1993/03/02City Hall, Anaheim, C&lifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter (entered 3:40 p.m.), Pickler,
Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau
COMMUNITY SERVICES SUPERINTENDENT: Steve Swaim
CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John Poole
POLICE CHIEF: Joseph Molloy
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ASSOCIATE TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Alfred Yalda
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 3:40 p.m. on February 26, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of March 2, 1993 to
order at 3:26 p.m., all Council Members being present with the exception of
Council Member Hunter who entered the Council Chamber at 3:40 p.m.
City Manager James Ruth. He introduced the workshop portion of the meeting
noting that the Council requested an update some time ago on staff efforts in
working with the community on the Graffiti program. Steve Swaim will assist
in giving the presentation today.
156: PRESENTATION - ANTI-GRAFFITI PROGRAM/MEASURE: Steve Swaim, Community
Services Superintendent and Gang & Drug Coordinator. The first portion of the
workshop will be a presentation of the video "Taggers", a series produced by
the FOX TV Network after which there will be a presentation by the Code
Enforcement Manager, John Poole and the Police Chief, Joe Molloy reporting on
the Police Department's efforts as well as outlining some of the key points of
the anti-graffiti ordinance which is being presented to the Council at the
5:00 p.m. session for introduction.
The 15 minute video was then shown which depicted actual "tagging" in progress
on freeway signs, walls, buses, etc., the extent of the problem in
Los Angeles, interviews with some of the taggers, and figures on the
tremendous cost to the community of graffiti vandalism.
John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He feels there is a brighter picture in
Anaheim. Several years ago, the City Council and staff recognized there was a
growing graffiti problem in California and started to develop an aggressive
anti-graffiti program in Anaheim. He then briefed the Council on the program
which started in 1989 having three main facets - education, enforcement, and
removal with community involvement. He brought the Council up to date
reporting on all the activities in the City regarding graffiti and graffiti
removal working closely with the Police Department as well as other agencies -
the courts, Caltrans, neighboring cities, school districts, etc. He also
referred to the report submitted to the Council by the Planning Director (see
report dated February 25, 1993, entitled - Anti-Graffiti Efforts Relating to
Landscaping and Painting). Because of programs and efforts put forth in
Anaheim, he feels they are making progress with this formidable problem.
139
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MA~CH 2r 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Police Chief Joseph Molloy. The Police Department also has a 3-prong approach
- suppression, prosecution and intervention working alone and in concert with
other cities and agencies. His extensive presentation covered Police
Department activities in all three areas. Subsequently he briefed some of the
provisions of the proposed ordinance to be acted upon by the Council at the
5:00 p.m. session. In concluding, he assured the Council that the Police
Department was using every resource at their disposal to address the graffiti
problem.
Council Members then posed questions relating to present state law and its
lack of meaningful penalties regarding the problem, curfew enforcement,
imposing stronger penalties in the future pending the outcome of future court
cases, the need for a uniform set of laws for all cities, etc., which were
answered by the City Attorney, Police Chief Molloy and the Planning Director.
Mayor Daly thanked staff for the presentation and urged that they keep
bringing their best ideas to the Council relative to this issue.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session
to consider the following items:
a. To confer with its attorney regarding pending litigation pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to wit:
Golden West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 40-92-46; Anaheim Stadium Associates vs.
City of Anaheim, et. al., Orange County Superior Court Case No.
44-81-74.
Vo vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior court Case No. 64-89-56.
b. To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative
regarding labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6.
c. To consider and take possible action upon personnel matters pursuant
to Government Code Section 54957.
d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant
to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b)(1).
e. 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.
f. Adams International Metals vs. City of Anaheim - 69-97-13.
RECESS: Council Member Daly moved to recess into Closed Session, Council
Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:35 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:20 p.m.).
INVOCATION: Reverend Michael Pallard, St. John the Baptist Greek Orthodox
Church, gave the invocation.
140
City Hallr Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Frank Feldhaus led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PRESENTATION - DONATION FROM QUANTUM CHEMICAL CORPORATION:
Mr. Roy Cranmer, Plant Manager, Quantum Chemical Corporation presented a check
for $1,000 to the City for the Anaheim Paramedic program. Mr. Cranmer then
explained their appreciation for the EMS and EMT services provided by the
Anaheim Fire Department and how important those services are in their
business.
Fire Chief Jeff Bowman accepted the check and Mayor Daly and Council Members
expressed their thanks on behalf of the City for the generous contribution
made.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Daly
and authorized by the City Council:
Volunteer Recognition Month, in Anaheim, March, 1993
Tree City U.S.A. Day in Anaheim, March 3, 1993
Save Your Vision Week, March 7-13, 1993
The Volunteer Recognition Month proclamation was accepted by representatives
of the City's many volunteers: Betty Soto, Ruben Soto, Linda Hoffman and
Ruby Rivera.
Mayor Daly and Council Members expressed their gratitude to the hundreds of
volunteers in the City of Anaheim who have contributed more than 103,592 hours
of their time for the betterment of the Anaheim community.
119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was
unanimously adopted by the City Council recognizing Olive Crest for 20 years
of dedication to abused, neglected and abandoned children.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,879,079.37 for the
period ending February 19, 1993 and $4,346,147.54 for the period ending
February 26, 1993, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5:32 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:36 p.m.)
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Mr. Roger Vanderlon addressed the Council
under Item Al9 (see discussion under that item).
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Mr. Keith Olesen, Central City Neighborhood Council (also speaking for
Don Parson, Patrick Henry Neighborhood Council and John Rodenbour, Pearson
Park Area Group) A very concerned group of residents have been meeting
formally and informally for some time, their primary concern being the
condition and environment of some of the parks in the City. Presently most of
their concern has been with La Palma Park and drug dealers. They are asking
for 10 or 15 minutes on the Council agenda of March 23, 1993, to present
information to the Council.
