HomeMy WebLinkAbout1_14_2003 - Council MinutesAPPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 28,2003
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
OF A REGULAR MEETING January 14,2003
The City Council of the City of Orange, California convened on January 14,2003 at 4:30 p.m. in
a Regular Meeting in the Council Chambers, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, California.
4:30 P.M. SESSION
1. OPENING
1.1 INVOCATION
Given by Reverend Roy Schlobohm, First Presbyterian Church
1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Councilmember Carolyn Cavecche
1.3 ROLL CALL
PRESENT - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT -
None.1.4
PRESENTATIONS/ ANNOUNCEMENTS/ INTRODUCTIONS Presentation was
given by the American Red Cross to Rocky Rombough, Orange resident and high
school freshman, for saving his grandfather's life in April, 2002.Michael Seltzer
and Eric Adams of the YMCA Indian 500 Event challenged the Mayor and Councilmembers
to participate in the Indian 500 Chiefs Race, at noon on February 1,2003,
at the Mall of Orange.Mayor Murphy
announced Council will adjourn in memory of Police Captain John McElwee.2.
PUBLIC
COMMENTS Arlen Craig,
address on file, spoke on build out, and submitted a flyer distributed by The Irvine Company
on open space.Rick Cryder,
307 S. Wrightwood, asked for direction from the Council on a proposed dog park at
Y orba Park; asked why the park is still closed; and asked the Council to agendize a vote
on whether the Council is going to allow a dog park use at Y orba Park.3.CONSENT
CALENDAR TAPE 535 All items
on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are enacted by one motion approving the
recommended action listed on the Agenda. Any member of the City Council, staff
or the public may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar PAGE 1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
for discussion or separate action. Unless otherwise specified in the request to remove an
item from the Consent Calendar, all items removed shall be considered immediately
following action on the remaining items on the Consent Calendar.
3.1 Declaration of City Clerk, Cassandra J. Cathcart, declaring posting of City Council
agenda of a regular meeting of January 14, 2003 at Orange Civic Center, Main
Library at 101 N. Center Street, Police facility at 1107 North Batavia, Shaffer Park,
summarized on Time-Warner Communications and available on the City's
Website www.cityoforange.org, all of said locations being in the City of Orange and
freely accessible to members of the public at least 72 hours before commencement of
said regular
meeting.ACTION: Accepted Declaration of Agenda Posting and authorized its retention as
a public record in the Office ofthe City
Clerk.3.2 Request Council Confirmation of warrant registers dated December 5, 12, and
19,
2002.ACTION:
Approved.3.3 Request approval of City Conncil Minutes, Adjourned Regular Meeting
of December 3, 2002 (corrected), Regular Meeting of December 10, 2002
and December 24,
2002.ACTION:
Approved.3.4 Consideration to waive reading in full of all ordinances on the
Agenda.ACTION:
Approved.3.5 Receive and file the City Treasnrer's Report for the period ending November
30,
2002.ACTION:
Approved.3.6 Receive and file the audited financial statements and related reports for the
year ended June 30, 2002. (C2500.J.1.
3)ACTION:
Approved.3.7 Receive and file Annual Financial Reports for Development Impact
Fees.C2500.J.1.0.
3)ACTION:
Approved.PAGE
2
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
AGREEMENTS
3.8 Renewal of a Lease Agreement at 292 North Main Street, business owner, Skip
Harrington. (A2100.0 AGR-2735.
1)SUMMARY: This is a renewal of an existing lease for a 5-year period.
The lease payment has been increased by 2.7% with an annual adjustment based on the
CPr. The lessee now pays the monthly water bill and security
alarm expenses.ACTION: Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a First Amendment
to Lease Agreement and Memorandum of First Amendment to Lease Agreement for
the property located at 292 N.
Main Street.FISCAL
IMPACT: None.3.9 Amendment No.1 to Consultant Services Agreement with P&D
Environmental for Professional Engineering Services for the Chapman Avenue and
Tustin Street Environmental Documentation Preparation. (A2100.0
AGR-3887.1)SUMMARY: This contract amendment is needed to allow the
consultant P&D Environmental to provide additional environmental services to revise
and complete the technical studies and environmental documents required for compliance with
NEP A
and CEQA requirements.The scope of the intersection improvement project has been scaled down
to reflect the timing and availability of funding for this project. Due to the
revised scope, existing technical reports, and draft environmental documents prepared by
the Consultant will need
to be revised.ACTION: Approved Amendment No. I to P & D Environmental,
and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement on behalf
of the City.FISCAL IMPACT: No Impact on Budget. The additional work by
the Consultant will require no additional funds to be expended on the project at this time.
With the deletion of optional tasks, and the availability of contingency amounts established
in the original Consultant Services Agreement, the additional costs incurred to the
project will not require an increase in
the original contract.3.10 Second Amendment to the Contract with the Soto
Company for Landscape Maintenance of City Parks. (A2100.0
AGR-2662.A.2)SUMMARY: It is recommended that the City Council
approve the Second Amendment to the contract with the Soto Company in an amount not to exceed $
20,000 for landscape maintenance services at Grijalva Park. The Landscape maintenance
of Grijalva Park will begin on March 1, 2003 through June 30, 2003, with three (3)
one year options for renewals
through June
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
ACTION: Approved the Second Amendment to the Contract with Soto Company in an
amount not to exceed $20,000; and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the
Second Amendment to the Contract on behalf ofthe City.
FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds have been budgeted for landscape maintenance
services for FY 2002-03 in account 100-7022-427100 (Contractual
Services) $20,000 3.11 Arterial Highway Rehabilitation Program - Award of
Consultant Services Agreement to NBCE, Inc. for the design of rehabilitation improvements
on Garden Grove Blvd. from The City Drive to Park Vine Street, and The City
Drive from Garden Grove Blvd. to 300 ft. south of the 22 Freeway. (A2100.
