HomeMy WebLinkAbout6_11_2002 - Council MinutesAPPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 25, 2002
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
OF A REGULAR MEETING June 11,2002
The City Council of the City of Orange, California convened on June II, 2002 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 Pastor Frank Riley, Orange Covenant Church
1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Emily Alvarez
1.3 ROLL CALL
PRESENT - Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT -
None Note: Mayor pro tern Alvarez was absent from the 7:00 p.m.Session.1.
4
PRESENT A TIONS/ ANNOUNCEMENTS/ INTRODUCTIONS Proclamation - Fire
Ant Awareness, June I through September 30, 2002, was accepted by Michael Hearst,
Communications Director, Orange County Fire Ant Authority Recognition was given
to Police Officer Liz Hoffman, Golden Award 2001 and Explorer Joel Southwick, Explorer
Award 2001 from the Orange County Law Enforcement Explorer Advisor Association -
Golden Awards for 200 I.Presentation was given by
Bruce Toro, Sr. Vice President of DMJM Harris, of 2002 Engineering Project Achievement Award
from Orange County Engineering Council for the SR-55 High
Occupancy Vehicle Widening Project, from SR-91 to Taft Avenue;accepted by
Jerry Bailey on behalf of the City.Mayor Murphy
announced the City received an Award of Merit from the California Association of
Local Economic Development for The Center at Main and LaVeta Project.Presentation of $
10,000 pledge check by Friends of the Orange Public Library toward proposed Main
Library expansion by Nora Jacob, City Librarian.Presentation of $
15,000 pledge check by the City of Orange Public Library Foundation toward the
proposed Main Library expansion by Doug Willits, Board Member.2. PUBLIC
COMMENTS - None.PAGE 1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3.CONSENT CALENDAR TAPE 750
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
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 June 11, 2002 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 of the City
Clerk.3.2 Request Council Continuation of warrant registers dated May 16, 23, 30,
2002.ACTION:
Approved.3.3 Request approval of City Council Minutes, Regular Meeting May 28,
2002.ACTION:
Approved.3.4 Consideration to waive reading in full of all ordinances on the
Agenda.ACTION:
Approved.
AGREEMENTS 3.5 Agreement between the City and Orange Elderly Services,
Inc.A2100.0 AGR-
0974.R)SUMMARY: Approval of annual agreement in the amount of $249,000.00
between the City and Orange Elderly Services, Inc. (OES), for the operation of senior
programs for
FY 2002-03.ACTION: Approved the annual agreement between the City
and Orange Elderly Services, Inc. in the amount of $249,000.00 to provide services for senior
citizens at the Senior Citizens Center; and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute the annual Agreement on behalf
of the City.FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds are budgeted for FY 2002-
03 in the following account: 100-7041-426700 (
Contractual Services) - $
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.6 Professional services agreement between the City of Orange and Wallrich Landi
Integrated Marketing Communications for the design and printing of the Orange
Progress City newsletter / Community Services brochure for FY 2002-
03.A2100.0
AGR-4018)SUMMARY: This agreement authorizes the consultant to design and
coordinate printing of the Orange Progress. In FY 01-02, the publication was expanded
and improved to provide more information in a clearer format. Further refinements in FY
02-03 will help the City to maximize the effectiveness
of this communication tool.ACTION: Approved agreement between the City of
Orange and Wallrich Landi Integrated Marketing Communications for the design and printing
of four quarterly issues of the Orange Progress in an amount not to exceed $100, I 00.
00 and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to executive the agreement on
behalf of the City.FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funding has been budgeted
through the following sources:General Fund: $63,100 (this amount includes $40,
000
contribution from Waste Management)100-0201-
426600-
7009 (City Manager's
Office-Publicity & Advertising-Orange Progress)Redevelopment Agency: $37,
000
940-9800-426600 (Merged and Amended Project Area-Publicity & Advertising -Orange Progress)3.7
Agreement between the City of Orange and the Orange County Sanitation District
OCSD) for flood
control system improvements on Taft Avenue and Glassell Street.A2100.0 AGR-4019)
SUMMARY: The Agreement provides for a 50% matching grant for the construction
of flood control system improvements to eliminate water ponding on Taft Avenue and
Glassell Street. The elimination of ponding will prevent water from entering the sewer
system
through openings in manholes reducing the flow/inflow into the sewage treatment
plant.ACTION: Approved Agreement between the City of Orange and the Orange County Sanitation
District and authorized the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City.FISCAL IMP
ACT:
Funds
have
been
allocated in
Fiscal Year
2002/2003
in the
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.8 Agreement between the City of Orange and the Orange County Sanitation District
OCSD) for flood control system improvements on Whitecap Avenue.