141
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
They have slides, videos and other kinds of presentation on the subject that
they wish to bring forward at that meeting. The reason they would like to
present the information publicly is (a) they might have information that is
not readily available to everyone, and (b) they would like to be a part of the
solution. It will give a better opportunity to show what they see as the
problem and to give some recommendations and as he stated to become a part of
the solution. The information is being compiled at this time. It will deal
with parks in general but the most notoriety is coming from La Palma park.
After a brief discussion between Council Members and the City Manager, it was
determined that Mr. Olesen would coordinate with the City Clerk on a
presentation to be made at the Council meeting of March 23, 1993.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances
and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of March 2, 1993.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Simpson, the following items were approved
in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished
each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member
Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 93R-37 and 93R-38 for adoption. Council
Member Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5357 for adoption and Ordinance No. 5358
for first reading. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book.
Al. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Budget Advisory Commission
Meeting held February 3, 1993.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission Meeting held February 10, 1993.
173: Receiving and filing Notice of Filing For Change In Gas Rates
Application No. 93-02-007, filed by Southern California Gas Company on
February 1, 1993 asking the California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC)
approval to increase rates for some customers and decrease rates for others
(new rates would be effective on or about September 1, 1993).
A3. 101: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder Hillcrest
Contracting, in the amount of $189,635.20 for Douglass Road Parking Lot
Improvements; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms
of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as
waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
A4. 152: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-37: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO SIGN LETTERS OF
SUPPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT(S) WHICH BENEFIT THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WHICH
ARE SUBMITTED BY OTHER LEAD AGENCIES TO THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE COMBINED TRANSPORTATION FUNDING PROGRAM.
A5. 169: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Mobassaly
Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $1,372,214.64 for Katella Avenue and
Douglass Road Street, Storm Drain, Electrical Traffic Signal Improvements; and
in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award,
awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waive any
irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
Council Member Pickler. In the past on anything pertaining to the Arena, he
has voted no. For the past few years, he has been skeptical about the City's
142
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
ability to meet some of the financial commitments to support the Arena. He
still has his doubts about using tax payer funds to subsidize the Arena and
the contractor, but he also believes they should take a positive approach when
it is clear that the Arena is going to be a part of the fabric of the Anaheim
community. It is a beautiful state-of-the-art Arena. With that in mind, he
does not plan to cast capricious no votes on Arena issues. He still plans to
question fiscal issues involving the Arena, but he believes in being a team
player and he recognizes that the team has worked cooperatively to make the
Arena a success. He plans to be a part of the team that will make the Arena
as successful as the Convention Center and Stadium.
106: Amending the F.Y. 1992/93 budget for Public Works/Engineering Department
to add $186,226 to Account No. 440-412-3792-7851 from fund balance revenues.
A6. 167: Approving a Notice of Completion of the Construction of Traffic
Signal Improvement Modifications by D & V Electric, and authorizing the Mayor
to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion.
A7. 169: Approving a Notice of Completion of the Construction of Lincoln
Avenue Street Improvements From Rio Vista Street to Sunkist Street by Boral
Resources, Inc., and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file
said Notice of Completion.
A8. 123: Approving a Traffic Signal and Street Improvement Reimbursement
Agreement between the City, Savi Ranch and Associates and Kmart Corporation
for the installation of a traffic signal and street improvements, at the
intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway and Pullman Street.
A9. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14193 and the Subdivision
Agreement with Kaufman and Broad-South Coast Inc., and authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Final Map. Tract No. 14193 is located at The
Summit of Anaheim Hills on Silver Star Way and Blue Sky Way (38 single-family
residential lots and 2 slope lots).
Al0. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14681, and authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Final Map. Tract No. 14681 is located at
206, 210 and 214 South Olive Street, and the developer is Anaheim
Redevelopment Agency.
Ail. 123: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order in an
amount not to exceed $250,000 to Bonafide Security Service for twenty-four
hour guard services in the east Anaheim Hills landslide disaster area.
Council Member Feldhaus. He asked if the City is getting reimbursed from the
State on these items (All and Al2).
City Manager James Ruth. The City has submitted a billing to the State and is
supposed to be receiving a check back for 2.5 million dollars which is 100%
reimbursement rather than 75%. There are also additional billings that cannot
be reimbursed until the services and contracts have been completed. The State
has been extremely cooperative and FEMA has been outstanding in the process.
Al2. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order in an
amount not to exceed $40,000 (plus taxes) to Ken Thompson, Inc., for emergency
repair to the sewer system in the Anaheim Hills landslide area.
Al3. 160: Accepting the low bid of Electrical Equipment c/o Ingalls Power
Products, in the amount of $68,046 (plus applicable taxes) 11 PMH-9 manual-
143
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
operated padmount sectionalizing switches with holders, in accordance with
bid $5121.
A14. 160: Accepting the low bid of Hoffman Video Systems, in the amount of
$116,515 (plus applicable taxes) for video equipment for the Media Services
Division of the Police Department, in accordance with bid ~5124.
Council Member Feldhaus. For the public's edification, this is being paid for
out of drug forfeiture funds.
Al5. 123: Approving a License Agreement with Atchison, Topeka, and the Santa
Fe Railway Company (Santa Fe) for electric supply line across or along railway
property, and authorizing the payment of the license fee amounting to $900 to
Santa Fe.
Al6. 150: Appropriating $243,973 from Fund 216, Parksites and Playgrounds
Fund Balance, to provide additional funding for the development of Citrus
Park.
Al7. 156: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-38: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM URGING CALIFORNIA CITIES TO ADOPT A DESTRUCTION POLICY
REGARDING CONFISCATED WEAPONS.
Al8. 177: Authorizing submission of an application for funds under the HOME
Investment Partnership Act, and authorize the Mayor and the Executive Director
to execute the necessary documents and certifications for submission of the
application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Al9. 156: ORDINANCE NO. 5358 - INTRODUCTION: Amending Anaheim Municipal
Code section 7.44.010 by adding section 7.44.015, 7.44.030, 7.44.040, 7.44.050
and 7.44.060, inclusive, relating to graffiti.