0 AGR-4198)SUMMARY: The subject projects were approved for funding under
the Arterial Highway Rehabilitation Program in May 2002. This contract authorizes the
design consultant to evaluate the pavement, recommend rehabilitation measures
and prepare plans,specifications and cost
estimates for bidding.ACTION: Awarded a contract in the amount of$49,830.00 to NBCE, Inc., 17501
E. 17'h Street, Suite 270, Tustin, CA 92780, and authorized the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute on behalf
of the City.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and available in
the
following
accounts:
272-
5011-
483300-
3223 262-5011-483300-3223 550-
5011-483300-3223 272-5011-483300-
3212262-5011-483300-
3212 550-5011-483300-3212 144,
846.00 (Gas Tax 2105)144,
846.00 (Measure M
Turnback)241,410.00 (
OCTA)99,189.00 (Gas Tax 2105)99,190.00 (Measure
M Turnback)165,316.00 (OCTA)Total $894,797.00 3.12
Consultant services agreement with Hogle-
Ireland, Inc., a private planning consulting firm, to provide direct current and
advance planning work related to Chapman University. (A2100.0 AGR-4199)SUMMARY:
The goal of the Planning Division is to provide quality professional planning
services. Chapman University has a number of significant projects in various stages ofreview. Chapman
University approached
the City about the potential need and benefit of the City hiring a
contract planner dedicated to working only on Chapman University projects.ACTION: Approved
and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the consultant services
agreement with Hogle-Ireland, Inc. for contract planning staff to work on Chapman University projects. The
contract amount is
not to
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
REMOVED AND HEARD SEPARATELY) TAPE 750
3.13 First Amendment to Agreement for the Annexation of Unincorporated County
Territory between the County of Orange and the City of Orange. (AGR-3946.
1)SUMMARY: Pursuant to a request by the County of Orange, the City and the
County negotiated an agreement for the annexation of thirteen (13) unincorporated islands
of territory located within the City's corporate boundaries. The First Amendment
reflects the changes to the terms relating thereto and anticipates what will happen if only
eleven 11) islands are
annexed.
Discussion Councilmember Ambriz asked about a discrepancy in the numbering of the
annexation islands and what the time frame is to annex the two additional islands not included in
this
agreement.John Sibley, Assistant City Manager, reported the original designation on the
annexation map included both 4-0R and 3-0R numbers, indicating the areas were
either in the Fourth District or Third District. With reapportionment, the City is now
entirely in the Third District, and the numbering is being changed to reflect this. He
also reported the time frame for the two other islands depends on the property owners and
could be within the next two to five years; and the primary reason for making the
amendment to the agreement was to allow the City to receive the $1.5 million in road funds that
are tied to the
11 other annexations.
MOTION - Ambriz SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche
ACTION: 1) Approved the First Amendment to Agreement, and authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute the agreement on behalf of the City; and 2) Authorized the
City Manager to carry out and implement the agreement and to administer the City's
obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed thereunder.
FISCAL IMP ACT: After the completion of the eleven (11) county islands, a transfer of
1.5 million in Road funds from the County to the City and approximately $92,000 in
property taxes annually. The First Amendment also details the future distribution of
County Road and property tax funds as it pertains to the annexation of the two large
county islands, which may have a fiscal impact at a future time.
APPROPRIATIONS
3.14 Appropriation of funds received from Santa Ana College for Fire Department
training. (C2500.H)
PAGE 5
I-~----~.~-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
SUMMARY: Santa Ana College offers a program, similar to the Joint Apprenticeship
Committee (lAC) program at the state level, which reimburses the fire department $2.50
per person for each hour of training. The Fire Department recommends that these funds
be used to supplement the department's overall training program budget.
ACTION: 1) Appropriated $10,000 to Account 100-3023-429400-
2521 (Fire Training Santa Ana College). 2) Amended the Revenue
Budget 100-3023-292100-2521 (Expense Reimbursement - Fire Training) by $10,000 to reflect the
funds
received from Santa Ana College.FISCAL IMPACT: None. The program is funded
entirely through Santa Ana College.REMOVED
AND HEARD SEPARATELY) TAPE 850 3.15 Appropriate funds for environmental cleaning of
the outdoor dining areas in Orange Plaza and award of contract to
RecovrX Industries. This contract also includes the environmental cleaning services for
the Metrolink Station and
Plaza Park. (A2100.0 AGR-4201)SUMMARY: Restaurants with outdoor dining in the public
right of way are required by ordinance to obtain an outdoor dining permit. The revenue
from these permits is used for the environmental cleaning of the established dining
areas. The revenue from the permits defray a
portion
of the environmental cleaning cost.Discussion Councilmember Ambriz asked if there was any other way to
pay for this type of service other than with General Funds, especially for
the Metrolink Station; and asked about
using two contractors instead of one.The Public Works Director reported the City has been
told over the years by both Metrolink and OCTA that the maintenance of the
Metrolink Station is the City's responsibility, which is a policy throughout the County.
The maintenance in the Plaza is driven by special events and outdoor
dining activities; and currently outdoor dining facilities are issued permits and do pay cleaning fees.
However, these fees do not cover the entire cost of the cleaning. He also reported it
is more economical to have one contract
for the work at both locations.Councilmember Coontz noted it has taken the City a while to
get to this point; but that everyone seems to be cooperating; and that there can be
health and safety issues with the volume of people that
eat in the outdoor downtown area.In response to questions by Councilmember
Cavecche, the Public Works Director noted this particular company has already been used for this
cleaning on
a
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
MOTION - Ambriz SECOND -
Cavecche AYES - Ambriz,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSTAIN -Alvarez Mayor
pro tem
Alvarez abstained due to a property interest at 130 South Glassell and 60 Plaza Square.ACTION:
Appropriated $27,
230 from unappropriated reserves to Account No. 100-5022-427100 (Contractual
Services); and awarded contract in the amount of $45,230 to RecovrX Industries
and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute on behalf of the City.FISCAL
IMPACT:
After appropriation, $27,230 will be available in Account 100-5022-427100 (
Contractual Services).BIDS
3.