A2100.0 AGR-
4020)SUMMARY: The Agreement provides for a 50% matching grant for the construction
of flood control system improvements to eliminate water ponding on Whitecap Avenue
and adjacent streets. The elimination of ponding will prevent water from entering the
sewer system through openings in manholes reducing the flow/inflow into the sewage
treatment
plant.ACTION: Approved Agreement between the City of Orange and the Orange
County Sanitation District and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement
on behalf of the
City.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds have been allocated in Fiscal Year 2002/2003 in the
following
accounts:
550-
5011-
483400-5337
530-5011-
483400-5324
OCSD Drainage Districts 132,000 171,600 3.9 Joint library
use agreement with
Orange Unified School District.A2100.0 AGR-4021)SUMMARY: A joint-
use agreement would be implemented with Orange Unified School District to operate a Homework Center
in the Main Library from sometime in FY 2006-07 onward, contingent upon State
award of Library Bond Act funding to complete the
design of, and construct, an expanded Main Library 2002-2006).
ACTION: Approved amended joint-use agreement with Orange Unified
School District contingent upon State award of Library Bond Act funding.FISCAL IMPACT: It is estimated that
half of the personnel costs to the City for adding a 20-hour Library
Assistant and a 20-hour Library Clerk to staff the new Homework Center would be approximately $20,
000 for FY 2006-07. Half the cost of obtaining a full set of
core textbooks for the Homework center would be approximately $2,250. None of these dollars
will actually be allocated unless the State awards Library Bond Act funding to the City
for expansion
of
our Main Library, and then, until construction of the expansion has been completed.
APPROPRIATIONS 3.10 Appropriation of
Beverage Container Grant and Used Oil Block Grant funds.C2500.
0 M.1.l)SUMMARY: The City participates annually
in the California Department of Conservation Beverage Container Grant program, which facilitates
recycling, litter abatement and education programs. The State recently changed its funding schedule and has notified
the City
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
cycle. Staff has previously requested appropriation of the first funding cycle amount and
is now requesting appropriation of the additional funds. The City also participates in the
Used Oil Grant program funded by the California Integrated Waste Management Board,
which enables the City to provide a door-to-door used oil collection program
and to support certified collection centers. Used Oil Grant funds are awarded annually
and must be spent within three years. Staff is requesting appropriation of 7th Cycle funds
that were awarded in Fiscal Year 01-02 and must be spent by
June
30, 2004.ACTION:1) Approved the appropriation of Beverage Container Grant funds in
the amount of 37,
680 as follows:220-5022-427100-4909 (
State Grant Funds-Beverage Container Recycling 02-03)2) Approved appropriation of Used Oil Grant funds
in the amount of$40,894 as
follows:220-5022-427100-5003 (Contractual Services-Used Oil Block Grant 01-02)
FISCAL IMPACT: Beverage Container Grant funds are scheduled to be disbursed to the City in June and July
2002, and must be spent by June 30, 2003. Used Oil Grant funds for the 7th Cycle were
received by the City in December 2001 and must be spent by June
30,
2004.
Expenditures for both grant programs will be fully reimbursed by grant revenues.BIDS 3.11
Project No. S.P. 3390; AHRP Project - Hewes Street Rehabilitation from Marmon
Avenue to Chapman
Avenue. Approval of plans and specifications, and request for authorization to advertise.Project No.
S.P. 3391; AHRP Project - Prospect Street Rehabilitation from La Veta Avenue
to Chapman Avenue.
Approval of plans and specifications, and request for authorization to advertise.Project No.
S.P. 3392; AHRP Project - Yorba Street Rehabilitation from Palmyra Avenue to
Chapman Avenue. Approval of plans and
specifications, and request for authorization to advertise. (S4000.S.7)
SUMMARY: Plans and specifications have been completed for Hewes Street Rehabilitation from Marmon
Avenue to Chapman Avenue. The project is ready
to be advertised. The estimated construction cost is $ 238,984.Plans and
specifications have been completed for Prospect Street Rehabilitation from La Veta Avenue to Chapman
Avenue. The project is ready
to be advertised. The estimated construction cost is $ 345,783.Plans and
specifications have been completed for Y orba Street Rehabilitation from Palmyra Avenue to
Chapman Avenue. The project is ready to be advertised. The estimated construction cost
is $ 211,320. These three projects are being combined into
one construction
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June II, 2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
ACTION: I) Approved plans and specifications and authorized advertising for bids for
the AHRP Hewes Street Rehabilitation project. 2) Approved plans and specification and
authorized advertising for bids for the AHRP Prospect Street Rehabilitation project. 3)
Approved plans and specification and authorized advertising for bids for the AHRP
Yorba Street Rehabilitation project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and are available in the Capital Improvement
Capital Program in the following accounts:
1. Hewes Street (SP-
3390)
500-
5011-483300-
3423 550-
5011-
483300-3423
FY 02-
03 FY
02-
03
Total
159,783 II3.802
273,
585
Capital AHRP
Projects 2.
Prospect
Street (SP-
3391)500-
5011-483300-
4029
550-
5011-
483300-4029 FY 02-
03
FY
02-03
Total 261,
375
181.955
443,330
Capital AHRP
Projects
3.
Yorba
Street (SP-3392)500-5011-
483300-3908 550-5011-483300-3908 FY 02-03 FY 02-03
Total 123,608 88.