Roger Vanderlon, Operations Manager, Spray-On Products, 3818 E. Coronado,
Anaheim. He is requesting a postponement of the anti-graffiti ordinance for a
couple of weeks to review the wording of the control measure. Partially at
the request of staff, the industrial community has put together a model
anti-graffiti ordinance and as of this morning turned it in to City staff
requesting flexibility on how to go about eliminating theft of aerosol spray
cans. They support the ordinance but are requesting a short postponement of
two weeks.
Council Member Pickler. He does not favor a postponement. The ordinance can
be changed at any time. He was even hoping they would not have to wait the
30-days before the ordinance becomes effective after adoption.
City Attorney White. As it stands, the ordinance is before the Council for
introduction tonight and for adoption at the next Council meeting and will
then be effective 30-days from adoption. If changes are made, those will have
to go through the same schedule. An urgency ordinance could be adopted with a
4/5ths vote of the Council and the ordinance would become effective
immediately. The question is whether it would be subject to legal challenge -
is there a need based upon public health and safety. If that is done,
normally two ordinances are adopted, one regular and the other an urgency
ordinance. A second ordinance amending the first would even be less likely
considered an emergency under State law. The request, even though not
specifically stated, is to change the so called lock-up of the spray cans
provision to allow electronic surveillance of some type. If the Council is
inclined to entertain that, he believes that could be brought back to the
144
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Council as early as next week. It is not staff's position to come back with a
recommendation different from the one submitted unless the Council wishes.
The concept is, rather than having a clerk take the cans out of a locked
cabinet, that the same type of mechanism found at music stores can be used
where there is a metal strip placed on the item and deactivated at the cash
register. Otherwise it would set off an alarm.
Roger Vanderlon. Since February 4, when the California Supreme Court ruled on
the matter, they have been meeting with retailers and clearly the large
retailers would lock up their products but the smaller ones are not set up
that way. All they are trying to do is facilitate an ordinance that needs to
happen.
City Attorney White. The information submitted came in today and staff has
not had a chance to analyze it. He does not believe that there is anything in
the so called "model" ordinance which y
ynwould need to be adopted other than the one issue mentioned - whether the
implements are locked up or monitored in some way.
Mayor Daly. It is clear that in Anaheim graffiti has become public enemy $1.
Staff, Code Enforcement, Police, City Attorney and many others have
collaborated to put the ordinance together. This afternoon in a workshop
session, additional potential solutions were discussed. One of the overriding
concerns is that State law as it relates to the subject be made to adopt a
uniform measure for all cities. The Council has asked staff to continue to
bring good ideas forward. They will consider any and all such
recommendations.
Council Member Pickler. He reiterated, he does not mind introducing the
ordinance tonight if next week the Council moves to make it an emergency
ordinance. The City Attorney can look at that aspect. He would rather not
wait for 30 days.
Council Member Simpson. At some point, the State is going to have to take a
stand. It does little good for Anaheim to impose an ordinance when
perpetrators are then able to go to adjacent cities that have no such
restrictions. He would personally encourage the State and staff to work
together to develop an ordinance that would be implemented State wide.
Otherwise, it does not make sense.
Mayor Daly then briefed the highlights of the proposed ordinance. The Council
will be voting on adoption at the next meeting at which time Council Member
Pickler or any other Council member may suggest the ordinance be adopted on an
emergency basis. Mr. Vanderlon's request for a model ordinance will be dealt
with along with trying to do something on a state-wide basis as discussed.
Council Member Pickler. He referred to the fact that the City has a curfew.
He asked that the Public Information Office disseminate the curfew law to the
Hispanic newscasters and papers in order to inform the Hispanic community that
there is such a law; Mayor Daly suggested that the information be included in
one of the future Utility bill inserts.
ORDINANCE NO. 5358 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 7.44.010 BY ADDING SECTION 7.44.015,
7.44.030, 7.44.040, 7.44.050 AND 7.44.060, INCLUSIVE, RELATING TO GRAFFITI.
A20. 142: ORDINANCE NO. 5357 - ADOPTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING CHAPTER 6.30 OF TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
145
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MA~CH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
RELATING TO SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES.
February 23, 1993.)
(Introduced at the meeting of
A21. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held
January 12, 1993.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 93R-37 and 93R-38 for adoption:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-37 and 93R-38 duly passed and adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5357 for adoption:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5357 duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CAI~ND~. MOTIONS CARRIED.
A22. 105: APPOINTMENTS TO FILL VACANCIES - BUDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION:
Appointment to fill three vacancies on the Budget Advisory Commission. This
matter was continued from the meeting of February 23, 1993 to this date. The
vacancies are for two terms which expired June 30, 1992 (Tait and Alexander)
and for a term expiring June 30, 1993 (Mayer). Council Member Hunter. He
feels on this item, it should be continued one week to give the Council the
opportunity to think about downsizing the Commission to five members. So it
is fair and equitable, each Council member should come up with a nominee or
renominate a member rather than having ten members. The Commission itself has
said that ten members is too cumbersome a number to work efficiently.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to continue the subject appointments for
one week and to consider downsizing of the Budget Advisory Commission.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A23. 102: APPOINTMENT - VECTOR CONTROL BOARD: This matter was continued
from the meeting of February 23, 1993 to this date: City Clerk Sohl reported
that no letters of interest had been received on the subject appointment. She
suggested that the Council might wish to consider continuing the appointment
until letters of interest' are received.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue the appointment to the Vector
Control Board to such time that at least two applications are received
expressing interest. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
ITEMS B1 - B9 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8r 1993
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH 2r 1993:
B1.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4218, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11:
OWNER: Trider Corporation, Attn: Alan Trider, 435 S. Anaheim Hills
Road, Anaheim, CA 92807.
146
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
LOCATION= 435 South Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately
5.31 acres located at the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch Road and
Anaheim Hills Road.
