Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 11-15-82OF T~E T~TIN ~ COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way November 1, 1982 TO O~DER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Edgar at 3:17 p.m. Councilpersons Present: Councilpersons Absent: Others Present: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli None James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Huston, City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Roy Gonzales, Personnel Director Ronald Nault, Finance Director Bob Ledendecker, Director of Public Works R. Kenneth Fleagle, Planning Consultant Charles Thayer, Police Chief Royleen White, Community Services Director Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk Approximately 35 in the audience ~DA ~ER IV. PBOC- LA~TI~ 1. Uo S. ~ COItPS AIR STATIOti (TOSTIN) & U. S. ~ COlqPS AIR S'~LTZO~ (~r. TOI~)) FOR PA~FItlJm,ATIC~ IN TOI3TIN TI'T-'r-~'~ DA~S S'FI~EET FAZI~E Mayor Edgar read two proclamations honoring Major Robert Hubner and the Marines of the U. S. Marine Corps Air Station (Heli- copter), Tustin, and com_m~nding Warrant Officer Crone, Band Director, and members of the Third Marine Air Wing Band of the U. S. Marine Corps Air Station, E1 Toro. Accepting the procla- mations were Colonel Mitchell and Major Robert Hubner. Colonel Mitchell expressed thanks to the Council. 84 It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Hoesterey, p.m. to the Redevelopment Agency. Carried 5-0. reconvened at 3:51 p.m. with all members present. to recess at 3:22 The Council was V. CONSENT Items 4 and 7 were removed from the Consent Calendar by Greinke. It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Hoesterey, to approve the remain- der of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. 1. APPROFAL ~F~T~- October 20, 1982 2. PA~IFICATIO~ OF PAXl~ in the amount of $99,103.17. APP~v~ ~ D~M~l~)8 in the amount of $1,810,499.67. 5O ~E~OX~F~IO~ NO. 82-85 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ANNUAL PAVEMENT MARKING PROGRAM AND DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVER- TISE FOR BIDS Adopt Resolution No. 82-85 as recommended by the City Engi- neer. 95 F.Y. 1981-82 MI~,z-m~EOUS PA~K ]]~P~3v~z~, ~Q~EST FOE ~ ~8ION Grant a one-day time extension to Acme Pipeline and Engi- neering in connection with subject project, and establish the completion date for the project to be October 19, 1982, and CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 11-1-82 authorize staff to assess a $100.00 per day penalty for every day thereafter until project is completed to the satisfaction of staff as recomended by the Engineering Department. 77 SOLID ~H%~TE C~.iz-~CTION ~f Authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment to the Solid Waste Collection Agreement for an adjustment of rates as reco~ended by the City Engineer. 45 Co~t Cale~w-v Item 4: Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Program - Councilman Greinke emphasized the importance of this pro- gram and expressed disappointment that it was placed on Consent Calendar. AS recozmended in the report dated October 21, 1982, pre- pared by the Director of Public Works, it was then moved by Greinke, seconded by Edgar, to adopt the following resolution: ~(~F~IO~ SO. 82-86 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AUTHORIZING FUEL EFFICIENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION Mayor Edgar inquired about the possibility of acquiring a central computer with Redevelopment funds, which could then be extended to other areas of ~he City where computer programming would enhance the flow of traffic. The Director of Public Works clarified that this grant will provide funding for the City to develop software on a micro-computer and aid staff in providing up-to-date signal timing. The Director stated that it may be worthwhile for staff to analyze what portion of such a centralized system could be financed by Redevelopment Agency funding and what areas would not be eligible. In response to Councilman Greinke, the Director stated the grant is presently on a first-co~e, first-served basis priority, and may be awarded on a fair share basis. The motion carried 5-0. C~t Cale~ I~e~ 7~ Newport-Wass Street Annexation No. 132 - Councilman Greinke again amphasized the importance of this matter and stated that he was pleased the residents desired to be annexed to the City. He co,ended Dr. Fleage, Planning Consultant, for his efforts in the matter. It was then moved by Greinke, seconded by Edgar, to adopt the following resolution: ~ESOI&~TIOI~ NO. 82~4 - A Resolution of the City Council, City of Tustin, California, REQUESTING THE CO~dENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF INHABITED TERRITOBX KNOWN AS NEWPORT-WASS STREET ANNEXATION NO. 132 TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN Carried 5-0. 