16 Sidewalk Replacement Around Tot-lot at La Veta Park; Approval of Plans and
Specifications and Authorization to Advertise Bids. (C2500.M.4.7)
SUMMARY: Plans and specifications are completed for the sidewalk and bench
replacement around the tot-lot at La Veta Park, and the project is ready to advertise
for
bid.ACTION: Approved plans and specifications and authorized staff to advertise to bid
for the sidewalk replacement around the tot-lot at La
Veta Park.FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds are in the
following account:310-9645-485100-0087 (CDBG - La
Veta Park): $20,000 3.17 Tot-lot Equipment Replacements at Shaffer,
Olive and Eisenhower Parks; Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise
for Bids. (C2500.M.4)SUMMARY: Plans and specifications are completed for
the removal and installation of the tot-lot equipment at Shaffer, Olive and Eisenhower Parks,
and the project
is ready to advertise for bid.ACTION: Approved plans and specifications and
authorized staff to advertise for the removal and installation of the tot-lot
equipment at Shaffer, Olive, and Eisenhower Parks.FISCAL IMP ACT:
Sufficient funds exist in the
following accounts:510-7021-481200-0121 (
Shaffer Park) $ 42,770 310-
9645-
481200-0121 (CDBG
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
310-9645-481200-0042 (
CDBG Olive Park)
510-7021-485100-0092 (
Eisenhower
Park)310-
9645-485100-
0092 (CDBG
Eisenhower Park)
Total:60,000 10,000
60.000 262,770 3.18 CLAIMS (C3200.0)The City Attorney
recommends that the Orange
City Council deny
the following Claim(
s) for damages:a. Marlene
Spielrnan b. Renee Ulnick c. Southern California Gas Cornpany ACTION: Denied Claim(s)
for
damages and referred to City Attorney and Adjuster CONTRACTS 3.19 Contract Change Order
No.2; Bid No. 012-
27; Project No. SP-3373, Grijalva Community Park. (A2100.0 AGR-3965)SUMMARY:
Contract Change Order No.2 authorizes payment for extra work at agreed prices.
The amount of Contract Change Order No.2 is $31,791.90 ACTION: Approved Contract
Change Order No.2 in the amount of $
31,791.90 to Consolidated Contracting Services, Inc. for the extra
work.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and
available in the following account:510-7021-485100-0149 $31,791.90 (
Grijalva Community Park)3.20 Final Acceptance of Bid 012-41; SP-
3397; Bridge Replacement Project
at Eisenhower Park and authorization to file Notice of Completion
with the County Recorder (No staffreuort reauired).SUMMARY:
Bid
012-41; SP-3397; Bridge Replacement Project at Eisenhower Park.
Contractor: DRP Construction Company. Staff recommends acceptance of improvements.ACTION: Accepted public work improvements, authorize
release of Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Bond No. 103845934 in
the amount of $
148,300.
00,
and authorized the Mayor and
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
PURCHASES
3.21 Purchase of fire hose on a sole source basis. (C2500.H.)
SUMMARY: Request that the City Council authorize purchase of fire hose to outfit 3
new pumpers on a sole source basis in the amount of $31 ,044.93 from LN Curtis & Sons.
ACTION: Authorized purchase of National Fire Hose from L. N. Curtis & Sons in the
amount of $31,044.93.
FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds are available in account 720-5023-
472102, Vehicle
Replacement
Fund.RESOLUTIONS 3.22 RESOLUTION NO. 9689 (A2I00.
0 AGR-4187)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange
approving Joint Powers Agreement for the Integrated Law and Justice Agency
for Orange County.Continued from
December 10, 2002)ACTION: Withdrawn
from the Agenda.3.23 RESOLUTION NO.
9693 (C2500.K)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange
commending Detective Alex Varga of the Police Department, for 25 years ofloyal and dedicated service to
the
City of
Orange.ACTION:Approved.
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche
Items 3.13 and 3.15 were removed and heard separately. Mayor pro tem Alvarez
abstained on Item 3.15. Item 3.22 was withdrawn from the Agenda. All other items on
the Consent Calendar were approved as recommended.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
PAGE 9
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
4.REPORTS FROM MAYOR MURPHY TAPE 1170
Off Agenda Item
Mayor Murphy suggested adding a legislative liaison committee to the Council Committees,
comprised of himself and one other Councilmember, to work with other local officials and to
increase communication with state officials, especially in light of the current State budget
situation. It is important to keep track of changing conditions and legislation; and this committee
can be kept in place as long as necessary and reviewed on a yearly basis. He noted the State
Library Grant exercise was a very successful endeavor for the City, and it may be a trend of
things to come.
Councilmember Coontz asked for more clarification on this type of committee and suggested
looking at other opportunities that are already in place. She noted the League of Cities is a good
opportunity for keeping informed on legislative actions, noting that Councilmember Cavecche
will probably be elected as Chairman of Advocacy Committee for the League.
Councilmember Cavecche stated the League is putting together their first Advocacy Committee
with two representatives from each Supervisorial District; but cities need to be more involved
individually.
5.REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS TAPE 1360
5.1 Councilmember Cavecche - Eliminating Council practice of automatically granting one
continuance for public hearings.The
City Attorney recommended a transcript ofthis discussion be provided.Councilmember
Cavecche asked the City Clerk to provide the following transcript:Councilmember
Cavecche - In the past few years, the Council has had an unofficial policy, I guess I'
ll call it a practice, of always allowing an applicant on a public hearing one continuance,and we
say it up here that we usually automatically grant a continuance. And there seems to be a lot of
appeals coming up through the system this year, and I think we're going to be having a lot of public
hearings and I've been uncomfortable with the practice and sometimes I've agreed and sometimes I
haven't agreed, but I've kind of gone along because it's been a practice that we've had. In
November we had a public hearing. It was actually the only public hearing scheduled for the
7:00 session; and a letter came in very late requesting a continuance. It was the only item we had
on the Agenda for that evening. We spent money noticing the public. We had people from the
community here to speak on the issue. We had staff that stayed for that meeting as well as ourselves.