Waiver of required site boundary screening to construct a 6-foot high
wrought iron fence within an existing 125-unit senior citizens'
apartment complex.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4218 GRANTED (PC93-17) (7 yes votes).
B2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2809 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Trider Corporation, Attn: Alan Trider, 435 S. Anaheim Hills
Road, Anaheim, CA 92807
LOCATION: 435 South Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately 5.31
acres located at the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Anaheim
Hills Road.
Petitioner requests modification or amendment to conditions of approval
and/or stipulations pertaining to landscape requirements for Conditional
Use Permit No. 2809 (to permit a 2 and 3-story, 125-unit senior
citizens' apartment complex).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 2809 APPROVED, IN PART, that the area located along the north
side of Nohl Ranch Road between Hillcrest Street and Anaheim Hills Road
shall be hydroseeded with a permanent irrigation system and that twenty
15-gallon trees shall be planted. The trees shall be permanently
maintained, and that landscape plans shall be submitted to the Zoning
Division for review and approval (PC93-18) (7 yes votes).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3579 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Canyon Acres Residential Center, Attn: Dan McQuaid, 233 S.
Quintana Road, Anaheim, CA 92817
LOCATION: 233 South Quintana Road. Property is approximately 4.6 acres
located on the west side of a private access road from Quintana Road and
approximately 300 feet south of the centerline of Arboretum Road.
To expand a boarding and lodging home for 30 dependent children,
including an 840-square foot addition to a bunkhouse and a proposed
4,499-square foot (previously 6,469-square foot) multi-purpose
building.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3579 GRANTED, with added conditions (PC93-19) (7 yes votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Council Member Feldhaus. The Council has received a letter asking that this
item be set for a public hearing. He sat in on one of the Planning Commission
meetings where revised plans were submitted that day. In his opinion, they
have received enough continuing public request from the area that they should
take another look at the item. Letters have also been received from a number
of people. He is not sure that those people have had an opportunity to look
at the revised plans.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The reasons for the Planning
Commission's approval were outlined in the resolution granting the request.
Revised plans were submitted downscaling the size of the multi-purpose
building from 6,400 square feet to about 4,400+ square feet. There are some
additional conditions not in the original staff report limiting hours of use
147
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
of one of the parking lots closest to the residents as well as limitations on
the hours of using the two story multi-purpose building where the second story
is not to be used in off hours. The number of children was fixed at 30
overall. There was a great deal of discussion and concern from the neighbors
whether the location would expand. The CUP is specific for a total of 30
children on the premises and a condition that prohibits any children having
on-site teaching other than occupants on the premises.
Council Member Pickler. The Planning Commission made it pretty specific as to
what could or could not be done; Annika Santalahti acknowledged that was
correct.
Council Member Feldhaus asked if the temporary trailer had been removed; Joel
Fick, Planning Director. He does not know but a condition of approval of the
CUP was that one of the two trailers on site had to be removed within 60-days
and the other trailer is to be removed and replaced by the construction.
Other technical items were addressed - part of the staff parking lot nearest
to the residential homes was relocated to another portion of the site and the
lighting for that parking area was also addressed.
Mayor Daly asked if there were any additional comments or if anybody was
interested in setting the matter for a public hearing; there were no comments
and the item was not set for a public hearing.
B4. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3583, AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED)t CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3148 -
READVERTISED TO AMEND PREVIOUSLY APPROVED EXHIBITS:
OWNER: Taylor Bus Service, Inc., 18818 Teller Avenue, #210, Irvine, CA
92715.
AGENT: Transport International Pool, Inc., Attn: Steve Metzger, 7170
E. Bandini Blvd., #085, Commerce, CA 90040
LOCATION: 1860 South Lewis Street. Property is approximately 1.8
acres located on the east side of Lewis Street and approximately 315
feet north of the centerline of Gene Autry Way.
To permit rental and outdoor storage of semi-truck trailers, minor
maintenance/repair and use of a modular office building with waiver of
minimum landscape requirements, required parking lot landscaping and
required improvement of outdoor storage and parking areas.
To amend previously approved exhibits for Conditional Use Permit No.
3148 to delete the subject parcel from the exhibits approved for an
adjacent bus storage terminal.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3583 GRANTED, in part for five years, until 2/8/98 (PC 93-20) (7
yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement, APPROVED, in part, modified waiver A must
provide five feet of landscaping on Lewis Street.
Approved Negative Declaration.
CUP NO. 3148 APPROVED, (PC93-21) (7 yes votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B5. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3586 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Lederer Anaheim Ltd., Attn: Les Lederer, 1990 Westwood
Boulevard, 3rd floor, Los Angeles, CA 90025
LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately
14.74 acres located north and east of the northeast corner of Cerritos
Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard.
148
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
To permit an indoor soccer field in conjunction with an existing indoor
swap meet facility.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3586 GRANTED, (PC93-22) (7 yes votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council
Members Pickler and Simpson, and therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled
at a later date.
B6. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2165 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION, REQUEST
TO AMEND OR DELETE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO TIME LIMITATION FOR
AN EQUIPMENT RENTAL YARD AND CONCRETE MIXING OPERATION:
OWNER: D. Raymond Woll and Ada May Woll, 4460 E. La Palma Ave.,
Anaheim, CA 92807
AGENT: GKN Rentals, Michael L. Stevens, Risk Manager, 100 Chaparral
Court, Ste. 130, Anaheim, CA 92808-2236
LOCATION: 4460 East La Palma Avenue (GKN Rentals). Property is
approximately 2.4 acres located at the southwest corner of La Palma
Avenue and Lakeview Avenue.
Petitioner requests amendment or deletion to a condition of approval to
allow an indefinite extension of time to retain an equipment rental yard
and concrete mixing operation.
