1993/05/18City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAy 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Gary Johnson
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGER: John Lower
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS OFFICER: Kristine Thalman
DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Russ McGuire
ASSISTANT PURCHASING AGENT: Carole Ibarra
DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE: John Roche
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 1:40 p.m. on May 14, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of May 18, 1993 to order
at 3:12 p.m. Council Member Feldhaus was absent.
City Manager James Ruth. There will be a presentation by John Lower, the
City's Traffic and Transportation Manager regarding the transportation impact
and improvement fee ordinance for new development which is before the Council
for a decision at the 5:00 p.m. portion of the meeting.
OOO: TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEE ORDINANCE:
John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager. The Council has previously
received a staff report dated May 18, 1993 which indicates that as a
requirement of Measure M approved by the Orange County Voters in November,
1990, it is necessary that a development mitigation program be adopted by each
local agency to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the cost
associated with that growth. Measure M eligibility is tied to the City's
adoption of the fee program. What is at issue is tens of millions of dollars
which the City is receiving through the Measure M local turn back for which
the City is competing through the various Measure M programs.
Mr. Lower thereupon gave a slide presentation and briefed and elaborated on
the figures presented. (Also see staff report of May 18, 1993 from the
Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Gary Johnson which discussed the
proposed ordinance in detail attached to which were tables - Table 1 showing
the possible traffic fee schedules, Table 2, transportation improvement fee
comparisons, Table 2, po~s£ble ~ee coll~et£on/oth~ r~v~nu~ total, ~te. Som~
of the tables were part of the slide presentation.) By June 30, 1993, all
Orange County cities must have a city-wide fee program in place to maintain
Measure M eligibility. In concluding, Mr. Lower stated he has an Anaheim
Chamber of Commerce newsletter, wherein it states that the Chamber at every
level would support the concept of a fee program because of its concern for
retaining eligibility for Measure M funds.
At the conclusion of Mr. Lower's presentation, Council Members posed questions
which were answered by Mr. Lower relative to the possible fees with reductions
of the recommended 25%, 50% and 60% (see page two of the subject report).
Further, the ordinance needs to be adopted by June 30th of this year, there is
a stipulation that a minimum fee be approved by each growth management area,
328
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5500 P.M.
what projects would and would not be subject to the fee, etc. Existing
developments would be exempt.
Extensive discussion followed between Council Members relative to many aspects
of the proposal especially with regard to the fees that might be set in
Anaheim in comparison to other cities. Mayor Daly stated his concern is that
they respect the condition of the market place right now and that they not
lose any marketing edge they have with surrounding cities.
Council Member Pickler. This item is scheduled to be acted upon this evening.
He has asked the Public Works Director Mr. Johnson if there was some way to
hold off, he would like to do more in depth discussion with staff and the
matter brought back on June 8th if possible. He will be asking for that
action when the matter is discussed this evening.
City Attorney White confirmed for the Council that the ordinance has to be
adopted by June 30, 1993, not effective. By law there is a 60-day waiting
period in this case whereas it is usually only 30 days.
Council Member Hunter. He agrees with Council Member Pickler. He would like
to know what other cities are doing. If other cities know what Anaheim is
doing regarding fees, those cities will have an opportunity to do something
else which could put Anaheim at a disadvantage.
After further discussion, Mayor Daly thanked Mr. Lower and Johnson for the
informative presentation.
City Manager Ruth. Kris Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer is
present to give her periodic legislative update.
139: LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Kris Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer.
She submitted a presentation outline entitled, Legislative Update (made a part
of the record). Relative to State Legislation, virtually all legislation is
dependent on the State budget. The assembly speaker maintains the budget will
be adopted by June 15, 1993, but no one believes that will be so. Everyone is
waiting to see what the Governor's revised budget may reveal. Mrs. Thalman
briefed and/or elaborated upon all of the categories listed under State
Legislation dealing with the State budget, specific legislation status update
and the meeting with Senator Hurtt regarding the State budget impact.
Relative to Federal Legislation, Mrs. Thalman reported on the economic
stimulus package~ tax legislation and gang/drug abatement/education/
intervention/prevention grants. This afternoon, she received an urgent alert
regarding the possible federal energy tax. The Public Utilities Department
has done an analysis on how the City would be impacted. The energy tax is the
major concern of all taxes and increases proposed. The BTU (British Thermal
Units) is probably the most equitable if a tax can be equitable. The City's
major concern is a carbon tax which would have a significant impact on
Utilities.