It wasn't a reason that I probably would have granted the hearing. I was informed by our
City Attorney that the best way is not to do it on a particular item, but to do it - make a statement.So for
the
record, I am making a statement that I will take requests for continuances on a public hearing on a
case by case basis and will not vote automatically to grant one continuance for public hearings.PAGE
10 r-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (Continued)
Councilmember Coontz - Well I think this has been a policy for many years - many years. And I'm
not saying it's right, but then so it's the automatic continuation that you're concerned about?Mayor Murphy -
If I could paraphrase for you, I think the concern is, there has been a policy for a number of
years.Councilmember Cavecche - Many
many years, yes.Mayor Murphy - To allow
a first continuance on an item for an item that comes up if an applicant makes that request for
public hearing. And I think the suggestion here at least from Councilmember Cavecche, and I'd
welcome discussion from others - sounds like we're having some discussion already, would be to
not consider that an autornatic or a policy and the best way to do that was not try
and establish that on the basis of a hearing already agendized, but take it up at a meeting individually so it
can be a part of the record for all those to recognize the fact that while it can be requested, it
is not an automatic per se event. Does that make sense? Did I state it correctly?Councilmember Cavecche - You stated
it correctly,
and I knowthe City Clerk is always very clear when someone does come and ask
for a continuance, that she lets them know that it is at the Council's discretion, that we can vote
or not. But because the Council over the years has usually said, and in all honestly, it's
usually stated Mayor Murphy, when someone does ask it's usually said, "well we usually automatically grant one
continuance". And I'm sure in all honestly, that in 99.9% of the time the
reasoning will be something that I will agree to. However, because I was advised by the City Attorney that
to change what has been a practice - and it is not an official voted in policy of this Council. There'
s no ordinance, there's nothing in place. To do it on one particular hearing after there has been
a practice could perhaps cause a problem, so I was asked to make a statement for the record
when there is no item before that when something does come up that I don't want to
vote for a continuance, we are established for the record that I'm not picking on that person particularly.Mayor Murphy - Does
that answer your question Councilmember
Coontz?Councilmember Coontz - Well yea, but I wondered why it
would just be one individual ifit's a policy that people feel is not appropriate.Councilmember Cavecche - Well,
if everybody would like to make that
statement that would be great.Councilmember Coontz - I just think we need to discuss it
as
to whether we would or not and what the reasons are. Are they supposed to bring a note from
their mother or what?Mayor Murphy - I think the idea was, and Councilmember Cavecche chatted with
me a bit about it as well when she put it on the Agenda, and I think
it's a good idea to put it out there, and since PAGE 11
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (Continued)
it is agendized today we can discuss it here and I would welcome the idea of other thoughts.
Personally, I would concur that the vast majority of the time, it probably makes sense and
probably and can be substantiated that it's appropriate to do, but we should reserve the right in
situations where that level of information can't be presented that folks have to understand that
when they do sign up for a public hearing date and time and place - you know deadlines are deadlines.
I know with the IRS you can ask for one extension - they usually grant it, but even with that
if you don't file all the paperwork they say no and they come after you I hear. So I just think it'
s appropriate to deal with the policy now. There's nothing before us that's asking for a continuance tonight,
right, at least from an applicant's standpoint. So we're dealing with the item and
I welcome other comments.Mayor pro
tem Alvarez - Couple of comments, first of all, I think it's timely that Councilmember Cavecche put
this on because we have our new member, Councilmember Ambriz on here.
I recall back when Councilmember Coontz was Mayor that we had a couple of instances where we
had some applicants that were very familiar with how this Council worked and didn't
bother to show up.Councilmember Coontz - You
can't always read their mind or know what the instance is, but I understand that.Mayor pro
tem Alvarez -
It was a good policy in terms of extending a courtesy, but my point was that there's been
a couple of people who kind of took advantage of that courtesy, and I think it's a good point
at least raised. I think another point to raise with it is again the cost. There are several costs involved. The City
incurs the cost of noticing everything out not only one time but then they've got to
notice again a second time - there's a cost there. And we've had this room filled with homeowners in the past
only for them to show up and then we have a letter saying well, we're not ready to
show and as we're pointing out, it's a little bit embarrassing.Councilmember Coontz - So it becomes optional
because it isn't an Ordinance we just would agree to the new policy of deciding
as a whole.Mayor pro tem Alvarez - Well I would
agree with it if we can recover some costs. I mean there are costs to mail things out. There are
costs to put things out for the public.Mayor Murphy - I think we're adding one
and one together though. I think the issue that's being raised today is simply 1) that it is not
an automatic or not a courtesy option to request and be granted a continuance on a public hearing item without
just cause. Is that a fair?Councilmember Cavecche - Yes, and I'm just reserving my
right as an elected official to vote no on that continuance.Councilmember Coontz - Well I think that should
come from the
Chair to ask the Council and then we can do what we want.PAGE 12
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (Continued)
Councilmember Coontz - Well I'm reiterating it. Not usually isn't a very good word in politics.Mayor
Murphy - Does anybody else have a comment on this item?Mayor pro
tem Alvarez - Just one for the City Manager. Would it be worth the time to look into what it costs
the city to do exactly what we're discussing?City Manager - I
think we can look at it on a case by case basis. My comment would be from the standpoint that, as
been pointed out, sometimes the Council Chambers are full of people concerned and we might
get exploited by an individual who wants to take advantage. And certainly that is a
concern. Part of my concern, as I shared with the Clerk, is we watch very carefully what our public
hearing calendar is, so that we don't overstack and we give an opportunity for each one
to have a reasonable period of time to be heard. And sometimes when these things get continued,
then we jam up the next hearing and then those require a continuance because you're not
able to resolve it all. The idea of taking it on a case by case basis I think is well founded.Councilmember Coontz -
sure.Mayor
Murphy -- Any other comments?
City Attorney -- Just one comment, if
a member of the Councilor the Mayor could do so, and that would be to ask the Clerk
to provide a transcript of what was said here tonight and include it in the minutes; and there are several
reasons to do that.Mayor Murphy - Councilmember Cavecche would you like
to make that request since it's your item.Councilmember Cavecche - Yes, if the City Clerk
could
please provide a copy of this transcript with the Minutes.Mayor Murphy - And I also assume
that since there'
s no action agendized with the item, no formal has to be taken.Councilmember Cavecche - No.Councilmember Coontz -
I have a suggestion. We
have listed, andthe
City Clerk hasbeenvery helpful with this over a period of time, policies which are not
in the Ordinance and they are part of the Agenda so they can read it and find out. I
do think it ought to be in there. This should be in there. It's much easier to do that, to form it
as a policy and get us to approve what it says if it's necessary, so that anyone looking at this agenda information will
understand. We've done this many times before, just exactly what our policy is.Mayor Murphy -
Fair enough, we'll take that under consideration too.PAGE
13 r __u______
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS - None.7.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS TAPE 1670 7.
1 Report by David DeBerry, City Attorney regarding the proposed Cellular Antennas at
El Modena Park. (This item was continued from the November 26, 2002 and December 10,
2002 Council meetings.) (A2100.0 AGR-4149)
SUMMARY: Review and consider prior Council authorization (October 22, 2002 Council
meeting) to execute cellular antenna agreements with Sprint PCS and Cingular Wireless.
The City Attorney reported the two agreements have been modified to reflect the changes as
requested by the Council.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez stated he was happy to see the changes made to tighten up the issues he
originally brought up and provide some degree of oversight at this park, as this probably won't
be the last request for cell sites. He asked the City Attorney's Office to use these agreements as
a template for future leases, which provides a great deal of oversight; and thanked the City
Attorney's Office for their efforts in modifying these agreements.