133 211,741
Capital AHRP Projects
3.12 CLAIMS (C3200.0)The City Attorney recommends that the Orange City
Council
deny the following Claim(s) for damages:a. Vestal Cavanaugh b. Dan Williams ACTION: Denied
Claim(s) for damages and referred to City Attorney and Adjuster CONTRACTS 3.
13 Contract Change Order
No. I; Bid No. 001-41; Project No. SP-3362 Annual Service
Contract for Concrete Replacement at Various Locations for the Fiscal Year 2001 -2002. (
A2100.0 AGR-3910)SUMMARY: This Contract Change Order authorizes payment for extra work at
agreed unit prices. The extra work consists of additional sidewalk and curb and gutter replacement at
various locations. The total cost for this
change order is $96,060.00.ACTION: Approved Contract Change Order
No. I in the amount of $
96,060.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.14 Contract Change Order No.1; Bid No. 012-17; Project No. SP-3375,
Taft Branch Library Remodel. (A2100.
0 AGR-3913)SUMMARY: Contract Change Order No. I authorizes payment for extra
work at agreed prices. The amount of Contract Change Order No. I is $
15,780.26.ACTION: Approved Contract Change Order No. I in the amount of $15,
780.26 to Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc. for
the extra work.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted or are available in
the following account:725-2001-481105-9918 $
15,780.26 (Taft Library Renovation)3.15 Final Acceptance of Bid 012-
34; SP-3380; ADA Wheelchair Access Ramps at Various Locations, FY 2001-
02 and authorization to file Notice of
Completion with the County Recorder (No staff report required).SUMMARY:
Bid 012-34; SP-3380; ADA Wheelchair Access Ramps
at Various
Locations, FY 2001-02. Contractor: Ranco Corporation. Staff recommends
acceptance of improvements.ACTION: Accepted public work improvement, authorized release of American Motorists Insurance
Company, Bond No. 3SM 04573500, in the amount of$118,303.15,and
authorized the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute the Notice of Completion.FISCAL IMPACT: None.3.16
Contract Change Order No. 1 to Bid 012-02; Installation
of Traffic Striping,Pavement Markings and Raised Pavement Markers. (A2100.0 AGR-
2436.B)SUMMARY: This Contract Change Order authorizes payment for extra work atagreed contract
prices. The total cost for this phase of the contract is $122,401.23.ACTION: Approved
Contract Change Order No. I in
the amount of $21,421.23 to PCI L TD. for
the extra work.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are
budgeted and available in the following account:OCTA Gas Tax Exchange 273-
5032-427100-0000 Contractual Services 3.17 Award Bid No.
012-47, Water
Division Landscape Maintenance Services Contract to Azteca Landscape, for annual maintenance of Water Division
properties.A2100.0 AGR-4022)SUMMARY: Three bid proposals were received
and opened May 7,
2002 for
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June II, 2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
ACTION: Awarded contract in the amount of $66,600 to Azteca Landscape, 1910 S.
Archibald Ave., Suite N, Ontario, California 91761, and authorized Mayor and City
Clerk to execute on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and available in Fiscal Year 2002-03
Water Operating Fund Contractual Services Account No. 600-8041-420000.
The effective date of the contract will be after July 1, 2002. Proposed line item
funding
as
indicated:
600-
8041-424301
600-8041-424101
600-8041-425200 600-
8041-425500 Landscape
Maintenance Repairs to
Buildings Maintenance of
Water Mains Maintenance
of Hydrants 32,
000.00 15,000.
00
4,600.00 15.000.00 66,600.00 Total QUITCLAIM 3.18
Quitclaim a portion of an abandoned water pipeline easement. (D4000.0)SUMMARY: Quitclaim a
portion of
a pipeline easement created in 1938 located at 1802 Kimbark Lane ACTION: Authorized the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Quitclaim Deed to the Harris
Family Trust for an abandoned water pipeline at 1802 Kimbark Lane.FISCAL IMPACT: The
required
fee
of $302.00 has been deposited into
Account No.100-5011-279600.RESOLUTIONS 3.19 RESOLUTION NO. 9603 (EllOO.O)A Resolution
of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, calling and giving notice of
the holding of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5,2002, for the election
of certain officers as required by the provisions
of the
laws of the State of California relating
to General Law Cities.ACTION: Approved.3.20 RESOLUTION NO. 9604 (EllOO.O)A Resolution
of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, requesting the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Orange to consolidate a General Municipal Election to be held on November
5, 2002 with the Statewide General Election to
be held
on
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June I 1,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.21 RESOLUTION NO. 9605 (E1100.0)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, adopting regulations
for candidates for elective office pertaining to Candidate's Statements submitted to the
voters at an election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2002.
ACTION: Approved.
3.22 RESOLUTION NO. 9606 (E1100.0)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, providing for the
conduct of a Special Runoff Election for Elective Offices in the event of a tie vote at any
Municipal Election.
ACTION: Approved.
3.23 RESOLUTION NO. 9611 (L1200.0)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange initiating proceedings and
ordering the preparation of a Certified Engineer's Report for certain Assessment District
proceedings (82- I).
