Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1 MINUTES 11-02-81MI~TES OF AN ADJO~ED ~AR ~TING OF 'l~ TUSTIN CIT~ ~O~NCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Centennial Way October 21, 1981 I · C~nn TO OP/)ER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Sharp at 3:35 p.m. Councilpersons Present: Councilpersons Absent: others Present: Edgar, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli, Sharp None James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Huston, City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Com~. Dev. Director Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer ~yleen White, Community Services Director Eva Solis, Deputy City Clerk Approximately 15 in the audience III. wU-~.?C ~O~CE~NS - None IV. CO, salT C~T~DAR Item 6 was removed from the Consent Calendar by Saltarelli for dis- cussion in Executive Session. It was then moved by Kennedy, secon- ded by Edgar, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar and continue Item 6 to the evening session. Motion carried 5-0. 1. APP~ugaL OF MI~wr~S - October 5, 1981 Regular Meeting 2. APPROVAL OF ~EMANDS in the amount of $1,161,800.46 4e Se 5O ~SOL~TIO~ NO. 81-114 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin ACCEPTING WORKS OF IMPROVEMENT AND AUTHORIZING RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (City Hall and Police Department Heating and Air Conditioning Systems - Louie Schmetzer Company) Adoption of Resolution No. 81-114 and if no claims or stop payment notices are filed within 30 days of the date of recordation of the Notice of Completion, authorize the release of the bond that has been posted in the amount of $59,575.00 as recommended by the Community Development Department. 39 ~ FOR PAIntinG P~O~IBITIO~ Authorize the installation of signing of "No Parking, 6:00 AM to Noon, Monday, Street Sweeping" on the northerly side of Mitchell Ave. adjacent to 1881 Mitchell Ave. and that warnings be issued in lieu of citations for the first 30 days after the sign installation as recommended by the City Engineer. . 75 ~ESOLUTION NO. 81-116 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, RELATIVE TO REGULATING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND PARKING ON CERTAIN PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY (Quail Meadows, 17522-17574 Vandenberg Lane) Adoption of Resolution No. 81-116 as requested by the Home- owners Association and recommended by the Police Department. 75 7e D~IA~ OF ~-~J/~ OF ALF~DO LOPEZ ~C~; DATE OF LOSS: 5-23-81; ~tl/~NO. 81--26 Deny the claim of Alfredo Lopez Bruce as recommended by the City Attorney. 4~ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2, 9-21-81 FOR ~r~O-- DI~3~IO~ 1. O~DINA~ICE ~0. 860 - An Ordinance of the City Council of ~he City of Tustin, California, AMENDING TITLE 3, C~APTER 4, PART 2 OF THE TUSTIN CITY CODE REGARDING THE REGULATION OF AMBULANCES The City Manager presented the staff report and recommendation. Following a brief question-and-answer period, it was moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 860 have first reading by title only. Motion carried 5-0. Following reading of title by the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordinance No. 860 be introduced. Carried 5-0. 22 01~)INANCE NO. 863 - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, AMENDING ARTICLE 3, C~APTER 4, PART 2, PERTAINING TO TOW TRUC](S The City Manager presented the staff report and recommenda- tions. Councilman Saltarelli objected that this adds a great deal of burden on the property owner to remove an illegally parked vehicle. The City Manager responded to Council questions/concerns in the Police Chief's absence, and suggested continuance of the matter pending the Chief's presence. Councilm-mbers agreed to consider first reading now and requested the Police Chief attend the November 2 meeting to clarify the ordinance prior to second reading. It was then moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edgar, that Ordinance No. 861 have first reading by title only. Carried 5-0. Follow- ing reading of title by the City Clerk, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, that Ordinance No. 861 be introduced. Motion carried 4-1, Saltarelli dissenting. 82 VI. 0~D ~BINESS - None VII. NEW 1. ~SIO~ 0~ ~aq'/VE TRACT ~ 11336 The Community Development Director presented the staff report and recommendation, and responded to Council questions. It was then moved by Kennedy, seconded by Edger, to grant a six-mon~h extension for Tentative Tract Map No. 11336, as reco~ended in the report dated October 21, 1981, prepared by the Community Development Department. Carried 3-2, Hoesterey and Saltarelli dissenting. 