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: Approved the
Lease Agreements with Cingular Wireless and Sprint PCS; and Authorized the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute the Agreements on behalf of the City.7.2 Report
by the Director of Commuuity Development regarding a consultant services agreement with Civic
Solntions, Inc., a private planning cousulting firm, to provide work in the areas of
current and advance planning and environmental review related to development proposals for
East Orange and Santiago Hills II by The Irvine Company.A2100.0 AGR-
4200)SUMMARY: Staff
anticipates that development applications will soon be submitted by The Irvine Company
for Santiago Hills II and East Orange. Coordination of the review of these applications will
require extensive staff resources, particularly since an environmental impact report will
be prepared. This consulting services agreement will augment the existing staff in order to
provide for adequate staffing to properly evaluate the proposals.Discussion The
Community
Development Director reviewed the proposal, stating that with the existing staffing levels,
and the increase in projects that are coming up, the Community Development Department will
need additional assistance in providing planning services. She noted The Irvine Company will
pay for this additional service.Councilmember Coontz
asked about Civic Solutions and if they had any ties with The Irvine Company.PAGE
14
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
The Community Development Director noted most of the personnel from Civic Solutions have
come from the public sector and she was not familiar with any connection to The Irvine
Company. The Community Development Department has used this company before, and
although staff talked with The Irvine Company about the need for additional help, they did not
get any recommendations from The Irvine Company.
Councilmember Coontz stated this was a good idea and realizes it is hard to find good people,
but would like to have more information on the consultants who are being considered.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez agreed the Council should know more about consultants to make sure
there are no potential conflicts with developers; and wanted to ensure this consultant was
independent of The Irvine Company.
Mayor Murphy pointed out it was the City who pursued this consultant, but suggested a
continuance ifthe Council required more information.
MOTION - Coontz SECOND -
Alvarez AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to continued
to January 28, 2003; and Council to meet with staff, through the City Manager's Office,
to discuss their concerns.7.3 Report
from the Personnel Director regarding the PERS 2.7% @ 55 retirement program for the
City's miscellaneous employees effective June 29, 2003.A2100.0 AGR-
0281.15)ThePersonnel
Director reviewed the proposal, noting this is an amendment to the contract with PERS to
provide an enhanced retirement system for non-safety employees.The
City Manager stated the City will budget for this each year as it is based on yearly actuarials.Mayor
Murphy noted this is the contractual update to reflect the negotiations that were concluded
and approved last year.RESOLUTION
NO. 9687 A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange of Intention to Approve an Amendment to
the Contract Between the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees'Retirement
System and the City Council of the City of Orange to Provide the 2.7% @ 55 Retirement
Program for the City's Miscellaneous Employees.MOTION -
Cavecche SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to adopt Resolution
No. 9687.PAGE 15 T
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
ORDINANCE NO. 1-03 (FIRST
READING)An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending the contract between
the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City
of Orange to provide the 2.7% @ 55 Retirement Program for the City's Miscellaneous
Employees.MOTION - Cavecche
SECOND - Alvarez AYES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved that
Ordinance No. 1-03 be read by title only and same was set for second reading by the preceding
vote. Note: Second reading to be heard February 11,2003.TAPE
2180 7.
4Presentation of Library Facilities Master Plan, 2002-2020 by Nora Jacob, Library
Services Director. (C2500.I)
SUMMARY: The Orange Public Library Facilities Master Plan, 2002-2020, analyzes Orange'
s demographics and its library service needs, identifies a total of four projects to bring expanded
or new libraries to every area of the City and recommends an 18 year build-out plan
to be accomplished in three phases that would provide significant improvements to library
facilities in each phase
as follows:Phase 1 (2002-
2007): Main Library Phase 2 (2008-
2013) East Orange
Branch El Modena Branch Phase
3 (2014-2020) Taft Branch Expansion
to 45,000 sq. ft.New
branch of23,300 sq. ft.Expansion to
16, I 00 sq. ft.Relocation
to 20,200 sq. ft.The Library Services Director reviewed the Needs
Assessment report,
outlining the three proposed phases.Councilmember Coontz asked for a consensus from the Council that
the City request The Irvine Company, through the City Manager, to include in their entitlements
one or more of the following to assist the City in reaching its library goals: fees, a gift of
land, facilities, or even a combination of these. She stressed the importance of pursuing this, as
years ago a library was supposed to be built on the other side of the Corridor, and suggested
a library could be built alone or
in conjunction with a school.Council agreed with this idea, as the City needs to look far into the
future and look at creative ways to achieve this goal, for both the City and the schools. Council
agreed the best way to approach this may be as a joint venture with the School District in
having a library built in conjunction with a proposed school in the East Orange area; and
also
suggested that grants be pursued The City Manager stated he is in constant communication with
The Irvine Company and will relay the
Council's
direction
to
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: Approved and
adopted the Library Facilities Master Plan, 2002-2020, as presented.8.REPORTS
FROM CITY MANAGER TAPE 2700 8.1
Report on the Director of Emergency Services Proclamation regarding the local emergency which
occurred on January 6, 2003 due to high winds. (C2500.E.6)The City
Manager reported on the recent local emergency due to the high winds, noting the Emergency Operations
Center was opened at 7:00 a.m. on January 6th. He reviewed several incidences with
fallen trees, traffic signals, power poles and street closures, stating he will report back to
the Council, at a future Council meeting, on the overall damages and costs associated with this
emergency.The Council
thanked and commended all those involved for their efforts in dealing with this emergency.RESOLUTION
NO.
9694 A Resolution
of the City Council of the City of Orange ratifying the Proclamation of the existence of
a local emergency and terminating the local emergency.MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - AlvarezA
YES ~ Ambriz, Alvarez,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to adopt Resolution
No. 9694.9.LEGAL AFFAIRS TAPE
3060 9.1 ORDINANCE NO.
12-02 (SECOND READING) (ZI500.0 ZCG-1213-02)An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Title 17 of the Orange Municipal
Code and approving the reclassification of property located at 411 to 421 South Batavia
Street and 802 West Culver Avenue from R-3 and R-2 to
OP.Zone Change 1213-02, Applicant:
Trico Realty MOTION -
Alvarez SECOND - Cavecche
AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche PAGE1?
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Moved that Ordinance No. 12-02 be read by title only and same was approved and adopted
by the preceding
vote.9.2 ORDINANCE NO. 16-02 (SECOND READING) (A2500.