ACTION: Approved.
3.24 RESOLUTION NO. 9612 (LI200.0)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange giving preliminary approval to
the Certified Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 82-
1 Shadow Ridge) and declaring its intention to provide for an annual levy and collection
of assessments in that special maintenance district and setting a time and place for
Public Hearing to receive evidence on the foregoing
matters.ACTION:
Approved.3.25 RESOLUTION NO. 9613 (L1200.
0)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange initiating proceedings
and ordering the preparation of a Certified Engineer's Report for certain Assessment
District proceedings (
86-2).
ACTION: Approved.3.26 RESOLUTION NO. 9614 (
L1200.0)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange giving preliminary
approval to the Certified Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance Assessment
District 86-2 Santiago Hills) and declaring its intention to provide for an annual levy
and collection
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
assessments in that special maintenance district and setting a time and place for Public
Hearing to receive evidence on the foregoing matters.
ACTION: Approved.
3.27 RESOLUTION NO. 9615 (LI200.0)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange initiating proceedings and
ordering the preparation of a Certified Engineer's Report for certain Assessment District
proceedings (94-
1).ACTION:
Approved.3.28 RESOLUTION NO. 9616 (LI200.
0)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange giving preliminary approval
to the Certified Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District
94-1 Sycamore Crossing) and declaring its intention to provide for an annual
levy and collection of assessments in that special maintenance district and setting a time
and place for Public Hearing to receive evidence on the
foregoing matters.
ACTION: Approved.3.29 RESOLUTION NO. 9620 (OCI300.
D.l)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange concerning
approving the submittal of transportation improvement projects to the Orange
County Transportation Authority for funding under Arterial Highway
Rehabilitation Program.
ACTION: Approved.3.30 RESOLUTION NO. 9624 (ORI800.0.
27.17)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange repealing Resolution
No. 8802 and Resolution No. 9298 and amending the procedures, rules and regulations
for the
Audit Committee.
ACTION: Approved.3.31 RESOLUTION NO. 9625 (ORI800.0.
27.13)A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange Repealing Resolution
No. 8801 and amending the procedures, rules and regulations for the
Investment
Advisory Committee.
ACTION:Approved.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Slater A YES -
Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Item 3.9
was amended and approved; all remaining items on the Consent Calendar were approved as recommended.
END OF CONSENT
CALENDAR 4. REPORTS FROM
MAYOR MURPHY - None.5.REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
TAPE 770 5.1 Councilmember Coontz -
The Irvine Company's request to eliminate or reduce capacity of arterial roads in
the City's sphere of influence.Councilmember Coontz reported that several
months ago, as the City Council representative to the Foothill Eastern Transportation Corridor,
she reported on the concerns she raised at the corridor agency. These concerns were
the possible effects to the corridor's future financial condition due to The Irvine
Company's reduction of their planning effort in East Orange which might affect the tollway's
ridership. Another question was whether or not planned improvements to the interchanges to
the 241 would take place in the East Orange area. As a result, the agency followed her
recommendation and set up a sub-committee consisting of the representatives from the possible
affected cities of Tustin, Irvine, Orange and Anaheim to study the problem.Subsequently, The
Irvine Company
requested the Orange County Transportation Agency OCTA) make jurisdictional changes
to the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways to reflect the Company's
opinion that there needed to be both reductions and elimination of arterial roadways due to the
Company's changed urban planning efforts. This became another new issue for the corridor's
subcommittee. Those on the corridor agency representing the affected cities are being assisted in
studying the issue by the City Managers and Public Works Directors from the cities along with
representatives from OCT A and the corridor agency.One of Councilmember Coontz'
s major concerns is The Irvine Company's request for reductions to the classification of
Santiago Canyon Road. While Santiago Canyon Road is a scenic road that should be enjoyed
on a slow drive, everyone knows that it has become a high speed route.Santiago Canyon Road is
a substandard highway with impacts way beyond the reduced planning efforts of the Company.
The road has regional significance which impacts safety concerns that contribute to accidents and
injury. The road needs to be designed to address current and future safety issues, beyond development
of The Irvine Company.PAGE 11
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 2002
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (Continued)
As The Irvine Company's plan unfolds, the City Manager and Public Works Director have
assured her that they will stay vigilant on this and other issues in their ongoing development
discussion with The Irvine Company.
Councilmember Cavecche appreciated Councilmember Coontz staying on top of this issue and
expressed concern about the elimination of Culver from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways.
5.2 Councilmember Slater - Motto Contest TAPE 880 Councilmember
Slater distributed a list of the top 19 mottos as determined by the Motto Committee
The Committee had narrowed down approximately 860 submitted mottos to 19 finalists,
noting the Register is running a poll on the public's favorite motto.He
indicated the Committee wanted to make this a surprise announcement at the July 3rd Celebration;
however, if the Council makes the final decision, it must be done at a public meeting.
