote:
AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
31
ZONE O4AN6E 85-g - ORDINANC~ NO, g4~
It wes moved by Saltarelli. seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance NO.
g46 have second reading by title only. Motion carried S-O.
Following second reading by title only of Ordinance No. 946 by the
City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordi-
nance NO. g46 be passed and a~ooted as follows:
OI~)INAIiCE NO. g44S - AN OROINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, R~ZONING THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF CARFAX
AVENUE, WESTERLY OF SCHOOL ROAD FROM PLANNED MANUFACTURING AND
MANUFACTURING DISTRICT (PM&M) TO PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT
(P&I), AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A"
Roll call vote:
AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES: None
ABS[NT: None
3. Z~)#E C~ 85-.].1 - OI~INAI~ NO. 947
].lO
It was ~oved by Kennedy? seconded by Edqar, that Ordinance N. g47
have second reading Py title only. Carried 5-Q. Following second
reading by title only of Ordinance No. 947 by the City Clerk, it
was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 947
be passeda~d adopted as follows:
OI~DIN~ NO. g47 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, REZONING 1782 NISSON ROAD FROM DUPL£X RESIOEN-
TIA4. OISTRICT
EXHIBIT
Roll call vote:
AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
110
I~J.9INE$S
BUSINESS
AWARD OF CO~I~CT - MAIN STREET WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT IMPROVE-
MENTS
As recommended in the inter-cc~ dated October 1, [985, prepared by
the Engineering Division, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by
Edgar, to award the contract for subject ~roject to Schuler Engi-
neering Corporation, Anaheim, in the amount of S[53,003.
The Oirector of Public Works responded to Councilwoman Kennedy that
the replac~ent line has been located to one curd side, and staff
does not anticipate any traffic problems on Main Street during con-
~truction. He noted that the old water line will be aDandoned and
drained once services have been converted to the new line, The new
line has been upgraded in size to accommodate a potential well site
in the west end of the City.
NEW
1.
The motion carried 5-0. 107
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE.
Page 6, i0-I0-88
REPORTS
~. Pt. ANMII(~ ~MMISSION ,~'TIO~S - SEPTEI~IER 2~,
The Community Development Director noted that the applicant for
Variance 85-5 (Ruby's Cafe) has filed an mppeal which will be on
the October 21 agenda.
The City Clerk also noted that an appeal was filed this date on Use
Permit 85-20 (satellite dish at 13201 Silver Birch Drive) by the
appl i cant.
It was then moved by Ed~ar~ seconded by Hoesterey, to ratify the
entire Planning Commission Action Agenda of Se~temOer 28, 1985.
Carried 5-0. 80
ROUTE 55 COSTA GSA PR~l~AY - CO~RIDOR 0Pt')~ATTON ADVISORY ~IirEE
~A~S ~T
Councilm~ber Edgar and Mayor Greinke debat~ the pros and cons of
carpool express lanes. Councilman Edgar felt the ~rpool lane will
provide efficient utilization of the fre~ay.
Mayor Greinke stat~ he was in favor of carpooling. H~ever, he
is ~posed to the HDV lane because it is paid for Dy all taxpayers,
yet t~e majority of those taxpayers will be deni~ the use of that
lane.
Councilman Edgar ~sponded t,at the HDV lane is numerical ~gineer-
lng and will allow efficient mordent of vehicles.
It was moved by Greinke~ seconded by Saltarelli, to declare a posi-
tion of opposition to 'the ~r~oo/ express lane, and suppo~ a
generml purpose lane to be us~ by all motorists who pay taxes to
suppo~ that lane.
Councilw~an Kennedy rebutt~ that ~eryone in a car is helping to
Suppo~ the ?re~ay~. Th~ may be paying the driver and helping
pay for the gas. I? we ~ve ~re people on the ?re~ays, we will
decrease ~ission~ ?r~ stalling automoOiles, and eliminate the
necessity to build ~re ~ads.
After further discussion and debate, the ~tion carried 3-2, Edgar
and Kennedy opposed. ~
XII.