During and after Mrs. Thalman's presentation, Council Members posed questions
on certain aspects of either State or Federal Legislation.
Mayor Daly thanked Mrs. Thalman for her presentation.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session
to consider the following items:
329
City Ha11~ ~,mheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
a. To confer with its Attorney regarding pending litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to wit:
Peggy Long vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior
Court Case 61-16-95.
be
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.
To confer with its attorney regarding potential
litigation pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9 (b)(1).
ee
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.
RECESS: Council Member Simpson moved to recess into Closed Session. Council
Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent.
MOTION CARRIED. (4:05 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.
(5:23 p.m.).
INVOCATION: Reverend Jim Schibsted, First Congregational Church, gave the
invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Fred Hunter led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Daly and
authorized by the City Council:
National Public Works Week in Anaheim, May 16 - 22, 1993
Mr. Gary Johnson, Public Works/City Engineer Director and John Roche,
Maintenance Director accepted the proclamation.
119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Julie Mayer for her
dedicated efforts on behalf of the Anaheim Children's Festival. Mayor Daly
and Council Members personall~ congratulated Mrs. Mayer for the time and
effort she gave in bringing the Children's Festival to the City of Anaheim
which was a great success.
The following were recognitions authorized by the City Council this date to be
mailed or presented at another time:
Proclamation - Management Week in Anaheim, June 5-12, 1993
330
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Declaration - Barry Manilow's contribution to the opening of the
Anaheim Arena
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $6,565,008.44 for the
period ending May 14, 1993, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency, Housing Authority and Public Improvement Corporation meetings.
(5:35 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:38 p.m.)
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Fern Wilson. Her group is here today to voice
their disappointment and disapproval of the May 12, 1993 action making
Claudina Street one way in order to make 14 parking spaces for the two
restaurants in the commercial center (Anaheim Boulevard and Center Street).
She spoke to Alfred Yalda of the Engineering Department the day the change was
being made. He indicated that southbound privileges were being taken away.
He also stated that the residents had been notified. She emphasized that they
had not been notified and had no idea such an action had been planned. There
were no parking problems before the restaurants came in. If proper research
had been done, it would have been evident that there was not enough parking
for two restaurants. The area residents are mainly senior citizens. She
explained the hardships that will be caused by the change involving
inaccessibility by TLC buses, Dial-A-Ride, Meals-On-Wheels, Feedback
Foundation, trash hauling vehicles, emergency vehicles, United Parcel,
commercial movers as well as a great inconvenience to the Senior Center. She
briefed the circulation patterns that were possible before the change and the
impossible circulation patterns the change has caused. The multi-storage
parking garage should be adequate for restaurant parking overflow. They have
endured late night closing noise, dumpster noises and parking in the middle of
the street by delivery trucks. Claudina has been two-way for over 50 years.
She questioned why it must be changed to benefit so few. She urged the
Council to have the street changed back to a two-way street.
George McClaren, referred to his letter sent after he saw the restriping that
was taking place on Claudina on May 12, 1993. (Letter previously received and
made a part of the record.) The letter outlined the specific concerns, most
of which had been addressed by Mrs. Wilson. Since closing Claudina
southbound, seniors attending the different events at the Senior Center on the
seven days it is ~pened have had to search for other exits besides Lincoln.
In July when the Trident Senior Center closes, the City will be bringing all
its square dancing classes to the downtown center. At night, it is going to
be difficult for those people to get out of the center. When the City
improved Center Street, they closed off Philadelphia so that there is no
access from Lincoln down Philadelphia to Center street. Since he does not
believe the Council will change its mind regarding Claudina Street, he
suggests that they reopen Philadelphia Street at Center Street to loosen the
stranglehold that has been created. He urged that the Council take
appropriate action. The seniors were not aware this change was going to take
place. (Later in the meeting, Mr. McClaren submitted a letter attached to
which was a petition signed by approximately 123 people in opposition to the
change and requesting that Claudina again be a two-way thoroughfare.)