0 Zoning)An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Section 17.22.030
of the Orange Municipal Code to allow public parks and athletic fields as permitted uses
within the Recreation Open Space (RO)
Zoning District.MOTION -
Alvarez SECOND - Ambriz
AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved
that Ordinance No. 16-02 be read by title only and same was approved and adopted by
the preceding vote.
10. RECESS TO THE MEETING OF THE ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
11. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed at 6: 14 p.m. to a Closed Session for the following purposes:
a. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 124-145 and 164-180 S. Water Street,
Orange, CA Agency Negotiator:
Linda Boone Negotiation Parties: City of Orange, Orange Redevelopment Agency and
Orange County
Fire Authority Under Negotiation: Price and terms
of payment b. Public Employee Performance Evaluation pursuant to Government Code
Section 94957:Title:
City Attorney c. Conference with Legal Counsel: Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.9(b): One
potential case.d. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as are orally announced
by the City Attorney, City Manager, or City Council prior to such recess unless the motion
to recess indicates any of the matters will not be considered in
Closed Session.7:00 P.
M. SESSION
TAPE 3150 12.
PUBLIC COMMENTS Jeff Mulford, 2321 N. Clinton, speaking on behalf of the Keep Orange Clean
Committee, spoke on RVs, asking Council to enforce the current City codes regarding RVs parked
on driveways;
PAGE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued)
the negative impacts to property values; and suggested this issue be placed on a ballot for a vote
of all citizens of Orange.
Arlen Craig, address on file, submitted literature and spoke on residential development and the
urban development process.
Mel Vernon, address on file, submitted a flier being distributed by the Keep Orange Clean
Committee and asked the City to enforce the current codes as they relate to RVs. He provided a
website for their Committee - Keeporangeclean.org and their E-mail address at
Keeporangeclean@earthlink.net.
13.PUBLIC HEARINGS TAPE 3500
13.1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16405-02; MINOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO.
230-02,HAL BAERG (T4000.
0 TRT-16405)The public hearing to consider a proposedsubdivision of 6.37 acres into six
parcels, each of which will become acre or larger in size, and to create lots without direct access
to public streets,upon property located approximately 500 feet south of Santiago Canyon Road
and east of Jamestown Way has been continued from November 26.2002. The subject site
is located within the boundaries ofthe Orange
Park Acres Plan.Note: The public hearing was not opened on
November 26, 2002 The Community Development Director reviewed the proposal, noting the alignment
of the trails is still being questioned
by the
Applicant.Council Ouestions Councilmember Coontz asked for clarification on the various proposed trail alignments
as it was not clear from
the posted map.Councilmember Cavecche asked about the trail proposed by the Planning Commission
the line of eucalyptus trees on the west side along Jamestown; the large flood basin to the
west which runs onto the property on the other side and whether there is continued drainage into that now
or is it a dry basin. She asked to see a map of the non-existent trail up the
hill because of the importance of the trail link; and wanted to ensure that the developer
will inform each property owner that they will have to go back to the OPA Planning Committee for
review. She noted the OPA Planning Committee suggested a trail along the
cuI de sac road.The Community Development Director reviewed the trail alignment
proposed by the Planning Commission, noting the trail would run east of the eucalyptus trees
along Jamestown. The basin is the former site of Handy Creek and is an area that does not get drainage
right now and grading will take care of
it in
the
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Mayor Murphy suggested, from his experience in living in an equestrian community, that
keeping the trails away from driveways and roads is much more preferable.
MAYOR MURPHY OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 4080
Hal Baerg, Applicant, reviewed the various trail alignments, stating he would like to keep the
trail along the north side of the property, coming down along the west side to the south. He did
not want it along the southern property line as the trails would interfere with him developing that
area into a nice back yard setting, and he is pursuing land use agreements with the property
owners to the south to have a landscape easement.
Chuck McNees, 11211 Orange Park Acres Boulevard, Chairman of the OPA Trails Committee,
stated they do not want the trail to go down the cuI de sac road in front of the residences, as
originally proposed by the OPA Planning Committee.
Tom Anderson, address on file, spoke in opposition to the trail going down the cuI de sac road or
along the north side of the property; and pointed out the trail is a multi-use trail, and not used
just for
horses.Nick Terpstra, 1475 N. Jamestown Way, agreed the trail should go along the south side of
the property and not down the cui de sac or the north property
line.Mr. Baerg again asked for the trail to go along the north side of the property, and then down
the west side to the
south.Councilmember Coontz asked the Applicant if the trail location was a make or break
situation.Mr. Baerg stated he was steadfastly opposed to the trail on the south side of the
property.Mayor Murphy noted there are special requirements in this area and a responsibility to
provide appropriate trail
access.MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC
HEARING Council
Comments Mayor Murphy noted there are a number of proposed alignments. The project should
be considered as a whole and the Council needs to look at the best solution for the trail that
works for both the property and the bordering land
uses.Councilmember Cavecche stated she did not want the trail along the north side of the
property and agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation of placing the trail along the
south
side.PAGE
20
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilmember Coontz also agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation and
definitely did not want the trail down the cui de sac. She noted the Colony Tract was the first
tract in this area to have a designation of a trail, and asked for information on adjoining
properties in the future.
Mayor Murphy agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation as it will minirnize the
exposure ofthe trails to cars and driveways and keeps the trail within the heart of the property.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation, as this is a new
development and wanted to minimize the impacts to existing neighborhoods.
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Approve Negative Declaration
1701-02, Tentative Tract Map 16405-02 and Minor Site Plan Review
230-02, as contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 22-
02.13.2 APPEAL NO. 488-02 - HANSON AGGREGATES (A4000.0 APP
488-02)The public hearing to consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's determination
that a concrete recycling facility is not a permitted land use on property zoned SG (
Sand-Gravel) upon property 6.40 acres in size located on the north side of Santiago Canyon
Road midway between Jamestown Way and Orange Park Boulevard (site address is 4621 E. Santiago
Canyon Road) has been continued from
December 10. 2002.Note: The public hearing is
closed.TAPE 5420 The City Attorney reported the Appeal comes down to two questions
does the current operation constitute a plant or apparatus for rock crushing and cement
treatment of based material, and if so, was that operation in existence prior to 1995. At the
December 10th hearing,staff was of the opinion that the use was not permitted under the existing
Sand and Gravel District. The staffs opinion on that particular issue has not changed.
