Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 05-17-82MINUTES OF A ~EGULAR ~TING OF ~ T~STIN CIT~ O0~I~CIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way May 3, 1982 T. C~T.T- TO ORDER ~he meeting was called to order by ~ayor Edqar at 3:49 p.m. II. R~LL Counoilpersons Present: Counoilpersons Absent: Others Present: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Saltarelli Kennedy James G. Ro%Lrke, City Attorney William A. Huston, City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Com. Dev. Director Ken Fleagle~ Planning Consultant Bob Ledendecker, Director of Public works Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Royleen White, Community Services Director Jeff Davis, Planning Aide Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk Approximately 20 in the audience A/A ~.~RATIO~ OF A~CTU~E W~K Mayor Edgar read and presented to Dennis G. Orr, local archi- tect, a proclamation designating May 8-15, 1982, as "A~A Celebration of Architecture Week." Mr. Orr thanked the Coun- cil. 84 IV. (~0~T~IuK- PUSI,IC mu%~ING 1. GAME A1K:ADES - O~DINANCE NO. 870 The Community Development Director presented the staff report and recor~nendation, stating that staff deleted the majority of conditions concerning ability to legislate good management and the ordinance now requires that arcades be located in shopping centers/shopping areas of sufficient size to handle large groups of people and to allow for more adequate surveillance of opera- tions from the street. In addition, the City Attorney has reviewed the last draft, has made technical corrections, and has deleted any requ~irement for double review, one by the License a Permit Board and one by the Planning Agency. However, the Director stated that on page 3, under definition of game arcade, it was Council's desire that a game arcade be any premise having 6 or more game machines, since the current code permits up to 5 in existing locations and does not define it as a game arcade. He reco~z~ended that the definition be amended to read "6 or more." In response to the Mayor, the Director stated that the Manager of Sgt. Pepperoni's had picked up a copy of the ordinance, but staff had not received any input from him. The Mayor opened the continued public hearing at 3:54 p.m. There were no speakers on the matter. Council/staff discussion followed. Councilmen Saltarelli and Greinke stated their opposition to the ordinance. It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Saltarelli, to continue to May 17, 1982, consideration of the following ordinance: O~DINANCE NO. 870 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of T~stin, California, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING TO GAME ARCADES cITY COUNCIL ~INUTES Page 2, 5-3-82 Following Council discussion, the motion carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. 81 The Mayor requested that staff solicit commentS from the Manager of Sgt. Pepperoni's for Council review and that those business- persons who have shown interest be notified of the continued public hearing on May 17, 1982. Vo pD~.TC CO~C~S A resident of the Californian Apartments, 14882 Newport Avenue, was requested by the Mayor to defer his comments to later in the agenda to coincide with Old Business No. 1 - Relocation & P~rchase Plan - Californian Apartments Condominium Conversion. VI. C~n~NDAR Item 5 was deleted from the Consent Calendar by Saltarelli. It was then moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Hoesterey, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. 1. APP~OqaL OF M~ES - April 19 and April 20, 1982. 2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS in the amount of $106,737.48. RA~FICAT~ON OF PAi~ROI~ in the amount of $92,954.19. 5O D~/~%~ OF ~ OF DAVID mT.n; ~A~E OF LO~S: 3-6-81; DA~ F~.~n= 6-5-81; CLAL~ NO. 81-14 Deny claim of David Hill as recommended by the City Attor- ney. 40 4,1, DENIAL OF CLAIM OF JOHN POIR~R; DAR OF LO~S= 3-6-81; DA'~E F~.~n: 6-5-81; C~AIMNO. 81-15 Deny claim of John Poirier as recommended by the City Attor- ney. 40 DENIA~ OF CLAI~ OF ~LL COMPANX; DAR OF LO~S: 3-27--82; DA~E FILED: 4-13-82; ~m/MNO. 82-13 Deny claim of the Koll Company as recommended by the City Attorney. 40 Lm*~-~OF ~K~T*~E: COLUMBUS T~STIN PARK~ADE Authorize the City Manager to execute a letter of agreement with the Tustin Unified school District establishing clearly that the City of Tustin will retain ownership of the park shade shelter structure and will be fully liable and respon- sible for any damage, loss, or maintenance expenses for the shade shelter structure as recon~ended by the Director of Community Services. 45 Co. sent Calen~=w Item 5 - In accordance with Planning Agency action to continue the request for extension to May 17, 1982, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Hoesterey, to delete the following item from the Consent Calendar: EX~SIOF OF u~ PEP~IT 8~-21 AND ~'r~v= ~RACT MA~ 11336 (1651 Mitchell - Windsor Garden Apartments) Approve extension of Tentative Tract Map 11336 with the understanding that no further extensions of the Tentative Map and the Use Permit will be granted as recommended by the Community Development Department. Carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. 