Mayor Daly. He asked that a report be submitted by Lisa Stipkovich, Executive
Director of Community Development regarding the change that has already
occurred, the rationale, and how it is working. The intention was to create
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
additional parking for the commercial uses in downtown and for easier
pedestrian access across Claudina. He would also like a study on the pros and
cons of opening Philadelphia Street through to Center Street.
Bill Ericson, 301 E. North Street. As a member of the senior citizens and the
Senior Citizen Commission, he would like to relate his concerns regarding the
proposed downtown community center. In his presentation, he broached the
subject of financing the Center and how that might be accomplished. He
concluded by stating that he hopes the community center is a priority. He
noted that the Mayor had indicated that they were looking for other avenues of
refinancing. He asked if there are any others beyond the ones he proposed.
City Manager Ruth. One of the hopes was that with the Jobs Bill there might
be some economic development money made available, but it looks as though that
is in serious jeopardy. Other sources could be CDBG but he understands those
funds are being cut back next year as well. They will just have to wait and
see; Mayor Daly noted that Redevelopment funds will also be cut back this year
by the State.
City Manager Ruth. This will be the second year in a row for those funds to
be cut. They lost 3.2 million last year and it is conceivable they will lose
as much as 5 million in Redevelopment money this year.
Rene Serrano, 1335 S. Petal Place. (Also see minutes of April 6 and May 4,
1993, where Mr. Serrano brought his request for stop signs and other traffic
striping before the Council.) He was before the Council previously asking for
two additional stop signs in a four-way intersection. He has a video tape he
would like to present this evening and has equipment with him for viewing.
It was determined that Mr. Serrano would contact the City Clerk's Office to
make arrangements for the video to be shown under Items of Public Interest at
the Council meeting of May 25, 1993.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
Public input received on Item Al3 (see discussion under that item).
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to waive reading in full of all
ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of May 18,
1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was
absent. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Hunter, 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-79 through 93R-81, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Council Member Feldhaus was absent.
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended:
332
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by A.H. Equipment Corporation, Advanced Spa Designs-
attn: Cheryl Gleeson for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about January 28, 1993.
b .Claim submitted by Terri B. Green for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 9, 1993.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission meeting held April 14, 1993.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Mother Colony House Advisory Board
meeting held March 8, 1993.
A3. 164: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Nobest, in
the amount of $29,016.65 for Barrier Free Anaheim 1992-93; 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. 169: Approving'a Notice of Completion of the Construction of Imperial
Highway/Santa Aha Canyon Road Street and Traffic Signal Improvements by R.J.
Noble Company; and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file
said Notice of Completion.
AS. 158: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute quitclaim deeds for
the City's interest in a storm drain easement lying within the south five feet
of Lot 82 and the north five feet of Lot 83 in Tract No. 2653 (Abandonment No.
92-6A).
A6. 155: Certifying that the City Council has reviewed and considered the
information in FEIR No. 538 for the Katella Avenue Super Street project
segments E and F in the City of Anaheim, and segment D, G and a portion of
segment C in the cities of Anaheim and/or Stanton, Garden Grove, Orange and
unincorporated County of Orange;
155: Making findings for each significant effect and findings relative to the
rejection of project alternatives; and
155: Adopting a mitigation monitoring plan and a statement of overriding
considerations.
A7. 155: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-79: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM MODIFYING FEIR NO. 299 (ANAHEIM ARENA) MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM (RESOLUTION NO. 89R-471).
A8. 156: Holmes & Narver, Phase 2 through Phase 6 architectural services for
the Anaheim Police Department Satellite Substation. (Continued from the
meetings of April 20, and May 4, 1993.)
Council Member Hunter. He spoke to the City Manager and suggested that the
matter again be continued to discuss whether or.not the actual site that is
contemplated is the one that the Council wants to go with.
Council Member Hunter moved to continue the subject item to Tuesday, June 8,
1993. Council Member Daly seconded the motion.
333
City Hall, Anaheim, Callfornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly asked in the meantime if the City Manager
has a proposed process for further evaluation of the other sites.
Council Member Simpson. It is clear that a majority of the Council does not
favor the site recommended unless there are compelling reasons. If not, he
would like a list of the next two or three prime sites in order of preference;
Mayor Daly. He would like a staff report on what the alternatives might be in
terms of siting the facility.