ACTION T~KEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 2165 APPROVED for three years to expire 1/12/96 (PC93-23) (7 yes
votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3559 - REVIEW OF LANDSCAPE PLANS:
REQUESTED BY: THOMAS J. DAVIS ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: 222 North Beach Boulevard.
Petitioner requests review of landscape plans for Conditional Use Permit
No. 3559 (to permit an auto service and tire installation facility -
Winston Tires).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Landscape plans for CUP NO. 3559 APPROVED.
B8. 179: CITY COUNCIL REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF EXISTING
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SIGN ORDINANCE:
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved Staff's recommendation.
B9. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3576 - REQUEST REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF
PARKING AND LANDSCAPE PLANS:
REQUESTED BY: LLAN BAZAL
LOCATION: 755-763 North Euclid Street.
Petitioner requests review approval of parking and landscape plans for
Conditional Use Permit No. 3576 (to permit the division of an existing
retail unit).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Parking and landscape plans for CUP NO. 3576 APPROVED subject to
additional climbing vines planted on the north end of the building.
ITEM B10 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1993
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH 4, 1993:
149
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
BI0.
170: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 12685 - REQUEST EXTENSION OF TIME:
REQUESTED BY: The Presley Companies
LOCATION: Property location is Development Area 4 within the Highlands
at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1).
Petitioner requests extension of time to comply with conditions of
approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 12685.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Extension of time for Tentative Tract Map No. 12685 APPROVED, to expire
2/25/94 (6 yes votes, 1 abstained).
END OF PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
Bll.
179: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - VARIANCE NO. 4166:
Extension of time requested by Joe Youssef, 119 N. Ladera Vista Dr.,
Fullerton, Ca. 92631. The property is located at 314 Helena Street the
east side south of Broadway. The petitioner is requesting an extension
of time retroactive to February 25, 1993 to expire February 25, 1994 to
comply with conditions of approval on Variance No. 4166 which is for a
waiver of maximum structural height to construct a 10-unit, 3-story
apartment complex.
Submitted was report dated February 22, 1993 from the Zoning Administrator,
Annika Santalahti recommending approval of the requested extension of time
retroactive to expire February 25, 1994, but subject to two additional
conditions as outlined on page one of her report.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of
time to expire February 25, 1994 subject to two additional conditions as
stated in report dated February 22, 1993 from the Zoning Administrator.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion, Council Member Daly voted no since
he voted no when the project was originally presented. MOTION CARRIED.
B12. 179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - VARIANCE NO. 4202 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
A request for rehearing was submitted by Richard Held, 264 North Saltair
Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90049, on Variance No. 4202. The property is
located at 540-546 South Rose Street. The variance was for a waiver of
minimum landscape requirements, minimum number of required parking
spaces and refuse storage requirements to permit the conversion of a
4-unit, 14,000 square foot industrial building to a 4-unit industrial
condominium complex. The City Planning Commission originally denied the
request for the variance and that decision was appealed by Mr. Held and
a public hearing set before the City Council on January 26, 1993. The
City Council also denied the variance and subsequently a request for
rehearing was submitted by Mr. Held.
Council Member Pickler. He asked to hear from the City Attorney
regarding the request.
City Attorney White. The Council has the discretion to approve or deny
the request. The information justifying the request is submitted in the
Council packet. He has reviewed it and does not believe there is any
error in the action taken by the Council.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to deny the request for rehearing on
Variance No. 4202, Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
150
City Hall, ~heim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Daly offered Ordinance No. 5359 for introduction.
B13. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5359 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 TO ~tEZONE PROPERTY UNDER RECLASSIFICATION
NO. 66-67-61(107) LOCATED AT NORTHWEST CORNER OF KATELLA AVENUE AND HARBOR
BOULEVARD FROM THE CL ZONE TO THE C-R ZONE.
ITEMS B14 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 18, 1993:
DECISION DATE: FEBRUARY 25, 1993 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS
MARCH 8, 1993:
B14. 170: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 92-249, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 15,
AND WAIVING SECTION 17.08.071 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE:
OWNER: Ashwill Trust, 1805 East Garry Ave., #110, Santa Ana, CA 92705
AGENT: Ellwin Ashwill, 4 Rockledge Road, Laguna Beach, CA 92651
LOCATION: 1030-1040 North Grove Street: Property is approximately 2.22
acres having frontage of approximately 360 feet on the east side of
Grove Street, with a maximum depth of approximately 352 feet, and
approximately 510 feet south of the centerline of La Palma Avenue.
Request for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 92-249 to create a
2-lot industrial condominium subdivision with 40 airspace condominium
units.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 92-249 APPROVED to record unsubordinate
maintenance covenant, plus exhibit and CC & R's within three months
(ZA93-18).
APPROVED the waiver of Section 17.08.071 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
pertaining to the requirement to prepare a Final Parcel Map.
SWEAR-IN OF THOSE TESTIFYING AT PUBLIC HEARINGS:
The City Attorney announced that it is appropriate at this time for all those
intending to testify at any or all of the public hearings including staff be
sworn in at this time.
Those testifying were requested to stand by the City Clerk and asked to raise
their right hand. The oath was then given.
D1. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 3571 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: City of Anaheim, Attn: Jack Kudron, P.O. Box 3222, Anaheim, CA
92803
AGENT: Robert Ballmaier, P.O. Box 19707, Irvine, CA 92713-9707
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1527 East Broadway and is
approximately 0.08 acre located approximately 520 feet north of the
centerline of Broadway (a portion of Lincoln Park). The request is to
permit a 75-foot high cellular telephone tower and unmanned equipment
building with waiver of required setback abutting a residential zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3571 GRANTED (PC93-1) (3 yes votes, 2 no votes, and 2
vacancies).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested
by Council Members Daly and Feldhaus at the meeting of February 2, 1993 and
public hearing scheduled this date.
151
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - February 18, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 18, 1993
Posting of property - February 19, 1993
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated January 11, 1993.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the Council on the details
of the request.