24 Raymond Pettin, m,mher of the Tustin Rotary club Board of Directors, announced that the Tustin 9mtary Club is conducting a raffle for a Bradley GT2 all-electric car, with the drawing to be held December 23, 1982, at which the Mayor will preside. Mr. Pettin extended an invitation to all to participate. VI. ORD~%NCES FOR INTI~CTI(~ - None VII. OI~DINANCE FOR ADOPTI~ 1. O~DINANCE NO. 874 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING THE TUSTIN CITY CODE RELATIVE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT, COMPOSITION, JURISDICTION, DUTIES AND TERMS OF OFFICE OF THE PLANNING CO~ISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN It was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Greinke, that Ordinance No. 874 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. The title of Ordinance No. 874 was read by the City Clerk. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 11-1-82 The City Attorney stated that page 3, lines 9 and 10 should be corrected by deleting the words "or any member thereof," whereby the ordinance would read ". .by the City Council as herein provided. ." It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Hoesterey, to pass and adopt Ordinance No. 874 as corrected. Roll call vote: AYES: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli NOES: None ABSENT: None 81 VIII. OM) BUSINESS It was then moved by Greinke, seconded by Edgar, to adopt the following resolution: ~US NO. 82-82 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, PRESCRIBING FILING FEES FOR APPEALS ON ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Councilman Hoesterey reiterated his opposition on the matter. After further discussion, the motion carried 4-1, Hoeeterey opposed. 81 1. 1~ FOR I~TItICTED PAl~G ~ "C" STREET ~L~ ~ ~ STREET Councilman Greinke reported on the meeting of area residents held in City Hall which had positive results, with neighbors agreeing to be more cooperative relative to parking in front of neighbors' homes on street sweeping days. He continued that the matter does not require further City action until brought up again by an area resident. It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Kennedy, to table the matter until it is brought up again by one of the neighbors. Carried 5-0. 75 2. PROPO~ STOP SIGNS ~T ~IN/"B" STW~S - RESO~OTIQ~ NO. 82-87 Following consideration of the report dated October 26, 1982, prepared by the Director of Public Works, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Greinke, to adopt the following resolution: RESQ~TIO~ NO. 82-87 - A Rpsolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, DESIGNATING PLACEMENT OF CERTAIN STOP SIGNS (Main Street at "B" Street) After reading the report concerning visibility problems and the proposal to place a sign in the middle of the street, the City Attorney recommended continuance of the matter to the next meet- ing to allow him to prepare a report about potential liability exposure to the City. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy stated she is very sensitive to traffic problems, but after reading the staff report, she prefers to table the matter for between 7-9 months to allow staff to enforce the 40 mph speed limit via radar, then review the speed limits in 6 months, hopefully reduce the warrants further, and thereby place the City in a legally defendable position and reduce the hazard in the area. A substitute motion by Kennedy, seconded by Hoesterey, was made to table the matter for between 7 to 9 months in order to look at speed l~m~t enforcement procedures and f~rther reduction of speed limits to try to solve the problem without a legally un- defendable stop sign. Councilman Hoesterey commented that placing stop signs in the area at the same time the speed limit is increased creates a potential for rear-end accidents. CITY COUN¢IA MINUTES Page 4, 11-1-82 Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that staff provide monthly reports on speed limit enforcement. Police Chief Thayer indi- cated subject infoznnation would be provided. Mayor Edgar stated his opposition to the substitute motion, stating that the decision by Council to have radar enforceable speed limits on Main Street is legally enforceable and that the stop sign issue has no hearing on traffic, but is strictly acknowledging the need for safe pedestrian crossing in that area. Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested that the crosswalk be repainted to make it more visible. In response to Councilman Greinke, the Director of Public Works reported that a condition of the 4-way stop sign warrant is that when the 85 percentile approach speed of a major street traffic exceeds 40 mph, the warrant requirements diminish. Police Chief Thayer stated that placement of a stop sign at Main and "B" Streets will not impede the ~se of radar in the area; however, it will impede the effective utilization of radar because warning signs will be installed to the west of the stop sign (indicating "Stop Ahead"), thereby greatly reducing traffic speeds down to or within the posted speed limit. The ultimate goal is to reduce the speed limit in the area, not have it remain the same. Warning signs do have an effect on drivers by warning them in advance and causing them to slow down, and there would be no need for utilization of radar to the east of "B" Street. The Chief continued that placing an island in the middle of the street poses tremendous liability, and elim~nating parking spaces in the Stevens Square vicinity does not seem feasible. As far as pedestrian traffic in the area, the Chief was not aware of any major pedestrian problem and indicated it could be handled if identified by additional data, i.e., date and time. The Chief indicated his staff would investigate any pedestrian crossing problem. The motion carried 3-2, Edgar and Greinke opposed. 1o AP/~RD ~ BID - ~ ~pW&T.T C~_~_C~"I'E PAvBa~G~T ~TI~ PI~0G~ Bids for subject project were opened on October 12 and received as follows: Century Paving, Inc., La Mirada Hardy a Harper, Inc., Tustin All American Paving, Orange All ~erican Asphalt, Orange California Living, Santa Ana Sully-Miller Contracting CO., Orange $105,845.00 $147,045.00 $166,530.00 $173,325.00 $175,000.00 $388,700.00 Pursuant to the reco~uaendation contained in the report dated October 25, 1982, prepared by the Assistant City Engineer, it was moved by Edgar, seconded ~ Hoesterey, to award the contract for subject project to Century Paving, Inc., La Mirada, in the amount of $105,845.00. Carried 5-0. 95 2. ~ ~01~ ~ ~- 1271 ~'TCm~'.T. AV~fOE As recommended in the re~ort dated October 25, 1982, prepared by the Director of Public Works, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to deny the request of Mr. Robert Hitchens for the removal of two magnolia trees without any required replacement, but authorize the removal based upon Case II of the current City Tree Removal Policy - City removal at City expense, and replace- ment at full cost to property owner for labor, tree and mate- rials. The motion carried 5-0. 86.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 11-1-82 Xe 1. FOR OFFICE USES - ORDINANCE NO. 881 Councilman Saltarelli expressed concern that the language in the proposed ordinance is not complete. The Community Development Director clarified that the amendment is preceded in the Code by an explanatory paragraph. The amendment mandates that any development which has an office compound being proposed in any commercial district will need a Use Permit from the Planning Agency. It was then moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Saltarelli, that the following ordinance have first reading by title only: ORDINAHCB NO. 881 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of T~stin, AMENDING C~TER 2 OF ARTICLE 9 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE PERTAINING TO OFFICE DEVELOPMENTS Carried 5-0. Following reading of the title of Ordinance No. 881 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, to introduce Ordinance No. 881. Motion carried 5-0. It was then moved by Edqar, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordinance No. 881 be adopted as an urgency ordinance. Carried 5-0. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Saltarelli, that Ordi- nance No. 881 have second reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Following second reading of the title of Ordinance No. 881 by the City Clerk, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, to pass and adopt Ordinance No. 881. Roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli None None 81 As reco, uuended in the repor~ dated October 26, 1982, prepared by the Director of Public Works, it was moved by Saltarelli, sec- onded by Kennedy, to authorize the installation of one two-ton air conditioning unit for exclusive cooling of the computer room; and appropriate supplemental funding from General Fund monies in the amount of $3,900.00. Carried 5-0. 