A vote was then taken on the continuance to June 8, 1993. MOTION CARRIED.
(Council Member Feldhaus was absent).
A9. 160: Accepting the low bid of Virco Manufacturing Corporation, in the
amount of $104,700 (plus applicable taxes) for 2500 portable folding chairs
and 100 seat and back covers for the Convention Center Arena, in accordance
with Bid ~5125.
Al0. 184: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change order to
Bonafide Security Service, in an amount not to exceed $120,000, bringing the
revised total to a not to exceed amount of $370,000 for security guard
services in the East Anaheim Hills Flood Disaster Area.
Ail. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by
the'Director of Finance for eight months ended February 28, 1993.
Al2. 123: Accepting the low bid, and authorizing the execution of an
Agreement with Nobest Incorporated, in an amount not to exceed $444,686.66
(including ten percent contingency), for the removal and replacement of
residential sidewalks, curbs, gutters and cross gutters, in accordance with
Bid #5130.
Al3. 123: Accepting the bid, and authorizing the Maintenance Director to
execute an Agreement with MacHoward Leasing, in the amount of $109,656.48
(plus applicable taxes) for the leasing of ten 4-Door Sedans, in accordance
with Bid #5136.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais. In reviewing the material, the comparison made
was that the leasing will cost $168,000 vs. $180,000 for the purchase of the
same vehicles. He asked what is the typical salvage value of a purchased
vehicle and if this is a real savings or a forestalling of future cost. He
would like to know if there are any costs that are a result of this
arrangement that would not be evident either in lost salvage value or
additional mileage costs or maintenance.
Carol Ibarra, Assistant Purchasing Agent. They did a study on buying vs.
leasing. She briefed the results of the analysis made which led to the
decision to lease rather than purchase concluding that it was more economical
than purchasing.
John Roche, Maintenance Director. This is the first time the City has entered
into this type of program. The cars that are to be replaced are in the Police
Department - detective cars. They believe with the turnover every four years
instead of eight years, cars will have less miles and a maintenance cost will
be cheaper. It is something they would like to try to see how it works. It
is a lease that anyone can get with the only exception being they went to
20,000 instead of the normal 15,000 miles. It is a straight lease and
maintenance is still performed by the maintenance program. He reiterated it
334
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
is a program that they would like to try limiting it to the Police Department
at this time.
Al4. 123: Approving the execution of an Agreement with the Anaheim Union
High School District to facilitate Summer Sports Camps for the period of June
1, 1993 through September 30, 1993.
Al5. 137: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-80: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT;iL TRUST AGREEMENT
(COMBUSTION TURBINE); (II) APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL TRUST AGREEMENT
(UTILITIES BUILDING/CITY HALL WEST), AND (III) AUTHORIZING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN
CONNECTION THEREWITH.
Al6. 101: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-81: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING A CITY POLICY CONCERNING WAIVER OF PARKING FEES AT
ANAHEIM STADIUM AND THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER.
114: Adopting Council Policy 013 concerning waiver of parking fees at Anaheim
Stadium and Anaheim Convention Center.
A17. 177: Approving submittal by the Community Development Department of an
application for 1993 Supportive Housing Program funds, in the amount of
$400,000, and authorizing the Mayor and the Executive Director to sign the
necessary documents and certifications for submission of the application for
federal assistance to the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
Al8. 184: Reviewing the need for continuing the Proclamation of the
Existence of a local emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on
January 19, 1993, and ratified by the City Council on January 26, 1993,
concerning the Santiago Landslide and Pegasus Landslide in the City of
Anaheim; and taking no action to terminate the local emergency at this time.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 93R-79 throuqh 93R-81, both inclusive, for
adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
None
Feldhaus
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-79 through 93R-81, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted._
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
Al9. 108/000: 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - BUSINESS LICENSES AND FEES:
To consider an ordinance repealing Title 3 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and
adding new Title 3 pertaining to Business License and fees; and a resolution
adopting certain fees in connection with the Business License Tax Ordinance
and Superseding Resolution No. 92R-134.
Ordinance No. 5368 - repealing Title 3 was introduced at the meeting of
May ll, 1993.