99 VII. O~DI- NANCES FOR INTRODU~-~.~O~ 1. O~DINANCE NO. 871 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, california, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO FINANCIAL AND PURCHASING PROCEDURES OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 5-3-82 It was .moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 871 have first reading by title only. Carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. Following reading of the title by the City Clerk, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 871 be introduced. Motion carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. 50 VIII. O~DINANCES FOR ADOPTIO~- None. IX. O~D B~SINESS ~CATION & PURCHASE ~- C~T.?FO~IAN APARtMenTS CONDOMINIUM C~vsaSIO~ (14882 Newport Avenue) The Community Development Director presented the staff report and provided information on the three concerns brought to Coun- cil's attention by the Californian Tenants' Association for clarification by the City Attorney at the April 19 meeting. Eligibility Disqualification Requirements - This issue was modified to require that a tenant must have a legal proceed- ing brought against h/m and found adversely against him before being disqualified. 2) Rent Raises - Cal State Associates did not mean to infer utility increases wo~ld be automatic, but did intend and did modify this section such that any rent increase would be subject to Council approval before it could be enforced; they did not want to revoke their right to at least come before Council to request consideration of a utility increase should it get tremendously burdensome. 3) Definition of "tenant" - Staff believes the confusion goes back to creation of Ordinance No. 822, which originally indicated a tenant would be subject to a minimum relocation fee equal to twice his month's rent. To eliminate the developer lowering rents for the last month and paying mini- mal relocation benefits, Council established a minimum floor of $600.00. Some tenants have advocated the $600.00 amount is on a per tenant, not per unit, basis. Relocation bene- fits have not been handled on a per tenant basis, nor does staff believe that was Council's intent. If the Council's intent was $600 per unit, then this plan is adequate. If not, then the plan would have to be changed to include each tenant. In Cal State's opinion, the per tenant basis would make the project unfeasible, and it has not been the rule applied to other projects. The Community Develola~ent Director requested that Council deter- mine its intentions concerning whether the benefits are to be on a $600 per unit basis or a $600 per tenant basis. The Mayor recognized the following speaker in the audience: Councilman Saltarelli interjected that this was not the proper place to hear grievances between private parties. 'A resident of the Californian Apartments, stated he did not receive a 60- or 120-day notice prior to being evicted. He received 30-days' notice based on the premise that the apart- ments were not being converted into condominiums, construction had not started, bu/lding permits had not been obtained, and therefore the standard 30-day notice for tenant eviction was applicable. He relocated within the same complex, received $850 in relocation benefits, and was informed he had forfeited his standing as a five-year tenant. At the Mayor's direction, the Community Development Director clarified that the problem revolves around 62 units to be demolished in order to comply with conditions of the Variance. Tenants of those 62 units must definitely be relocated. It is Cal State's contention that those tenants will be allowed to make a choice - they may either receive the $850 relocation benefits and forfeit purchasing rights, or they may retain the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 5-3-82 X. NEW B~INESS XI. O'~HER BOSINE~S discount allowance in order to purchase a unit and relocate within the complex at the developer's expense. At present, tenants have been relocated, of which 8 have accepted relocation payments and 2 have retained discount allowance benefits and relocated within the complex. AS to tenants who have accepted relocation benefits but moved within the same complex, it would be Cal State's contention those tenants would be subject to the current market rate of those units like any other new tenant. Councilman Saltarelli stated that relocation benefits on a $600 per uaAit basis was reasonable and that subject tenant had received equitable compensation. Council concurred. 