87 The Community Development Director responded to Councilmembers Kennedy and Edgar regarding door-to-door solicitors, and proce- dures currently being followed by staff to become aware of new businesses as soon as possible. The City Manager emphasized that the business license program is revenue raising, not regulatory, and enforcement is more selec- tive. The program is more effective now by concentrating on areas that have the greatest yield - delinquent accounts, ficti- tious business names, and State Board of Equalization informa- tion, as opposed to an inspector driving throughout town search- ing for violators. Staff indicated that a report would be presented at the Dece.zber 6, 1982, m~eting comparing the City's business license fees in relation to other Orange County cities; and an informa- tional article will be prepared for publication in the Chamber of Commerce's newsletter describing the program and what the City is trying to accomplish. 31 2. WINDSOR ~ARD~-q (~b'DOMI~iu~ COhv~SZON The Community Development Director presented an update to his report dated November 1, 1982. Steve Price, 14918 Newport Avenue, Relocation Coordinator, pro- vided a status report, stating that an across-the-board $50/ mmnth rent decrease has been effected for all tenants for CITY COUNCIL ~INUTES Page 6, 11-1-82 BUSINESS 1. November - January, 1983; they have assigned numbered ~arking at the complex with additional lighting; there is someone checking for cleanliness after each day=s construction; and a lease has been signed for extra parking at the Starer Bros. parking lot, primarily for second car use. Mr. Price added that a tenants~ meeting will be held on November 11 for input on any other issues. To ~ate, four eligible tenants have received relocation benefits. Barbara Hudson, 1651 Mitchell, Apt. 904, presented tenant sug- gestions pertaining to the condominium conversion. The Community Development Director and Mayor responded to Mrs. Hudson's suggestions. The Mayor encouraged Mrs. Hudson to work with Mr. Price on the suggestions she presented and ~ossibly reach an acceptable arrangement. The Mayor commented that it would be appropriate to agendize ~his matter again so that it can be monitored on a regular basis until some of the construction is completed. 43 3. BUSINESS L~S~ F~ES FOlt vzm~O GAMES The community Develo~xnent Director provided an additional hand- out to Councilmembers and presented the staff report as con- rained in the memos ~ated October 7, 1982, and November 1, 1982, prepared by t_he Conuaunity Development Department. It was ~oved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, to approve a business license fee of $20 per year per video ga_me machine which would apply to beth arcades and any business havi~g a machine on the premises. The Community Development Director indicated staff would prob- ably implement the new fee with business licenses this coming year, and might even be able to hold back slightly on the mail- out of renewals until a determination has been made on what businesses do have video g~m~ machines on premise. The motion carried 5-0. 31 The re~ort dated October 28, 1982, prepared by the Finance Director was received and filed by unanimous informal consent. 29 FOI~AT POlt ~ CO~I~SION ~a~v~w~ Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy inquired on the format to be followed for interviews of Planning Con~nission candidates at the evening ses- sion. Discussion followed on the method for candidate voting. Councilman Hoesterey suggested that interviews be conducted this evening, and the information assimilated for selection of candi- dates at the November 15 meeting. Steve Price responded to Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy that he is still interested in being considered for appointment to the Planning Co~nission and indicated that he would resubmit his qualifica- tions to Council for the evening meeting. Council concurred to draw names randomly as opposed to con- ducting interviews in alphabe=ical order. 81 2. PUB~ZC ~CIES DATA S~'~ (PADS) OP~q BO~SE Councilm~n Hoesterey extended an invitation to all to attend the PADS Open House to be held on November 17, 1982, and noted that PADS is now located in Tustin at Newport and Sycamore. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 11-1-82 At 5:17 p.m. it was moved by Greinke, seconded by Hoesterey, recess to the 7:30 p.m. meeting. Carried 5-0. to MI~u'.r,'~S OF A ~uA~ OF TH~ TOSTIN CJ.'.tx' CO~Cl~- Hovemh~x' 1, 1982 I. CJI~T-T. II. ~ III. PO~I/C CONCE~S None. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Edgar at 7:31 p.m. Councilpersons Present: Councilpersons Absent: Others Present: Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli None James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Huston, City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Approximately 39 in the audience I~Vo C~ J.J.