He asked if the Committee should make the final decision or if the Council wanted to make
the final decision, he would agendize it for the June 25th meeting. He also asked for feedback
on the Council's favorite mottos so that he could take that information back to the Committee.
The
Council agreed they should narrow down the list of mottos and send it back to the Committee
for a further recommendation, but that the Council would make the final selection at the
next Council meeting.Councilmembers
provided their favorite mottos from the available list.Councilmember
Coontz: Honoring the Past - Embracing theFuture Councilmember Cavecche:
Honoring the Past - Embracing the Future; California's Home Town.Mayor pro tern
Alvarez: Honoring the Past - Embracing the Future; Slice of Old Towne Charm;California's Home Town;
City 'Round the Plaza.Mayor Murphy: Honoring the
Past - Embracing the Future; California's Home Town; Slice of Hometown Charm (a combination of2
other mottos)6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES,
AND COMMISSIONS TAPE 1280 6.1 Reappoint Mara Brandman
to the Planning Commission, term to expire 6/30/06.MOTION - Murphy SECOND - Alvarez AYES -
Slater, Alvarez, Mayor
Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche
Moved to reappoint Mara Brandman to the Planning
Commission, term to expire June 30, 2006.PAGE 12
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 2002
6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS (Continued)
6.2 Report on the meeting times for the City Traffic Commission, Park Planning and
Development Commission and to review the composition of the Design Review Committee.
Council directed staff to investigate moving these meetings to 5 :30 p.m. or later, and to review
the composition of the Design Review Committee regarding removal and replacement of the
staff voting member. Staff has requested this item be continued to June 25, 2002 to allow them
time to discuss the issue of meeting times with the Traffic Commissioners at their next regularly
scheduled meeting which is June 12th.
MOTION - Coontz SECOND -
Alvarez A YES -
Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to continue
to June 25, 2002 Council Meeting.7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS -
None.8.REPORTS FROM CITY
MANAGER TAPE 1340 8.1 Presentation of
the FY 2001-02 Third Quarter Budget Report which includes the period July 1,
2001 through March 31, 2002. (C2500.J.l.l)SUMMARY: ThisThird
Quarter Report helps inform the City Council of departmental performance for the
quarter, including progress toward the achievement of departmental goals and completion of
major capital improvement projects, and summarizes the results of the City's financial operations.The
City Manager
explained that during the recent 2002-03 budget hearing, the status of the current budget
was discussed and he was available for any further questions.MOTION - Coontz
SECOND - Slater A
YES - Slater, Alvarez,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: Received and filed the
FY 2001-02 Third Quarter Budget Report.9. LEGAL AFFAIRS - None.
10. RECESS TO THE MEETING
OF THE ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 11.RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
TAPE 1400 The City Council recessed at
5:20 p.m. to a Closed Session for the following purposes:PAGE 13
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
11. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
a. Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:City
Negotiator: Personnel Director Steven Pham
Employee Organizations: Orange Maintenance & Crafts Employees Association (OMCEA),
Orange Management Association (OMA), Orange Municipal Employees Association
OMEA), Water Department Employees Association (WDEA)
b. 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
NOTE: Mayor pro tern Alvarez was absent from the 7:00 p.m. Session.
12. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None.13.
PUBLIC HEARINGS TAPE 1440 13.
1 APPEAL NO. 487, MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 206-01
CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY DORMITORYfPARKING STRUCTURE: (A4000.0 APP-
487)Time set for a public hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision
to uphold Appeal No. 486-02, denying Major Site Plan Review No. 206-01 to
replace an existing dormitory (Cheverton Hall) with a new four story, 300 plus bed dormitory and
six level, 600
space parking structure.NOTE: Environmental Impact Report No. 1195 for the Chapman College
Specific Plan was certified on January 10, 1989, considering the environmental effects of a
campus wide specific plan. An addendum to that EIR was approved in March 1997 to assess an
updated Specific Plan focusing on the addition of a law school, new parking facilities and an
increase in student capacity. In accordance with Section 15177 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City
of Orange has prepared Initial Study No. 1686-02 to assess the potential
for project specific environmental impacts and determined that the environmental effects of the
proposed dormitory and parking structure project have been addressed in EIR No. 1195 and
its Addendum. Therefore, additional
documentation is
not
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June II, 2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
THE APPELLANT STATES THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR THE APPEAL:
We are requesting that the City Council reconsider the following facts: The Residence Hall and
Parking project:
Addresses all environmental issues in conformance with CEQA;
implements and is consistent with the Chapman University Specific Plan, as approved by the
City of Orange;
has been approved by the Staff Review committee, Design Review committee and
Community Development Director;
incorporates residential architecture and enhanced landscaping that blends into the
neighborhood;
compliments the City approved University Parking Management Plan; and
reduces parking and traffic impacts within adjoining residential neighborhoods by providing
critical off street/on-campus resident student
parking."The Community Development Director reported this project was approved at the staff
level,which is allowed under the Chapman University Specific Plan. It was then appealed to
the Planning Commission by neighbors who were concerned about the potential impacts of
the dormitory and parking structure in the residential area. The Planning Commission upheld
the appeal and denied the
project.Appellant TAPE
1590 Dr. Jim Doti, Chapman University, stated the goal of Chapman University is to make
the University a preeminent place and more of a residential university and not a commuter
college.They recognize they are neighbors in the community and want to work with the
neighborhoods.Mr. Ken Ryan, EDA W, representing Chapman University, reviewed the project, stating
this project is consistent with the Chapman University Specific Plan. They have met
with community and neighborhood groups throughout this process, and are trying to provide more
on-campus parking, which will help resolve the parking and traffic issues in the neighborhood.