Jack Kudron, Parks Superintendent. Answering Mayor Daly, he explained that
the subject parcel adjacent to Lincoln Park is totally fenced in and it is not
landscaped. It looks like it was an extra parcel that was not developed when
the park was developed that got fenced off and was further fenced off by the
apartment to the north. It has no park purpose at all. It could be
designated as surplus and sold. Until the department was approached by the
PacTel people, there was no intended use by the City.
Council Men%her Feldhaus. He asked for a review, his reason being setting a
precedent of using publicly owned park space for a private-for-profit
enterprise. The Planning Commission wrestled with the matter as was reflected
in their vote. If the property in itself is not useful, he feels the City
should sell it; Council Member Pickler stated it could be leased with an
option to buy.
Jack Kudron. The department would not be opposed. It was not considered as
an option.
City Attorney White. The issue of ownership of the property should be
considered separate from the zoning aspects. Even if privately owned, it
would still need the same zoning action taken on it. If the Council wishes
staff to pursue the issue of the possible sale of the property, it could be
done but the issue of zoning, whether or not it is an appropriate location for
a tower and antenna is something to be considered separate and apart.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENTs
John Petke, Planning Associates, 3151 Airway Avenue, Costa Mesa,
representing the applicant, PacTel Cellular. They have the
benefit of numerous experts from PacTel in the audience to respond
to questions. They are present to solicit Council's approval of
the subject request. He then described some of the entitlement
processes they have been through with staff and the Planning
Commission relating to aesthetics, the precedent setting nature of
the request, and the duration of time for the conditional use
permit. Perhaps a fourth issue might be the subject of ownership
as raised by the Council. In concluding his extensive
presentation, he stated they would be happy to exercise a lease
with option to buy as suggested by Council Member Pickler all
subject to fair market appraisal and City appraisal property
exchange competitive requirements.
Mayor Daly then asked to hear from those in favor or in opposition. Since
there was no response, he closed the public hearing.
152
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Mayor Daly. He has looked at the design of the 75 foot high tower. He has
also noted the Planning Commission was split relative to the application, that
there are nearby residents opposed to the installation of the tower, there is
an apartment project on one side, a park on the other and a school next door.
He is, therefore, suggesting that additional research be done as to whether
the facility could be located either closer to downtown Anaheim where there
are already high rise buildings or along the State College corridor. This is
a iow-rise neighborhood with single-family homes, a school, apartments and a
park. The proposed tower is quite obtrusive. He feels it is inappropriate to
place the tower in this kind of neighborhood. They are trying to improve the
downtown area. Putting up a communication tower equivalent to a 6 story
building very close to a residential neighborhood is not the way to do it. He
then referred to the PacBell Communication Tower located in the downtown area
on the PacBell building. He does not think any city in Orange County with the
exception of Anaheim in the 1960s or early 1970s would have allowed that kind
of building right in the downtown area with the added tower and satellite
dishes. In his opinion, it has permanently marred the residential
neighborhoods in downtown Anaheim. He has asked staff to work with the
PacBell ownership on the matter. The communication equipment is visible from
the single-family neighborhoods in downtown when looking up into the sky. He
feels it is not right or at the least there should be an enormous trade off.
A rental arrangement of $6,000 a year is not an appropriate trade off. He
would like to see the applicant try again to find a site for the proposed
tower not in a residential neighborhood and if that cannot be done that the
Council entertain tying the application to a major trade off in terms of
beautification of the central part of Anaheim near to or in the neighborhood
where the tower is proposed.
Council Member Hunter. There has been a good "marriage" between PacBell and
the City ongoing in the downtown area. A lot of PacBell employees are living
in the downtown area and it was one of the reasons why the Kaufman and Broad
project was built - to attract those persons who not only work for the City
but also for PacBell so they might work and live in downtown. He is in favor
of the project.
Mayor Daly reiterated his concerns and emphasized that it is a matter of
location.
Answering Council Member Pickler, Mr. Petke explained why PacTel picked this
particular location from numerous alternative sites utilizing the various
exhibits posted on the Chamber wall. They would not be present today if
cellular phones service demand had not increased way beyond their projections.
He also clarified that the tower itself is 60 feet with a 15 foot whip antenna
at the top as well as 3 microwave dishes. He went on to explain some of the
technicalities involved in choosing this particular location which they found
to be the best suited for their needs.
Questions were then posed to staff by Council Member Pickler regarding
duration of the proposed CUP and the control the City would have which were
answered by both Mr. Kudron and Planning Director Joel Fick.
Mayor Daly also posed a line of questioning answered by both Mr. Petke and
also Mark Bon, PacTel cellular, Radio Frequency Engineering Manager who gave
more specific technical data relating to the reasons for wanting to place the
tower in the subject area. He also clarified that they are not looking at
establishing additional sites in the area.
153
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Council Member Pickler. He feels there is a need reflected by this
application and does not believe it will be a detriment. However, he would
like to know if the applicant would be amenable to a five-year limit with a
review every five years. In that way, the City can be assured that if new
technologies come along, the appropriate changes will be made to the tower or,
if it proves to be a detriment, that the applicant will be required to remove
the tower.
Mr. Petke. They can work with the City to design a five year CUP with an
accompanying lease agreement with the renewable feature they proposed. They
understand the intent - the modernization outlook for the future. They
support that proposal.
Council Member Feldhaus. He still stands behind his premise that they should
not be leasing public park property for private-for-profit enterprise.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler, the City Council approved
the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. Council Member Daly voted no.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 93R-39 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 3571. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-39: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3571
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White stated he wants to be sure it is
clear what they are doing tonight is not acting upon the property issue. This
does not have anything to do with negotiating a license agreement for the use
of City property. That will be negotiated separately and if successful will
come back at a later date at which time the Council can vote for or against
it. He reiterated this is no different from a private property owner owning
that property and asking for a conditional use permit. He believes the
condition the Council should be looking at is the same one they have often
placed on other conditional use permits on private property - that the permit
would be for five years and at the end of five years the property owner has
the right to come back and seek, by filing another application, to extend it.