Mayor Daly. Last week the Council heard the staff presentation on the
proposed changes to the business license schedule. He noted that the public
hearing is still open and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak.
335
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Mrs. Hernandez, 2810 W. Ball Road, hairdresser. Since the business license
was changed, it has been a hardship on her and other like businesses. An
increase to $150 was extremely high. They work very hard at their trade. She
urged the Council to approve the proposed change which will be a decrease in
business license fees for their businesses.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. He referred to a newspaper article
which reported that Garden Grove in an effort to stimulate economic activity
has considered temporarily waiving its business license fee to encourage
establishment of businesses. Since Anaheim offers economic incentives, this
might be something to look at.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Daly closed the
public hearing.
Council Member Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5368 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5368 - ADOPTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING
TITLE 3 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING NEW TITLE 3 PERTAINING TO
'USINESS LICENSE AND FEES ASSOCIATED THEREWITH. (Introduced at the meeting of
~y 11, 1993.)
~oll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5368 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5368 duly passed and adopted.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 93R-82 for adoption, adopting
certain fees in connection with the Business License Tax Ordinance and
Superseding Resolution No. 92R-134. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-82: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADOPTING CERTAIN FEES IN CONNECTION WITH THE BUSINESS LICENSE TAX
ORDINANCE AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-134.
~oll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-82 for adoption:
~YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
None
Feldhaus
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-82 duly passed and adopted.
A20. 000: 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING - TRANSPORTATION IMPACT AND IMPROVEMENT
FEES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT:
To consider an ordinance authorizing collection of a Citywide Transportation
Impact and Improvement fee from new development as mandated by Measure M; and
a resolution selecting a 25% reduction in actual costs of new development
transportation impacts as the schedule of fees for the Citywide Transportation
Impact and Improvement Program.
ORDINANCE NO. INTRODUCTION: Adding Chapter 17.32 to Title 17 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code establishing a Transportation Impact and Improvement
.fee for new development.
336
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. - .... : Establishing a Transportation Impact and Improvement
fee for all developments in the City of Anaheim.
Council Member Pickler. There was a Council workshop held on this issue
today. At the time, he stated he was going to request that the matter be
continued to June 8, 1993 in order to evaluate not only what staff has
presented but also to give an opportunity to come back at that time with
suggestions.
Council Member Pickler moved to continue consideration of the subject fees to
Tuesday, June 8, 1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly asked the City Attorney if this is a
public hearing.
City Attorney White. The State statute uses the term public meeting. It does
require notice to go out to invite members of the public to come and voice
their opinions. There has been a legal notice published on this matter. It
would be in order if not tonight certainly at the meeting before the Council
acts to receive public comments. There may be people who wish to comment. If
the Council continues the matter, it would be at their discretion to take
comments tonight or put it all over and take comments at the continued
meeting.
Mayor Daly. If there are those who wish to speak on the matter, although the
proposal has been put forth to continue it for three weeks, those citizens may
do so at this time.
Phil Knypstra, 2520 Gelid. He has renamed the tax TIIF. As he understands,
this is basically going to be on all building permits for new development by
an owner or developer. There are also many exemptions. What concerns him, he
is not clear what new development means and would like clarification. He can
understand why the City wants the tax because it represents 2.9 million
dollars. As he understands it, the tax on a new family residence would be
$1384 which will increase the price of housing in Anaheim as well as for
apartments, hotel, motels, etc. The justification is that the tax is mandated
by Measure M, a one-half cent sales tax. Now because the citizens voted for
the tax, they are going to be getting a new tax. It does not make sense to
him. If people knew when they voted for Measure M it created the necessity
for a new tax, they would be alarmed. Another justification is that if other
cities are doing it, Anaheim should also. If the City of Anaheim approves the
tax, the other ci~ies will also approve it. Obviously there is too much tax
and citizens do not need more. He is not in favor. He does not know all the
details and would like clarification.
Mayor Daly. At the workshop held this afternoon on the subject, many of the
points raised by Mr. Knypstra were raised by Council Members and staff
indicated they will return to the Council with additional information. He
~eels Mr. Knypstra summarized many o~ the reasons why the item £s propo~d to
be continued for three weeks.