He noted the current Specific Plan allows for a maximum classroom capacity of 4000 seats.
The current number of seats on campus is 2634 with a total enrollment of
4591.Mr. Ryan noted all City departments have reviewed and approved the project, concerns of
the City and neighborhoods have been addressed, the Design Review Committee has reviewed
the project, it is supported by the Old Towne Preservation Association (OTPA), it addresses
parking issues by providing much needed on-campus parking and implements the
Parking Management Plan which is to have more residents and
less commuters.Mr. Ryan reviewed the location of the proposed dorm and parking structure, noting the
dorm will have a 30 foot landscaped setback and the parking structure is behind the dorms
inside the campus, with no access onto Shaffer. The lighting on the parking structure will
have less
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
lighting spillage than other structures and can be adjusted if necessary. He noted a 6 level
parking structure equates to about a 4 to 5 story building in height.
CouncilOuestions TAPE 2350
Councilmember Coontz asked about the increase in the ratio of cars to students, which can drive
the need for more parking spaces. Mr. Ryan indicated the ratio has increased from .5 to .65, and
these factors have been updated as part of their analysis.
Councilmember Cavecche spoke about the poor lighting on the University parking structure
behind the Law School, asking if the proposed structure will have similar lighting. Mr. Ryan
indicated the lights on the proposed structure will have 50% less spillage and he would have to
obtain additional information on the types oflights.
Councilmember Slater appreciated Chapman's goal of trying to provide a more residential
university, and asked how many dorms are being taken out and replaced with the new dormitory
and how this projects relates in reaching the University's long term goal. Mr. Ryan indicated
140 beds are in Cheverton Hall, which is being replaced, and their goal is to have approximately
80% of their students as residents. He also stated they do not expect any vacancies in the dorms
and if a student has a car, they must purchase a sticker, which is part of the Parking Management
Plan.
Councilmember Slater stated he did not like to see the lights at the top of the structure and asked
if lights could be placed in the sides of the structure so they would be hidden from view. Mr.
Ryan stated they need to provide a balance between lighting and security. There are only 4 light
standards on the top and they are 50 feet in the center and not on the edge.
Councilmember Coontz stated she appreciated the fact that over time, Chapman University has
listened to community and City concerns. She has always thought the ingress and egress
problems on Shaffer needed to be addressed and there needed to be more setbacks and
landscaping. These, and other concerns about car alarms, have been addressed. She asked about
the Traffic Management Plan and how often it is required to be addressed by the Planning
Commission. She asked about daily incident logs and if there is a system to record incidences in
the parking structure and if they could be addressed in a report. There is a concern that
immediate attention is not being pair to these issues. She also asked about the cards issued to
drivers and if they provide information as to who the cars actually belong to.
Mr. Ryan stated there is an annual review, or report card, of how the University is doing relative
to the Parking Management Plan which is submitted to staff. He stated they would be happy to
share their incident logs; and as part of this proposal, they are implementing several items, such
as hiring a new on-campus safety officer, a comprehensive sign program reminding
students about parking and car alarms, a program for citing and towing illegally parked cars and a
new hotline for use by all
residents.a
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilmember Coontz asked about the time element between a phone call to the hotline and the
resolution of the problem and if a report card could be made available on these issues. Mr. Ryan
indicated follow through is key to this project and they are committed to making sure that
responses are made in a timely manner. They would also agree to a condition on a report card.
Councilmember Cavecche asked about Brandon Hall and what the future plans are for dormitory
expansion; if residents of Henley Hall will be using this parking structure; and asked how high
the wall is around the top level of the parking structure.
Mr. Ryan indicated there is no specific plan for the other campus facilities; however, it is the
long term goal of the University to upgrade facilities and make the campus more pedestrian
orientated. They are also looking to utilize the proposed parking structure for all resident
students, so that resident hall students are parked in the area. It was noted the guard rail around
the top level of the parking structure will be 3-1/2 to 4 feet
high.MAYOR MURPHY OPENED THE PUBLIC
HEARING The following people spoke in opposition to the
Appeal:Vic Iversen, 719 E.
Hoover Fred Peters, Walnut Avenue, submitted a picture of the proposed dormitory and
parking
structure Angela Larsen, 593 N.
Orange Tom Tsotsis, 247 N.
Grand Paul Larsen, 593 N.
Orange Elizabeth Madden, 429 E.
Walnut Christine Steineggol, 427 E.
Walnut Steven Naslund, 660 N.