It could be for another five years, longer or shorter. The permit they are
acting upon tonight would be limited to five years. The license agreement
negotiated later might say something different but it is not relevant to the
Counc£1's discussion tonight on %he zoning i~sue.
He would suggest that be incorporated in the conditions if that is where the
Council is headed.
Council Member Hunter. He is incorporating in his offering of the resolution
what was just articulated by the City Attorney; City Attorney White. Ail it
needs to say is that the permit is granted for a period of five years.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. For clarification of the condition, the wording
staff would suggest is that the use should be permitted for a period of five
years provided however that time extensions may be granted by the Planning
Commission following a request by the petitioner and that the petitioner shall
154
City Hallr Anaheimr California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
submit information regarding approved technology such as appearance, height of
the antenna, etc. The suggestion by staff is that the Planning Commission
hold the review and the Council would always have the right to review that
decision.
City Attorney White. He suggested the addition that it be reviewed by the
Planning Commission at a noticed public hearing.
Mayor Daly. He understands the need but is not convinced that all stones were
turned and that there is not a better, more suitable location for the tower.
He will be asking staff again to work with PacBell relative to the downtown
communication tower to mask it better and to beautify it. He believes there
should be major trade offs. He will be voting no.
City Attorney White. The Council as the zoning body tonight, even if the CUP
is approved for the use of the property, when it comes back on the issue of
whether the City should enter into a license agreement, it would not be at all
inconsistent with what the Council has done tonight to say in the City's
capacity as property owner they are not going to give the applicant a license
agreement. Even if they found as a zoning matter that this might be an
appropriate place to put a tower, the Council might not end up giving them the
right to put the tower in the proposed location as the owner of the property.
A vote was then taken on the resolution offered by Council Member Hunter,
adding that the use permit shall be permitted for a period of 5 years and that
extensions of time may be granted by the Planning Commission at a noticed
public hearing following a written request by the petitioner.
Roll C&11 Vote on Resolution No. 93R-39 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson
Daly
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-39 duly passed and adopted.
Before concluding, Council Member Pickler stated he concurs relative to the
concerns expressed by Mayor Daly about the tower in the downtown area and if
there is something that Mr. Petke and the people from PacBell can do, that
they should do it.
D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 3573 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Alvin Leon. Whipple, 13550 Edgefield, Cerritos, CA 90701
AGENT: Tim Bundy, 20331 Irvine Avenue, #7, Santa Aha, CA 92707
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 201 East Ball Road and is
approximately 0.37 acre located at the northeast corner of Ball Road and
Claudina Place. The request is to permit 2,070 square-foot car wash
facility with waiver of minimum landscape setback and minimum structural
setback.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3573 GRANTED (PC93-2) (5 yes votes, 2 vacancies).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
155
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested
by Council Members Pickler and Feldhaus at the meeting of February 2, 1993 and
public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - February 18, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 18, 1993
Posting of property - February 19, 1993
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated January 11, 1993.
Council Member Pickler. His concern is the traffic and circulation problem at
Ball Road and Anaheim Boulevard. He travels that area 30 or 40 times a week.
Traffic during certain hours is horrendous and putting a car wash in the area
close to that intersection will only exacerbate the problems.
Council Member Feldhaus. He has similar concerns. He feels the entry and
exit should be on Claudina Place. He explained his reasons, the main one
being that if the lead car which has stopped at the Anaheim Boulevard/Ball
Road signal wants to proceed west on Ball Road instead of turning right, that
lead car during lunch or evening rush hour will cause traffic to back up
beyond Claudina. In the past, as Council Member Pickler pointed out, that
lane had right turn arrows only but those have been removed. He has talked to
the applicant regarding the entry and exit on Claudina who explained there is
no way to configure the car wash on the property and be able to do that.
Alfred Yalda, Associate Traffic Engineer. There are a couple of programs in
progress for that intersection. There has been an award by the State of
approximately $30,000 to improve the northbound and southbound left turn
movements. They are also in the process of design for a westbound right turn
lane only on Ball Road to Anaheim Boulevard. In order to improve the level of
service at the intersection, they did remove the right turn only to get more
cars through the intersection. Council Member Feldhaus is correct that
traffic does back up during p.m. peak hours. However, peak hours for this
type of use is not in the a.m. or p.m. but takes place during Saturday and
Sunday and probably mid-day.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Richard Finkel, Bundy-Finkel Architects. He initially did the
site planning studies for the project and met with the Traffic
Department to discuss the appropriateness of the car wash. He did
discuss with 'Council Member Feldhaus entering the car wash from
Claudina. By doing so, they would be truncating the drying area
to a point where it would no longer function as a car wash because
there is not sufficient area. From their standpoint, that is a
side issue because they spent considerable effort going over the
car wash ingress from Ball Road with Traffic. They are aware of
the right lane buildup at lunch time and other peak hours. The
net impact would not be anymore than any ordinary business that
would be on that lane. Additionally, the owner/operator has the
ability to vary the speed of the car wash functions. It is in his
interest to keep the driveway clear so as not to impact the right
lane. He will, if necessary, increase the capacity of the car
wash even posting an attendant to ensure everything is done to
keep cars coming and going on and off the site. The Traffic
156
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Department was very conscious of peak traffic loads and in
reviewing the trip count found it to be more than adequate on Ball
Road to support this type of project. Claudina is primarily an
entrance only for employees because there are two parking stalls
and a trash enclosure which needs to be accessed. He clarified
that the drying area is from the east end of the car wash tunnel
all the way back to Ball Road. They cannot exit cars out Claudina
on the busiest days because there will be too many care behind
trying to exit. Claudina essentially is an exit only for the car
wash users, but employees can use it to park their cars in the
parking spaces. The car wash users - anyone entering the tunnel -
will have the option of coming out of the tunnel and then either
going out Claudina or out Ball Road. The majority will exit onto
Ball Road.