8~ One other tenant voiced discrepancies in information he received from Cal State Associates and what he has heard discussed in Council meetings. The City Attorney interjected that Mr. Hudson, Vice President of Cal State Associates, was speaking outside with the previous speaker and suggested that this tenant also meet with that representative to try to resolve the matter, and if not perhaps staff could resolve it. The Community Development Director concurred with Councilman Hoesterey that the proper procedure would be for tenants to com- municate any discrepancies, problems, etc., in writing to City staff for investigation and resolution. William H. Hamilton, 735 Joanne %1, Costa Mesa, formerly a tenant at 14884-K Newport Avenue, also voiced discrepancies in information he had received, what was approved by Council, and the frustration and confusion tenants have experienced caused by different interpretations of Ordinance 822 by different people at the ownership level. He stated he would follow the proper procedure to try to have the matter resolved. In response to Mayor Edgar, the Community Development Director responded that Cal State Associates has been verbally informing staff of their dealings with tenants. Presently, they've dealt with l0 tenants, with approximately 52 ~nits more that will have to be demolished. At this point, Cal State has given every indication of complying with the document. He continued that his staff will handle problems on a case-by-case basis. FUTURE (~NE~%L P~AN ~M~D~T (North Side of McFadden Between "B" Street & Newport Avenue & Other Appropriate Areas) As recommended in the report dated May 3, 1982, prepared by the Co, unity Develol~ent Department, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to direct staff to advertise public hearings for an Amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Following Council/staff discussion, the motion carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. 56 2. ~ED .t~.r. & W'AT~uT AVENUES INTEBSECTTO~ u--~u~ Following consideration of the reports dated April 22 and 29, 1982, prepared by the Director of Public Works and City Manager, respectively, Councilman Saltarelli stated that Mr. Nisson had requested this matter be scheduled for a workshop. Council con- cuffed that staff contact Mr. Nisson to set up a workshop date, with staff to propose alternative dates for subject workshop at the May 17 meeting. 94 NORTH T~$TIN PAI~'r£~ Councilman Saltarelli reported on the deplorable state of repair of the North Tustin Parkette on Santa Clara Avenue. Staff responded that this parkette will be receiving rehab equipment CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 5-3-82 from other parks that will be receiving new equipment, and will insure that any hazardous conditions are eliminated in parks throughout the City in a timely manner. 77 2. P~)CLAMAT~O~S Councilman Saltarelli urged the Council to support proclamations for local organizations and causes only. 84 3. PO~TL%LL! ~AZARDOUS W~ CO~DITI(I~ - ~a~.~OAD ~OMPANY Councilman Hoesterey requested that staff communicate with the railroad company regarding removal of weeds between the Santa Aha Freeway and Moulton Parkway before it becomes a potential fire hazard. Staff responded they had con~nunicated with the railroad company, were notified that financial considerations prevented them from removing the weeds in a timely manner, but staff will again com~Gunicate with them and request that the weeds be removed very quickly. 108 4. L.I01~' S CT. ZYB ~'.~RAGE Councilman Greinke announced the Tustin Lion's Club "World's Largest Garage Sale" to be held Saturday, May 8 at ColumbGs Tustin Intermediate School from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 73 5. -'~ui, aI~iSORLIL I)ISTRIC'I~ Councilman Greinke directed staff to study the feasibility of T~stin being placed in one supervisorial district. The City Manager reported that staff has gathered preliminary information on a historical basis and will provide same to Council. 68 6. ~EINS~T OF A P~A~ING Mayor Edgar requested that staff prepare a timetable for reacti- vation of a Planning Commission for the May 17 meeting. Coun- cilm~n Hoesterey added that members of the community interested in serving in such capacity be encouraged to communicate their interest in writing. Councilman Greinke requested that the media also feature a story on the Planning Commission. 80 7. W~., COMPLA//~T Agnes Bacon complained about 6' weeds near her property. Staff responded it should be taken care of within six to eight weeks. 1Q8 In view of the recent bad fire in the City of Anaheim, Mayor Edgar suggested that Council review the present fire ordinance in terms of retroactively reducing fire exposure. Councilman Saltarelli commended the Maintenance Division for the excellent job they did in clearing debris and trees in a timely manner. XII. ADJO0~T It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Edgar, to adjourn to the next regular meeting on May 17, 1982. Carried 4-0, Kennedy absent. MAYOR CITY CLERK