However, under the doctrine of legal non-conforming use, if at the time the operation was initially
begun, it was a permitted use, then it could continue as a legal non-conforming use. So
in order to make the determination, it is necessary to go back and look at the Sand and Gravel
District as it existed at the
time the operation was established.According to Declarations that were filed by Hanson, the operation was begun
in the mid to late 1970's. There was a letter submitted earlier that day by a nearby
resident that contends that the rock crushing operation began in 1997, which is an issue he
will explore further. Assuming that the rock crushing operation, or the recycling operation, that is there
now, began prior to 1995,there was one permitted use under the Sand and Gravel District that existed
prior to 1995, that no longer exists, which is the operation of a plant or apparatus
for rock
crushing
and
cementPAGE21r----.---~----.u---...----~-'--------.-----
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
treatment of base materials. According to the Declaration submitted by Hanson, and which
appears to be supported by staff, there does not appear to be an argument of what the current
operation consists of, which is the importation of asphalt and concrete and it is crushed on site.
What it boils down to is whether or not the crushing of asphalt and concrete constitutes the
crushing of base material. There is a declaration that was submitted by Mr. Davis explaining
how the crushing of asphalt and concrete constitutes the crushing of base materials.
In addition, The City Attorney accessed information on an internet site which defines what a
base material is. It states that recycled aggregate can be used as base and sub-base and notes
that specifications as to what can be used as base material roads are contained in the Green
Book,which is a set of specifications that is uniformly adopted by public
agencies.It was the City Attorney's opinion that the existing operation is a plant for the rock crushing
and cement treatment of base materials. Since that was a use that was permitted prior to 1995,
as long as the Council finds that the current operation was in existence prior to 1995, it would
be permitted as a legal non-
conforming use.If the Council finds it is a legal non-conforming use, there still may be
other issues about whether it is operating in accordance with existing regulations. There also may be an
issue as to whether or not the use discontinued for a period of time which will result in
the property owner losing their right to continue that use. However, the City Attorney suggested
Council stick to whether or not this was a legal use at the time it was constituted, and the other
issues be taken care of through the
Code Enforcement process.Council
Ouestions TAPE 5650 Councilmember Cavecche stated it seems they are basing this on what the definition
of a base material is; but she is looking at the intent of this Ordinance when it was
established. In defining base materials, she suggested looking at what the Green Book said at that time,
and could this have changed since
the early 1970s.The Public Works Director reviewed the Green Book from the early 1970's,
stating there have been slight changes since 1973, but it is basically the same as today; and that
crushed asphalt was considered
a base material.Councilmernber Cavecche again looked at the original intent of this Ordinance, if it
was to allow crushing of materials versus importation; and asked if this can be
taken into consideration.The City Attorney stated the Code already permitted the operation of mining for
the extraction of materials on site and any facilities that are related thereto. So the
Code already contemplated that they might have a mining operation and in conjunction with that
mining operation,
there
PAGE 22
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
would be a rock crushing plant. If that was the intent, there would have been no reason to set out
a separate permitted use for a rock crushing plant. It appears the intent was to allow a stand
alone operation where there was an extraction on the site.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez stated the applicant might have originally had the right to conduct a
mining operation which may have included the crushing of rock. However, in looking at the
operation as a business, there may be other ordinances not being followed at this point. He asked
if there is documentation to prove this is a legal business and what exactly is out there. He was
also concerned that if the City was not enforcing laws back in the 1990's, or even now, did the
city help the applicant establish this grandfathering. If the city established this by lack of
enforcement or lack of recognition of what was going on there, then the City becomes a partner
to this operation.
The City Attorney pointed out the Applicant does have a business license. However, a business
license does not delve into any issues of whether or not a business conforms with the existing
zoning code. When the business was established, if it was established in the mid 1970's, they
were not required to obtain any type of Conditional Use Permit since it was a permitted use. He
agreed other issues may need to be addressed, and recommended the Council make a
determination on the legal issues and then let Code Enforcement follow up on these other issues.
Councilmember Coontz asked for clarification on how Code Enforcement would be involved as
there may be other zoning or General Plan issues involved.
The City Attorney stated Code Enforcement is the initial contact with a business, but that the
City Attorney's Office would be working with them.
Councilmember Cavecche asked about the Rehabilitation Standards in both the ]973 Ordinance
as well as the 1983 Ordinance, as it talks about termination of operation. It basically states that
once excavation has ceased, then the Planning Commission may hold a public hearing. She
asked if excavation has ceased on this property, because it doesn't say they can do anything else
after excavation.
The City Attorney stated the Code section says once the mining operation ceases, then the owner
is required to submit a rehabilitation plan. It doesn't prevent the property from being used for
other purposes.
MAYOR MURPHY REOPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 6200
Pam Rosenberry, address on file, stated if the use is allowed to continue, then the City needs to
enforce codes, including those relating to airborne pollutants, the security of the property, traffic
and health and safety issues.
Mrs. Reinking, 856 Crest de Ville, expressed concern about noise, truck traffic, dust and health
concerns.
PAGE 23
r--.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Patrick Mitchell, speaking on behalf of Hanson Aggregates, submitted a declaration that the
recycling operation started in the mid 1970's; and supported the City Attorney's recent memo
that the use is a legal non-conforming
use.David Piper, 6705 E. Oak Lane, stated it is his opinion that the facility did stop
operation between 1995 and 1997; and asked the City to enforce other zoning codes and make the
health and safety of nearby residents a
priority.Shirley Grindle, address on file, stated it was her understanding that this property was
annexed into the City around 1965 and the operator would have obtained the original sand and
gravel operating permit though the County. She asked if the City had investigated what was told to
the County as far as what they were doing on this site; and if a sand and gravel operation came
in after 1973, they would have had to file a detailed report on the
operation.Ken Barker, Hanson Aggregates, stated their company has an open door policy and has tried
to work with surrounding residents in alleviating concerns; and in fact, were having a
neighborhood meeting the following evening. They are respectful of the environment and air quality is a
top priority for
them.MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 2 - 50
The City Attorney reiterated the merits of the project or any impacts are not part of the
discussion at this hearing.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez stated the City needs to know more about the operation at the site; that
other issues on the property need to be addressed; that the history of this property needs to be
tightened up and the investigation into the current operation probably needs to be at a higher
level than Code Enforcement.
Mayor Murphy suggested Council focus on the issue on the Agenda, which is whether the
facility is a legal non conforming use, make a decision on that, and then direct staff to pursue
other issues that need to be investigated.