Council Member Pickler. The developers who developed the new buildings are
the ones that pushed for Measure M and did realize this was a part of
Measure M as well as the majority of the people.who voted for it. All cities
have to adopt a fee program to be eligible for Measure M funds. The Council
does not have to go along with the figures proposed and at the workshop talked
about being able to recommend any other amounts.
337'
City Ha11~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
A vote was then taken on the motion for continuance, Council Member Feldhaus
was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
A21. 105: RESIGNATION FROM COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD: Donald W. Dexter (term
expires June 30, 1993).
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to accept the resignation of Mr. Dexter
from the Community Services Board. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion.
Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter asked that appropriate recognition for Mr. Dexter be
scheduled for a Council agenda.
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: CONTINUED.PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 3581 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Hutton Development Company, 201 E. Sandpointe, Ste. 300, Santa
Aha, CA 92707-8707
AGENT: Reeves Assoc. Architects, Inc., Attn: Lawrence C. Reeves,
417 South Hill Street, Ste. 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90013
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 8205 E. Santa Aha Canyon
Road and is approximately 3.34 acres on the north side of Santa Aha
Canyon Road and approximately 1050 feet west of the centerline of Weir
Canyon Road. The request is to permit an automotive repair facility
including the retail sale and installation of automobile parts and
accessories with waivers of (A) minimum setback adjacent to a freeway,
(B) permitted freestanding sign, (C) permitted wall signs and (D)
permitted roof-mounted equipment.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3581 GRANTED (PC93-24) with nine added conditions (6 yes votes,
and 1 no vote.
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED, IN PART, waivers A, B and D
GRANTED, and waiver C DENIED.
Approved Ngg&tive Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested
by Council Members Daly and Pickler at the meeting of March 16, 1993, and
public hearing scheduled April 20, 1993. At that meeting, the applicant
requested a continuance to May 18, 1993. Although the continuance was
subsequently granted, public input was received since many citizens were
present on the issue. On May 11, 1993, Floyd Farano attorney for the medical
center requested a continuance instead to June 22, 1993 which was granted by
the Council.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - April 8, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 8, 1993
Posting of property - April 9, 1993
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
338
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated February 22, 1993.
City Clerk Sohl. The reason the item is on the agenda tonight is due to the
fact that it was continued from the meeting of April 20, 1993 to May 18, 1993
however on May 11, 1993 subsequent action was taken by the Council to continue
the public hearing instead to June 22, 1993.
Mayor Daly asked if the public hearing is then already considered continued.
City Attorney White. The Council already took an action last week to continue
the public hearing to June 22, 1993. Because the notice had already gone out
scheduling it for tonight, technically in order to continue it again from this
agenda a formal action should be taken.
MOTION: Council Member Daly reaffirmed continuance of the subject public
hearing to Tuesday, June 22, 1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion.
Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney White further clarified for the Mayor that there was no legal
requirement to take any public comment tonight. It would be at the Council's
discretion.
The Mayor asked if anyone was present who wished to speak; there was no
response.
D2. 164: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LEMON STREET ASSESSMENT AREA AND A DRAINAGE
ASSESSMENT AREA FEE OF 97,150 PER ACRE:
To consider a resolution for the establishment of the Lemon Street Drainage
Assessment Area and adopting a fee of $7,150 per acre.
Submitted was report dated May 11, 1993 from Gary Johnson, Director of Public
Works and City Engineer recommending that the Council by resolution approve
the establishment of the Lemon Street Drainage Assessment Area and adopt a fee
of $7,150 per acre.
City Clerk Sohl announced that three letters of opposition have been received
from Northrop Corporation, Auburndale Properties and Bryan Industrial
Properties.
Mr. Russ Maguire, Deputy City Engineer briefed the Council on the matter
giving an historical overview. The item before the Council started when the
City received a ~etter from the developer's representative on September 2,
1992 requesting the formation of a reimbursement district per Chapter 17 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code for oversizing of the storm drain to service
properties other than the development proposed. The City concurred with the
submittal. It is a reimbursement district dealing only with payment of fees
upon future development. It only applies when property within the district is
developed. At that time, the developer would pay the fee and the City would
reimburse the applicant for the funds already expended for the drain. This
proposed reimbursement district abuts a previously approved drainage district
immediately south and east which was approved in July, 1989. The area fee for
that is $9,230 per acre. They are recommending approval of the requested
reimbursement district as set forth in the resolution at a fee of $7,150 per
acre.