Shaffer Concerns expressed included: parking structure is too high; structure should be lowered to
4 levels; structure is not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood; the project is
not within the current Specific Plan; the EIR and Specific Plan are not current and should
be amended; and traffic
concerns.The following people spoke in favor of the
Appeal:Anne Siebert, speaking on behalf of Old Towne Preservation Association, 340 S.
Olive,stated Chapman University is doing a good job working with the neighborhood and spoke
in favor of locating the parking structure inside the
campus.Bill Parker, 980 Wanda Road, spoke as an advocate of the students, who are in need
of parking and
housing TAPE
4130 PAGE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Council Questions
Mayor Murphy asked for clarification on the accuracy of the Specific Plan and the environmental
documents.
The Community Development Director stated the Specific Plan does call out permitted uses
within the residential area and talks about residential housing, dormitories and parking. Parking,
whether it is a parking structure or lot, is an allowed use per the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan
does not deal with number of stories, instead it creates an envelope in terms of height and
setback, and this project does fall within that framework, with the dormitory out front at a lower
height of 40 plus feet and the parking structure behind it at 55 feet.
With regard to the EIR, staff reviewed the document for overall growth, traffic, height, setback,
noise and lighting and found the project was consistent with the assumptions of the EIR.
Councilmember Coontz asked about a report card for circulation, which is different than the
other report card discussed earlier, and the idea of controlling of some of the other issues, which
are not part of this project, but are obviously important.
The Community Development Director reported one of the current conditions applied to
Chapman University was to create a Parking Management Plan, which was approved by the
Planning Commission about a year ago. As part of that, one of the requirements was to provide
an annual report card. The Parking Management Plan looks at the distribution of parking to see
if there is enough parking on site and if the students and staff are utilizing that parking or if there
is still spillage into the neighborhood. Chapman University has submitted their first annual
report, which has been reviewed by staff; and staff will be meeting with the University to review
it. Staff found the University has implemented a system whereby all students and faculty have to
buy parking stickers allowing them to use spaces on campus. The University has done things
internally to encourage on-site parking and they are able to track that usage. There is still
some parking spillage into the surrounding neighborhood, which indicates either a need to tighten
up the Parking Management Plan or perhaps there is not enough parking
on-site.Also, she pointed out that the University has proposed a number of things such
as additional security, not only for this project, but to address concerns from
the neighborhood.Councilmember Cavecche asked about the stepping up with the setbacks and if
this correlates with the line of site issue. The Community Development Director reviewed
the submitted drawings noting the differences between two and three dimensional drawings and the line
of
site Issues.Councilmember Coontz asked for clarification on the height of parking levels versus
stories of buildings. The Community Development Director explained a 6 story building would be
70 to 80 feet in height, whereas this 6 level parking structure is
55 feet.
TAPE 4650
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11,2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Appellant Response
Mr. Ken Ryan stated he has discussed the lighting issue with their consultant and they are able
to eliminate the light poles on the top of the parking structure and use bulk head lights on the
sides of the structure instead, which will provide the same illumination. The lights on the top of
the structure are metal halide but are fluorescent on the other floors, and the fluorescent lights
will have shields which will allow them to be dealt with in a better way. He pointed out again
this project is consistent with the current Specific Plan and they will continue to meet with
residents and follow through with what they have committed in terms of conditions and a report
card.
MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 4810
Council Comments
Councilmember Coontz asked about the process if additional conditions were imposed.
The City Attorney indicated the Appellant would need to buy off on any new conditions and
those conditions would then be included in the final Resolution.
Councilmember Slater complimented Chapman University on their efforts in reaching out to the
community. He appreciated their putting the parking structure inside the campus in response to
community concerns and for eliminating the light poles on top of the structure. He stated he
liked the project very much but was concerned with the height of the parking structure. Given
the residential proximity, 6 levels seems too high but he could support 5 levels.
Mr. Ryan stated 5 levels is better than zero, but it would mean a loss of 100 spaces and would
ask for a commitment that the City work with the University in finding additional parking.