The City Attorney stated if there are any violations on the property, there is a process in place
that needs to be followed, which is, if a violation is found, they are cited, they are given a certain
amount of time to respond, if no response, then the matter is referred to the City Attorney's
Office and then a misdemeanor complaint can be filed. The City is not in a position to close this
facility. The City would have to make solid findings to do so and the City needs to afford this
property owner the same rights as any other property owner.
Councilmember Coontz stated the Council needs to have an accurate history of this property and
all resources available to them to make any determination in the future.
PAGE 24
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilmember Cavecche stated they seem to be looking at the definition of rock crushing and
recycling. It is her opinion that according to the original ordinances, this was digging up rocks
and doing so with the rocks that were dug up there, and recycling is an ancillary operation. Her
concern, however, is how this would be interpreted legally, but she is swayed by the City
Attorney that this is a legal issue at this point.
Council agreed this is a legal issue but that other issues need to be looked at; and discussed
having a point person for this project, possibly in the City Attorney's Office.
Councilmember Ambriz noted the change of ownership that has occurred on this property over
the years, and asked for information on the process in terms of permits that have been applied for
over the years.
The City Attorney stated that even if it is determined that this is a legal non conforming use,
there are provisions in the code that basically say if the legal non conforming use, and the owner
thereof, has had an opportunity to amortize their equipment, then the City Council can set a
reasonable time frame for them to stop the operation. Or, if a finding is made that a public
nuisance exists, then it can possibly be abated. However, all these issues are outside the purview
of this hearing and there is a process established to handle them.
The City Attorney stated he will provide a report back to the Council at the February 11, 2003
Council meeting.
For the record, Councilmember Cavecche sated she will go along with upholding the appeal, in
all honesty just based on the City Attorney's recommendation alone; and that this has come
down to a strictly legal argument; and sometimes that is what you have to do.
Mayor pro tem Alvarez recommended to Hanson Aggregates that they start working on their end
as to what the City will be looking at, in the event the City finds things are not appropriate for
that site.
MOTION - Murphy SECOND -
Alvarez AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Upon further review
and based on the recommendations of the City Attorney, moved to uphold the appeal; and
direct staff to review the additional issues that have been raised during this public hearing and pursue
it to the furthest extent with an initial report back to the Council no later than the first meeting
in February.13.3 2001
CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (A2500.0 Fire Code Ord 17-02)Time set
for public hearing to consider adoption of the 2001 California Fire Code and other amendments.PAGE
25
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14, 2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
RESOLUTION NO. 9692
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, setting forth findings with
respect to local conditions within the City of Orange which make certain modifications and
changes to the California Fire Code necessary for various occupancies.
ORDINANCE NO. 17-02 (SECOND
READING)An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Title 15 of the
Orange Municipal Code to adopt the 2001 California Fire Code and other
amendments.Mayor Murphy announced staff requested a continuance to the January 28, 2003
Council
meeting.MOTION - Cavecche
SECOND - Coontz AYES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to
continue to January 28, 2003 Council meeting.13.4
STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION -2003 EDITION (A2500.
0 Public Works Ord 18-02)Time set
for public hearing to consider a proposed ordinance amending Chapter 12.02 of the Orange Municipal
Code adopting the 2003 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (
commonly referred to as the Green Book).The Public
Works Director reviewed the request, noting the Green Book is used by all cities in the County
as a standard document pertaining to specifications for permits, subdivisions and public works
construction activities and is updated every three years.MAYOR MURPHY
OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING THERE BEING
NO SPEAKERS, MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE NO.
18-02 (SECOND READING)An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Chapter 12.02 of the Orange Municipal
Code to adopt the 2003 Edition of the "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction".
MOTION -
Cavecche SECOND - Coontz
AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche PAGE 26
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
12. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Moved that Ordinance No. 18-02 be read by title only and same was approved and adopted
by the preceding
vote.NOTE: The City Council recessed at 9:03 and reconvened at 9:
10 14.PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT TAPE 2 -
700 14.1 Report by the Director of Economic Development regarding the
following:1) Cooperative Agreement with the Orange Redevelopment Agency relating to
the rezoning, entitlement and disposition of real property at 164-180 S. Water Street
to the Orange Redevelopment Agency. (RA2100.0
AGR-4202/4203)Rick Otto, Sr. Housing Manager
summarized the report.Mayor pro tem Alvarez stated this will be a good purchase and will give the
City control over what eventually goes
onto these properties.
RESOLUTION NO. 9696 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving the sale
of certain real property located at 164-180 S. Water Street to the
Orange Redevelopment Agency, approving the cooperation agreement pertaining thereto;
and makingcertain
findings.MOTION - Cavecche
SECOND - Murphy AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz,
Cavecche Moved to adopt Resolution No.
9696.MOTION - Cavecche
SECOND - Murphy AYES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Transferred $1,
400,000in Set-aside Funds from Account No. 941-9800-485701-
9878 (Mobile Ritz Project) to Account No. 941-9800-485802-
9881 (Housing Set-aside-Water
Street Housing Project) for the Project. (Agency)2) Cooperative Agreement with the
Orange Redevelopment Agency for the disposition of surplus City-owned real property
located at 206 N. Manchester
to
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 14,2003
14. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT (Continued)
RESOLUTION NO. 9695
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving the sale of certain real
property located at 206 N. Manchester to the Orange Redevelopment Agency, approving the
cooperation agreement pertaining thereto; and making certain findings.
MOTION - MurphySECOND -
Alvarez AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to adopt
Resolution No. 9695.MOTION - Murphy SECOND -
Alvarez AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy,
Coontz, Cavecche Transferred $400,000 in Set-aside
Funds from Account No. 941-9800-485701-9878 (Mobile Ritz Project) to
Account No. 941-9800-485802-9880 (Housing Set-
aside-Manchester Housing Project) and appropriated $370,000 in Housing Loan Funds to
Account No. 913-9800-485802-9880 (Housing Loan-Manchester
Housing Project) for the project (Agency)The City Council reconvened at 9:10 p.m. to the
Redevelopment Agency
Meeting, Item 12.
1.15. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND - Ambriz AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor
Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche The City Council adjourned at 9:15 p.m. in memory of Police
Captain John McElwee.Jb~~~A~
e'-(7C CASSAt'\TDRA J. T
CART, CMC
CITY CLERK1fL~f/
itI MAYO