Council Members Pickler and Hunter posed questions relative to the formula
used in assessing the fees which were answered in detail by the City Attorney.
He also explained that it goes back to 1974 or 1975 when the master plan of
33g
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
drainage was adopted throughout the City. In this case the developer has come
in making a demand for an increased size of storm drain and therefore has been
required to put in a storm drain that is not only adequate for his needs but
also the needs of other properties that may in the future be developed in the
area. The first developer will then be entitled by law to reimbursement from
the other properties to the extent that they benefit. If properties are never
further developed, they are not going to have to pay the fee; the fee is only
paid on new development.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing.
Mr. Jerry Knudsen, 2540 Huntington Drive. He is appearing on behalf of R.S.
Mike Holt, Brian Industrial Properties and Lemon Associates who own over
30 acres in the subject assessment area and have filed a protest to the
proposed assessment (see letter dated May 5, 1993 from Mr. Holt listing
eleven reasons why they oppose and protest the formation of the proposed Lemon
Street Assessment area and proposed assessment of $7,150 per acre).
He briefed and elaborated upon the reasons as outlined emphasizing that the
drain benefits only the drive-in theatre property and that they find no legal
basis for the assessment. He added that the drain extends into the City of
Fullerton and its cost, if prorated, is considerably greater than the $200,000
estimate. The drive-in theatres gave the total cost as being in excess of
$955,000 which means that the Fullerton portion is more than $560,000. It is
unusual that the proposed assessment by the City of Anaheim is for the entire
drain when 59% of the land in which the drain is placed is owned by the City
of Fullerton. They respectfully request that the proposed resolution be
denied.
Mr. Ron Schultz, Team 5 Civil Engineers. (Mr. Schultz was first sworn in by
the City Clerk since he was not present earlier.) They are the civil
engineers involved in the project and are for the district being formed. He
is present to answer any questions and is speaking on behalf of Pacific
Drive-In Theatres. They filed a request for the district being formed for
their client and pursuant to the Anaheim Municipal Code.
COUNCIL ACTION: There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor
Daly closed the public hearing.
Council Member Pickler asked the City Attorney to address some of
Mr. Knudsen's statements.
City Attorney White. Addressing the legal issues, the proceeding is not a
classic assessment district proceeding in which a majority of the property
owner's protest would require the City Council to either overrule the protest
by a two-thirds vote or abandon the formation of a district. It is not an
assessment district as the term is legally used but a benefit district. In a
benefit district, only those properties that are subsequently developed and
benefit from the improvement are required to make a payment. The fact that
there may be a majority protest does not mean the same as would be the case in
an assessment district - that the City Council overrule or abandon the
district.
Gary Johnson. Answering Council Member Pickler he explained if the drainage
study indicated the need for the master plan storm drain, any other property
owner would have had the same ability to petition the City Council to
establish a reimbursement district to recover the cost in excess of the
340
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI~ES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5500 P.M.
prorata share. The City is merely the conduit and not the beneficiary of any
funds received.
Mayor Daly. He wants to make clear to Mr. Knudsen that the proposal will only
cause a fee to be paid if a new development is proposed on their property.
Jerry Knudsen. He understands that argument. This is over a $200,000
potential assessment coming off the top of any sale of the property. It is
impacting the property very substantially. It is misleading for
administrative staff to say that it is not. Every property in the area is
fully developed except for Pacific Drive-In Theatres. Thirty (30) acres times
$7,150 is quite a hit. He clarified that the Brian properties are fully
developed but there are circumstances which can cause the assessment to be
paid - if there is a fire or they put in something different.
Mr. Johnson clarified if there was a fire and the replacement was in kind,
there would be no assessment; City Attorney White confirmed for Council Member
Hunter that if the properties as currently developed were leveled and
apartments or commercial were built, that development would then be subject to
the assessment.
Further discussion and questioning followed with questions answered by both
the Public Works Director and City Attorney. Mr. Johnson confirmed that the
storm drain was installed solely based on the Pacific Drive-In project. The
master plan indicated there was an area-wide problem. The drain is necessary
to provide flood protection for the entire area - over 130 acres. The drain
is installed and they have a complete report from the Engineer. They concur
with the cost of almost $956,000 and the allocation of the cost. They have a
request from the developer to form a reimbursement drainage district and that
is the petition before the Council this evening.