Councilmember Coontz stated the original problem, which generated the Specific Plan in the
1980's, was the fact that there was not enough on-campus parking. Chapman University
has been trying to resolve this issue for years and this was one of the original issues for the
formation of OTP A. She appreciated the proximity of the structure to the residences and in the interior
of the campus, and felt this was a good
solution.Councilmember Cavecche stated she had spent a great deal of time reviewing this project
from all angles, noting that from Grand and Rose there is a straight line of site to this structure
and nothing has been done to mitigate the view from that
location.Mr. Ryan indicated they would add mature landscaping to mitigate the line of site from
Grand and
Rose.Councilmember Cavecche stated she knows there is a traffic and parking problem in this
area,and appreciated the efforts of the University in trying to solve those problems, but
understands PAGE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 11, 2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
this is a very large parking structure. She viewed the lines of site from various locations, noting
it was not visible from many areas. However, although the structure will help solve traffic
problems, she agreed that the extra level is putting it over the top for this neighborhood. She
predicted that another parking structure will be needed in the future when new dormitories are
re-
built.Mayor Murphy stated it is ironic that for years, the City has asked Chapman University to
solve parking problems in the neighborhood, and now that they are trying to do that, there is
the possibility that the University may be asked to make the parking structure smaller. He stated
the lighting change will help, but it seems the overall height is the problem and asked if there
was any way to reduce the height a little without eliminating one of the
floors.Mr. Ryan stated they could reduce the structure by a half level, which would keep the
same number of parking spaces but lower the structure approximately 5 feet and still maintain
the landscaping at the
base.Councilmember Coontz asked about safety and engineering issues if the structure were
lowered.Mr. Ryan indicated reducing it by a halflevel would not affect its
safety.Councilmember Slater asked how they could lower it without removing a floor, and what
the heights are of other buildings. He stated that height is the issue, not capacity, and that at least
9 feet should be taken off the
structure.Mr. Ryan indicated they would have to slightly adjust each floor, while still maintaining 6
levels,but it would not restrict any vehicles. The parking structure on Lemon is 45 feet, whereas
this one was proposed for 55 feet with the dorms at41-1/
2 feet.Councilmember Cavecche stated if the appellant was willing to look at
additional landscape screening from the Grand Street line of site and along the south side of the
building, in conjunction with the parking structure height, she would be interested in continuing this
item for
further review.Mr. Ryan indicated time is of the essence, and if continued, they would like to come back
at the next
Council meeting.The City Attorney indicated if this item were continued, the hearing would be closed
except for the discussion on the new drawings. Also, if Mayor pro tern Alvarez is present at
the next meeting, and wanted to participate in the discussion, he should review the tape of
the meeting.Also, in response to comments made on the environmental review that it did not
address the possible closure of Center Street, CEQA does require looking at foreseeable future
projects; and it could be argued that the closure of Center Street is a foreseeable future project.
The Center Street closure and this project were addressed in the environmental
documentation that accompanied the library project, which has been reviewed by
the Council.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June I 1,2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Council Action:
MOTION - Murphy SECOND -
Slater A YES -
Slater, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT - Alvarez Moved
to continue this
item to the June 25, 2002 Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Appellant to make presentation on the
other type of report card that was asked for that covered the issues brought up by the
community in the Planning Commission meetings; there are two types of report cards - circulation and
controls of the parking structure and noise.TAPE 6300 13.2 ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT - NONCOMMERCIAL
AND CAMPAIGN SIGNS A2500.0 ORD-6002)Time set
for public hearing
to consider a proposal to amend the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to regulations for noncommercial
and Campaign Signs.The City Attorney provided a
brief report, noting this Ordinance does not change the manner in which the City will regulate
campaign signs, but clears up ambiguities in the current sign ordinance in limiting the square
footage of allowable signage.Council Ouestions Councilmember Coontz noted
her banner
signs in 1986 seemed to initiate this issue; noting that political candidates still need to
get permission from property owners to place signs on their property.Councilmember Cavecche asked if
the
permitted ISO square feet is the norm in business areas.The Community Development Director indicated
the allowable square footage is based on business frontage.The City Attorney
explained this
Ordinance limits the square footage of allowable signage. As an example, if a business
has the maximum allowable signage for their business, the business can use only up to an
additional 32 square feet for campaign signs. However, anything less than 32 square feet would not be
aggregated with the existing permitted signs.In response to questions by
Councilmember Cavecche, the City Attorney further explained no permits are required for political
signs as it is a First Amendment issue.MAYOR MURPHY OPENED THE PUBLIC
HEARING THERE BEING NO SPEAKERS, MAYOR
MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING PAGE 21
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June II, 2002
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilmember Slater pointed out this proposal falls in line with existing ordinances and is
enforceable, eliminates excesses and attempts to clean up sign blight.
For the record, Councilmember Cavecche indicated a lot of cities allow their candidates to put
signs in public right-of-ways and this seems to clean up a lot of the blight. Her
first response with the City Attorney was to try to make the Ordinance a lot stricter and was informed
that the City Attorney could not do that legally. So as much as she would like to have gotten rid
of those signs, legally she is going to have to vote
for this.The City Attorney noted signs are not permitted in the
public right-of-way.
ORDINANCE 6-02 (FIRST READING)An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Chapter 17.
36 of Title 17 of the Orange Municipal Code pertaining to regulations
for Noncommercial and
Campaign Signs.MOTION -
Slater SECOND - Coontz AYES - Slater, Mayor Murphy,
Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT -
Alvarez Moved that Ordinance No. 6-02 be read by title only and same was set for second reading
by the
preceding vote.14. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT -
None.15.
ADJOURNMENT MOTION - Slater
SECOND - Murphy AYES -
Slater, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT - Alvarez
The City Council
adjourned at 9:20 p.m.J4V~1tsi~fA/
A~CASSANDRA i\THCART,
CMC CITY CLERK df,.~.;!#
MAYOR PAGE
22
r-~_.__._--_._--_._-.~.._.__.'.._-_._----_..__._-----