OTHER BUSINESS
1. REQUEST FOR O. OSED SESSION
The City Manager requested a Closed Session following the Redevel-
, opment Agency meeting to consider Personnel Matters pursuant to
Government Code Section 5&957.
2. UPCOMING CO~UNITY EVENTS
Councilwoman Kennedy acknowledged receipt of a notice from the Com-
munity Development Department regarding a public workshop on the
First Street Specific Plan to be held on Thursday, October 2¢,
~985, at 7:00 p.m.
She was informed it would not conflict with the City of Tustin TGIT
whic~ is tO be held on Tuesday, October 29, in City Hall.
3. TUSTIN TILLER OAYS
Mayor Greinke announced Tustin Tiller Days to be ~eld 0ctober
13. He invited everyone to participate in the events and joy of
celebrating the harvest season and the traditions of Tustin's ~eri-
rage.
IIII.
C.. COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7, I0-10-85
4. TU~ TEA~EP.S S'~IKE
Mayor Greinke co~mented that ha was happy to have both the teachers
and students back in the classrooms, He invited everyone to attend
the October 11 football game in suppor% of Tustin High School vs.
Orange High School.
RECESS - REI)EVELOPI, IEHT - CLOSED SESSION; ADJOURNMENT
At 8:49 p.m. the meeting was recessed to the Redevelopment Agency,
thence to a Closed Session for discussion of personnel matters pursuant
to -Government Code Section 54957; and thence adjourned to the next
Regular meeting on October 21, 1985, at 7:00 p.m. by unanimous informal
consent,
MAYOR
MINUTES OF Ag ~OURgEO R~EGtff~ ME~ZI'IN(~
OF ~ R£DEYE~.OP~I(T AGENCY OF
TI4E CIl~r OF llJb'TIN, CALIFORNIA
OCTOBER 10, 198S
C.~L TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 8:49 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, Chairmen
Donald J. Saltarelli, Chairman Pro Tom
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, Co~nunity Development Director
Robert S. Ledendecker, Director of Public Works
Royleen A. White, Dir. of Con. & Admin. Services
Approximately I0 in the audience
AP~ROVA&. O~
It was moved by Hoesterey) seconded by Edgar, to approve Minutes of the
September 13, 1985, Adjourned Regular Meeting, and September 16, 1985,
Regular Meeting. Motion carried 4-0, Greinke abstained.
4. CIVIC Q~NTER ~ NEEDS A~4~4. YSIS
It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to authorize retention of
John Bates Associates to prepare the Civic Center Space Needs Analysis as
reco~nended by the Executive Director in his inter-com dated October 10,
1985. Carried 5-0. 45; 85-44
39
NEW ~$IOE~I'IA~. UNITS CON~'~I~Uci~.~) IN ~OEVE].OPHE~ PR(~)ECI' A~EA
Agency member Edgar stated that his purpose in requesting subject analysis
was to acknowledge that an inequity exists for the Orange County Sanita-
tion Distri'ct. As more individual residential units are built, service
needs increase, yet there is no increase in funds received by the Sanita-
tion District. He suggested that Tustin voluntarily pay on an annual
basis a fee for new residential units constructed in the Redevelopment
Project Area.
Agency discussion followed. The other members agreed that the Sanitation
District should take the incentive to propose a fee for same.
The report dated October 10, 1985, prepared by the tom, unity Development
Department was received and filed by unanimous informal consent. 60
NEWPORT AVENUE EX~NSION PRECISE A~.IGN~NI'
AS recommended in the inter-con dated October 1, 1985, prepared by the
Director of Public Works, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to
approve the Professional Services Agreement naming A.S.L. Consulting Engi-
neers, Santa And, as the consultant for the Newport Avenue Extension
Precise Alignment for $22,700 subject to final review by the City Attor-
ney's office. The motion carried 5-0. 45; 85-4E
95
REDEVELOPMENT AG~,,CY MINUTES
Page 2, 10-10-85
None..
8. ADdOUR~I~I'
At 8:55 p.m.. the meeting was adjourned to the next Regular Meeting on
Monday, October 21, 1985, by unanimous informal consent.
CHAIRMAN