~IUISU PUB~.~C m~Mt~HG 1. XPPl~Xn 0~' OS~ g~tltT'~ 82-22, HER_T~AGE I~USK - 151 N. '~US~q AVE. The public hearing was opened at 7:33 p.m. Michael Jacobs, 131N. Tustin Ave., who filed the Appeal of Use Permit 82-22 (Heritage House), spoke in favor of the Appeal. His reasons stated were not enough space for parking because part of the parking spaces are behind another building and people will not use those spaces. Art Johnson, 151 Tustin Ave., owner of the Heritage House, and Tom Crandall, general partner, spoke in opposition to the Appeal. They said they now have 28 seats and that the "walk-in" trade is fantastic. They feel that they have enough parking since it meets the Code requirements. The public hearing was closed at 7:42 p.m. Councilman Greinke said that he had abstained from voting at the last meeting because he thought one of the owners was a custo- mer of his, but he has since found out that this is not the case. Discussion followed on the necessity of having a stringent agreement about the use of the building to the north continuing to be offices and not commercial. The agreement would have to be approved by the City Attorney regarding removing seats if the building to the north would convert to retail use. It was ~ved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, that Planning Agency Resolution No. 82-22 be modified to allow 36 seats, the applicant provide and pay for signs for parking spaces at 131 N. Tustin Avenue, that a one-year review be placed on the Use Permit, and if there is a problem with parking, modifica- tions will have to be made to the facility. Councilman Hoesterey was opposed to using leased parking to jus- tify a permanent facility. Motion carried 3-2, Hoesterey and Kennedy opposed. 81 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8, 11-1-82 Applicants were drawn at random by the City Clerk to be interviewed in an open forum as follows: James B. Sharp Steve Price Hildegarde E. Cutts Mark D. Ainslie C. Robert Bdman Kathy Well Walter S. Kowalik Ronald H. White L. W. (Bill) Robbins Charles E. Puckett was out of town at the time of this meeting and will be interviewed later. Following the interviews, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Greinke, to review applicants' qualifications during the next two weeks and then make a decision at the next regular City Council meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Councilm~n Saltarelli stated he hoped we would utilize the talents of all these qualified candidates and if we institute an advisory committee for special projects, some could be used there. 81 VI. ~x~. 1. Mayor Edgar brought up that recent State legislation has enabled us to have the option of an Urban Service Area for planning of annexations. We could identify a portion of land that is pres- ently in the County that could be annexed gradually to t_he City of Tustin. The area would not be nearly as large as our sphere of influence. Many areas are not financially viable to be annexed at the present time. The Mayor thought we should pro- ceed to identify an Urban Service Area that would include areas whose mailing address is Tustin 92680, plus to the nearest arte- rial road. We could start in the north part of town at Santa Clara and Prospect, southerly on Prospect, easterly on 17th, southerly on Newport, southeasterly on Skyline, southwesterly 0~ Redhill, and southeasterly on Irvine Blvd. This would be the precise area that we would say the City of Tustin should grow ina period of perhaps five years, maybe 15% growth of the com- munity at about 3% a year. Also included would be the two island areas that presently exist. It was moved by Edqar, seconded by Greinke, to direct staff to prepare the necessary paperwork to achieve an Urban Service Area. Councilman Hoesterey expressed concerns about annexing areas that we will have to expend far more money to maintain than we ever would gain in revenue. He would be willing to study the matter. The City Manager said there were certain requirements to be met and staff would inventory the costs such as p~blic works and police protection and report back at a later date. Councilman Saltarelli interjected that if LAFCO approved an Urban Service Area, they do not have the right to turn down any annexation in that area. The motion carried 4-0, Saltarelli abstained. 24 VII. It was moved by Greinke, seconded by Hoesterey, to adjourn at 10:04 p.m. to the next regular meeting on November 15, 1982, and thence to a Workshop on Nov-mher 16, 1982, for Water Rates and Financial Analysis. Carried 5-0. CITY CLERK MAYOR