99 2. ~SAL AND INVENTO~X ~ ASSETS OF ~ATER S~STE~ AND P~H~'SZCAL INq~OR~ OF ~m~g~AL FrOWn ASSETS OF ~E ~ The City Manager provided the staff report and reco-~-endation. He indicated that the study conducted at acquisition of the water service will provide historical data, but will not be sufficient to assign current value. Following discussion, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Saltarelli, to authorize an appraisal of the City Water System and approve the expenditure of $15,000 from the Engineering Study adopted in the 1981-82 Water Capital Improvement Budget; and authorize a physical inventory of the general-fixed assets of the City and appro- priate $6,000 from the unappropriated reserve of the general fund for this purpose, with the provision that it be time-phased and complemented as much as possible with the Engineering Study. Motion carried 5-0. 50 3. P~-?C ~EARI~G NOTICES POLICY Following the City Manager's presentation of the staff report and recomendation, Council raised concerns re computerization of a mailing list on City equipment, penalty for neglect in notification of affected property owners, reliability of title companies in supplying mailing lists, graphics of the public CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3, 9-21-81 notice, summarization of notices, notification of homeowners' groups, and utilization of current information for preparation of mailing lists. It was then moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to continue the matter so that staff can explore con- cerns expressed by Council. The City Manager indicated that any su~L~rization would apply only to ordinances which would be a separate policy and that public hearing notices would continue to be written in the same format. Following further discussion, a substitute motion was made by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to approve the recon~nendation con- tained in the report dated October 14, 1981, prepared by the City Manager, with the addition of notifying affected home-' owners' groups. Motion carried 5-0. 83 It was moved by Sharp, seconded by Edgar, to direct staff to explore the benefits of su~tarizing ordinance publications and report back to Council. Carried 5-0. 4. M~-£~sK PLAN FOR PARKS AI~ RECREATION The City Manager presented the staff report and options avail- able to Council. Following discussi6n, it was moved by Edgar, seconded by Sharp, to include the entire sphere of influence in a schematic m~ster plan, but that any particular site or devel- opment be restricted to incorporated City limits. Further Coun- cil discussion followed relative to political' implications if the entire sphere of influence is included in the master plan, County planning in unincorporated areas, County islands, and exclusion of the North Tustin area. A substitute motion was made by Kennedy, seconded by Saltarelli, to limit the master plan to the incorporated City limits. Motion carried 4-1, Sharp dissenting. 77 The City Manager reported that the handbills which were ille- gally posted by the Green Peace organization will be investi- gated and removed by CalTrans with billing for such costs to go to the Green Peace. Mr. Gene Carter, representative from Southern California Edison Company, was recognized by the Mayor and indicated that they are proceeding to remove the handbills and will forward a bill to Green Peace for any related costs. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Edgar, that if any city costs are incurred in the removal of the handbills, that Green Peace be billed for same. Carried 5-0. 93 2. RE~EST FOR ~=r~v~ SESSIO~ Councilman Saltarelli requested a five-minute Executive Session for discussion of personnel matters. Council concurred. 3. CCH4SOLIDATT(X~ ~ ~IClPAL ~.~TIOI~S Pursuant to Councilman Hoesterey's and Mayor Sharp's comments, Council concurred to direct staff to agendize for the November 2 meeting the matter of consolidation of municipal elections with state/county elections for Council consideration. 48 4. C~T.TFO~Z~_A ~0ASTAL COMMISSION In response to Mayor Sharp, Councilmen Edgar and Hoesterey indi- cated they would serve as representative and alternate nominees, respectively, for consideration of appointment to the California Coastal Commission for the Los Angeles/Orange County areas. Councilman Edgar relayed that this may prove to be a futile attempt on the City's behalf as there are already two prospec- tive nominees from the Orange County area being considered for same, and they must still be considered along with the Los Angeles area nominees. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4, 9-21-81 Councilman Edgar indicated he would distribute copies of resolu- tions adopted by the General Assembly to City staff m-tuBers, and reported on several it~m~- which affect the City. Council~n Hoesterey reported on the Redevelopment and special assessment district workshops which he attended at the confe- rence · Councilwoman Kennedy requested information on the procedure for residents to report stray animals in the City and suggested that same be published in the "Tustin Today" publication. 