Council Member Pickler. He reiterated he believes it is too small and too
much for that corner and exiting on to Ball Road will be a mistake. Exiting
on Claudina would be more acceptable.
Mr. Finkel, after further questions from Council Member Pickler, stated if
they limited egress on Claudina only, the driveway would need to be very close
to Ball Road. Placing the driveway further north will shorten the drying
area. It would cease to function as a suitable drying area. The closer the
driveway is to Ball Road on Claudina it will be creating a more significant
traffic problem of cars exiting very close to Ball Road.
Jay Shank, 1815 Point Margate, Newport Beach, representing NS Car Wash
Systems. This is strictly a car wash and will have no gasoline sales. It
will handle approximately 100 to 150 cars a day with a car entering or exiting
approximately every 4 minutes. It has the capacity to wash many more cars
than that - perhaps 500 or 600, 10 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is
automated and run by machinery. There will be 5 or 6 men working at the
facility total. They can detail a car as well as vacuum using the same
personnel. There are 6 parking spots for employees.
The Mayor asked if anyone was present in opposition; no one was present.
Mayor Daly then posed questions which were answered by staff, relative to the
additional projects proposed to the intersection to facilitate traffic and how
those might affect the project as well as questions relative to landscaping.
Tim Bundy, Architect, 20331 Irvine Avenue, Santa Ana. The landscaping is
taken into account, the standard setback requirement at the point of
right-of-way. There is a 5 to 10 foot requirement. The exhibit posted on the
Chamber wall reflects the additional setback requirement. He confirmed for
Mayor Daly even if the street is widened, on either side of the driveway,
closer to the intersection of Claudina, there will still be a required 10 feet
of setback even at the point where the ultimate right-of-way is taken.
After further discussion was concluded relative to ingress and egress from the
property, Mayor Daly noted that staff indicated a concern relative to the pole
sign on the property but gave no recommendation.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. Condition No. 3 states that if the
existing pole sign is removed, they would have to replace it with a monument
sign.
157
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MA~CH 2, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Richard Finkel. He clarified that should it be removed, it will be replaced
with a monument sign but it is the applicant's intention to keep the pole
sign. It is the only sign on the property.
Annika Santalahti. If the existing pole was in good condition, staff was
willing to go along with retaining it. There was a concern about signage and
Condition No. 9 in PC93-2 requires a sign program be submitted to the Planning
Commission to look at with all the on site pricing signs before a building
permit is issued.
Council Member Pickler. Ball Road is an entrance to the C-R Area. He feels
they should require a monument sign. He is going to vote against the project
but in any case if it is approved he would like to see a monument sign.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Hunter, the City Council approved
the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 93R-40 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 3573. Refer to Resolution Book.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Hunter stated he is recommending
approval based upon several factors - at present the property is a weed patch
and an eye sore. The Planning Commission approved it 5-0. They are in the
midst of a recession and ought to be encouraging business to come into the
City that will bring jobs and revenue. It is a good project.
Mayor Daly. He is prepared to support the project including the monument sign
requirement; Council Member Hunter concurred.
Richard Finkel. When the street is widened which has been indicated between
one and five years, the monument sign will be removed as part of the widening.
He is asking on behalf of the owner to be able to enjoy the use of the pole
sign until such time as the street is widened. It is a pole sign and at
present it is well maintained.
Council Member Hunter. The applicant is saying in five years the pole sign
will come down to be replaced by a monument sign.
Council Member Pickler. For him, five years is too long. He feels there is
nothing to prevent the applicant from installing a monument sign and when the
~£me comes %0 move £t back.
Mayor Daly. He asked for clarification from staff that the City's plans are
definite to widen the street for the critical intersection which will occur in
one to five years; Mr. Yalda answered that was correct.
Mr. Finkel. When and if the sign is removed, it will be replaced with a
monument sign. He believes that was the intent of the wording of the
resolution. Everyone was anticipating it would be removed when the street is
widened.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. She would suggest that there be a
modification to Planning Commission Condition No. 3 that the existing pole
158
City Hail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 2, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
sign shall be removed when the critical intersection widening at Ball Road and
Anaheim Boulevard takes place at which time the pole sign shall be replaced
with a monument sign not to exceed 8 feet in height.
City Attorney White. He also suggested additional language be added that it
be removed without cost to the City upon 30-days notice in conjunction with
the modification of the critical intersection at the property owner's expense;
from the audience, there was an affirmative answer.
Council Member Hunter. He will incorporate in the offering of his resolution
an amendment including the amendments/modification as articulated by both the
Zoning Administrator and the City Attorney. A roll call vote was then taken
on the resolution.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-40 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Feldhaus, Hunter, Simpson, Daly
Pickler
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-40 duly passed and adopted.
Cl. 105: JOINT MEETING SCHEDULE WITH FOUR CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
Approving the proposed schedule for joint meetings to be held with the
Planning Commission, Community Redevelopment Commission, Public Utilities
Board and Budget Advisory Commission, but continuing as outlined in Memorandum
dated February 19, 1993 from the City Clerk.
Council Member Simpson. Referring to the proposed schedule, he recommended
that there be one change which he feels would make more sense - to switch the
Budget Advisory Commission Joint meeting of April 20 to May 11 and the May 11
joint meeting with the Planning Commission to April 20. In that way, the
meeting with the Budget Commission will more closely coincide with
consideration and subsequent adoption of the City budget.
City Manager Ruth. He agreed with the proposed change.
City Clerk Sohl. She will advise the Planning Commission of the change. They
may choose another day in April but in any case the Budget Advisory Commission
Joint meeting will be scheduled May i1 and the Planning Commission Joint
meeting in April.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to approve the subject schedule of joint
meetings with the change as noted. Council Member Simpson seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By General Consent the Council recessed into Closed
Session. (7:37 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (approx. 8:10 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: By General Consent the Council adjourned.
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
(approx. 8:11 p.m.)
159