23 7 · P~ITICA~ SIGNS Pursuant to Councilwoman Kennedy's request, it was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Kennedy, to direct staff to provide clarification on the regulations governing placement of politi- cal signs, i.e., they are not allowed in center islands, but are allowed adjacent to the street with the consent of the adjoining property owner, with this information to be provided to the applicant at the time of posting the bond. Council discussion followed. Council concurred to defer the matter to the evening session to allow staff to provide a recommendation. 93 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 4:50 plm. to the 7:30 p.m. evening ses'sion. Carried 5-0. CI'T~ uOdd~.u.. ~ETi~G 7:30 I. CALL TO ~ The City Council meeting was called to order by Mayor Sharp at 8:37 p.m. II. B0~L C~T.T. CouncilpersQns Present: Councilpersons Absent: Others Present: Edgar, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli, Sharp None James G. Rourke, City Attorney William A. Huston, City Manager Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk Mike Brotemarkle, Comm. Dev. Director Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer Ed Knight, Associate Planner Maria Ivory, Planning Secretary Approximately 90 in the audience III · NKN BUSINESS 2. ~T~O~%L IMPB_~T ~O~ 81--2 (Newport Avenue between Main Street and E1 Camino Real) REEK~TION NO. 81-117 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tustin CERTIFYING DRAFT FOCUS EIR 81-2 AND AMENDMENTS FOR USE PERMIT 81-29 (CAL PACIFIC PROPERTIES) AS FINAL FOCUS-EIR 81-2 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to adopt Resolu- tion No. 81-117. Carried 4-1, Kennedy opposed. 81 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Hoesterey, to recess to the Plan- ning Agency at 8=38 p.m. Carrie~ 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5, 9-21-81 CI~'X (~X~CTT. ~e~II~G 10:05 P.Mo The Mayor declared a short recess at 10:06 p.m. 10;13 P.M. PUBLIC --R~RINGS 1. A_O~ff,~, (~ uS~ ~ ~O. 81-27 Mike Brotemarkle, Co~m~unity Development Director, reported that this is an appeal of the denial to build eight condominiums at 1161 Sycamore Ave. The developer has reduced the height of the buildings from 33 feet to 26 feet. If a flat roof is accept- able, the height could be reduced to 22 feet. A two- story single-family residence could be built with a maximum height of 30 feet. The Public Hearing was opened at 10t18 p.m. Frank Gonzales, designer of the project, explained that he originally was asked to design an apartment complex, which he did and it conformed to all City standards without applying for a Use permit. However, he suggested to the developer that a condominium project would be more desirable. The reason for not conforming to the 150 ft. setback from R-1 zoned properties is because the lot is only 110 ft. deep. -The property to the rear is lower than this property, and staff has suggested a 6'8" wall abutting those properties. Charles Sullivan, 14782 Carfax Drive, was opposed to these units and expressed that they would have a tremendous adverse effect upon his property value, which has already been affected by the apartments a couple of lots from this property. Also, the traf- fic would be adversly impacted. He asked Council to consider changing the R-3 Code to conform to the PD district. The Community Development Director confirmed that apartments with one more unit could be put on this lot without coming to Council for approval, and they could be as high as 40 ft. John Zier, 1152 Mear Lane, was opposed to the project and urged Council to change the ordinance so that the development on this lot would be compatible with R-1 property. Rick Cramer, 14792 Carfax Drive, spoke in opposition to the appeal. He had two concerns about the project - first, the high density of multiple-family units on this very small parcel of land in south Tustin and second, the increase in traffic on an already heavily traveled street. Richard Nowling, of Barnett Nowling (developer of the project), 14081 Yorba Street, said he probably should have built apart- ments instead of considering condominiums, but felt condominiums would be a much better project because of pride of ownership. He stated a lot of residents have compared this project to the one currently being built on the street, which is entirely different, and if this project is approved he will work with staff to have more than adequate landscaping and screening. Pat McMahan, 1181 Mear Lane, and Wendy Dugan, 1182 Mear Lane, spoke in opposition to the project and felt it would be detri- mental to their property values. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing at 10:41 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6, 9-21-81 II. B~SINESS Councilwoman Kennedy stated that this R-3 zone (zoned when this was County area) is inappropriate among R-1 property. She could see the developer' s rights but is also sensitive to the I%-1 propez~cy owners. She continued that the density on this is too high, and there is an urgency ordinance for adoption which was continued from the last meeting that could stop this development · Councilman Hoesterey said that in 1977, he sat in the audience and brought up the same concerns of height and difference in grade level when the Peppertree tract was developed, and today his house is three times more valuable. He stated the developer has met the concerns by lowering the height to 26 ft. which is lower than an R-1 building could be. Councilman Saltarelli expressed that the worst thing is to allow apartments to go in and the best thing is to have condominiums owned by residents who take interest in keeping their property beautiful. He feels the d~veloper is faced with the stigma of other apartments being built, and the height of this project is significantly better. It was moved by Saltarelli, seconded by Sharp, to approve the appeal of Use Permit 81-27 subject to verification that plans and working drawings show 5 ft. minimum depth of the parking and the roof line height in back does not exceed 26 ft. An unidentified woman in the audience asked if anything was going to be done about traffic in the area. Bob Ledendecker, City Engineer, responded that a study had been conducted at Sycamore and Carfax, and results did not warrant stop signs. After that a study was done for a crossing guard and one was hired. There was an information report for red zoning on Sycamore but there is adequate visibility except for a camper parked at the southwest corner. The resident should be notified if the curb is red zoned in front of.his house. The City has applied for an at-grade railroad crossing at Newport and Edinger; Sycamore could be widened. The City has 50% ownership of the right-of-way on the south side of the street and none on the north side. Motion carried 4-1, Kennedy opposed. 81 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to direct staff to make a study of the traffic on Sycamore and come back with some recommendation to alleviate traffic problems. Carried 5-0. Councilman Saltarelli said that when the plans are ready, the residents should be notified so that they can look at the plans and if there are some. options, the architect could work with the residents to get the most pleasing aesthetic design relative to the screening of the fence, etc. A resident in the audience asked if the R-3 property could be down-zoned to R-1. Council concurred to refer this to the City Attorney for a report on what ramifications there would be if property is downzoned from R-3 to R-1. 81 It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to direct staff to notice a public hearing before the Planning Agency and the City Council for consideration of the draft ordinance amending Article 9, Chapter 2, of the Tustin City Code relative to land use and zoning. Carried 5-0. 110 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 9-21-81 AGE~DA C~DER III. O~DINANCE$ FOR ADO~-~rO~ 1 · ORDINANCE NO. 859 - An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, California, ADOPTED AS AN URGENCY MEASURE PROHIBITING STRUCTURES IN THE R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN EXCESS OF PRESCRIBED HEIGHTS WITHIN CERTAIN DISTANCES OF PROPERTY ZONES R-A, E-4, AND R-1. OTHER BUSINESS It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to continue Ordinance No. 859. Carried 5-0. 81 1. US~ OF ~A ~u~DS Councilman Hoesterey suggested that before our workshop meeting on the Town Center project, we should look into the possibility that RDA funds can be used to alleviate problems caused by a development within an RDA Area. If funding is a problem at the time we get PUC approval to extend Newport Avenue, we could look at RDA funds from the Town Center Project tax increment. ADJOurnMenT It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 11:30 p.m. to the next regular meeting on November 2, 1981. Carried. CITY CLERK MAYOR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7, 9-21-81 III · ORDINANCES FOR AXK)PTIO~ 1. ORDIHANC~ ~O. 859 - An Ordinance of the City of Tustin, Califor- nia, ADOPTED AS AN URGENCY MEASURE PROHIBITING STRUCTURES IN THE R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN EXCESS OF PRE- SCRIBED HEIGHTS WITHIN CERTAIN DISTANCES OF PROPERTY ZONES R-A, E-4, AND R-1. It was moved by Hoesterey, seconded by Edgar, to continue Ordi- nance No. 859. Carried 5-0. H1 1. ~ OF RDA F~DH  CT-AR 6. Councilman Hoesterey suggested that before the workshop meeting on the Town Center project, we should look into the possibility that RDA funds can be used to alleviate problems caused by a development within an RDA Area. If funding is a problem at the time we get PUC approval to extend Newport Avenue, we could look at RDA funds from the Town Center Project tax increment. This item, continued from the afternoon session, was not recon- sidered by Council, and no action was taken on the ~tter. It was moved by Edgar, seconded by Kennedy, to adjourn at 11:30 p.m. to the next regular meeting on November 2, 1981. Carried. MAYOR CITY CLERK