City Attorney White. This is not a unique circumstance but the same procedure
followed in forming every drainage district and reimbursement area. The
reason they do not and cannot hold a hearing and impose the fees before the
improvements are installed, they do not have any idea of the ultimate cost and
how it is going to be split. If they were not to create the district, a real
question would exist because they have now required the owner of one parcel to
install an improvement in excess of what is necessary to meet his drainage
requirement that he could seek relief from the City for the extra cost he had
to spend which did not benefit his property. If the district does not form,
the City would have some exposure to the property owner.
council Me~ber Hunter then posed a line of questions relative to the benefit
to the City of Fullerton of the storm drain answered by both Mr. Maguire and
Johnson. Mr. Maguire reported that there is some level of potential benefit
to Fullerton but by law they have to proportion the cost of the drain over the
whole drainage area so that everybody only pays their fair share. If property
is outside of the City's jurisdiction, it is incumbent upon the developer to
get the City of Fullerton to also form a reimbursement district; Gary Johnson.
If the developer does not petition the City of Fullerton for the per acre cost
in Fullerton, the developer will not receive reimbursement for that acreage.
Upon further questioning by Council Member Hunter, City Attorney White
explained the reason and theory for requiring the oversize drain giving an
example in his explanation. He also clarified .for Council Member Pickler that
the statute does not technically require notice to personally go to all the
properties. The City met the requirement in the law by imposing new fees
requiring that it be published in the newspaper which was done on three
34~'
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
different occasions one week apart. He also confirmed that it is a contingent
liability and the contingency is on development in the future.
Mayor Daly. He would like to know some of the historical background on how
Anaheim forms these districts, collects the fees, experiences in other
districts, etc. He wants to make sure it is the fairest and best way and is
keeping with the tradition of handling drainage matters in Anaheim. He also
wants to know what assurance the City has that Fullerton will follow suit. He
believes they need a fuller summary by staff. He, therefore, suggested a
30-day continuance of the matter.
Council Member Hunter. He would like to know hypothetically, if Pacific
Drive-In when it was first developed, whoever developed it and did the grading
did not do a good job and that caused the drainage problem further causing the
request for an oversize drain. He does not know if that is true. He wants to
know the history going back to the beginning. If it is true, then the
opponents have a legitimate argument. He will not vote on the issue until he
gets more information.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved that the matter be continued for 30-days
to Tuesday, June 29, 1993 and that the requested information by Council be
provided by staff. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Simpson stated he would like to know
what happens absent a district as well as the other implications by other
Council Members. Does the City have to pay for the drain.
Council Member Pickler. He suggested that staff along with the City Attorney
give the answers to all the questions asked and other things they would need
answers to that they have not asked.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Council Member Feldhaus was
absent. MOTION CARRIED (Council Member Pickler commented that he will not be
present at the Council Meeting that date.)
Mr. Knudsen requested that any staff report generated be a public record so
that they could see it before the next hearing.
City Attorney White. The portion that answers the questions that were asked
would be a public record prior to the meeting and available by the Friday
prior to the Tuesday Council meeting at approximately 12:00 noon.
ITEMS BI - B6 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF APRIL 29, 1993:
DECISION DATEs MAY 6, 1993 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MAY 21, 1993
B1. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3598 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Bradmore Realty Investment Co. Ltd., 721 Santa Monica Boulevard,
Santa Monica Boulevard, CA 90401
AGENT: Calvary Chapel Anaheim, 270 East Palais Road, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 270 East Palais Road. Property is consisting of
approximately 4.69 acres, with frontage of approximately 80 feet on the
south side of Palais Road with maximum depth of 555 feet and being
located approximately 710 feet east of the centerline of Anaheim
Boulevard.
To permit a pre-school and elementary school in conjunction with an
existing 20,000 square foot church facility with waivers of minimum
number of parking spaces and permitted outdoor uses.
342'
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3598, Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1 APPROVED regarding fencing
around play area (Decision No. ZA93-30).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Council Member Pickler posed questions to staff regarding parking which were
answered by the Zoning Administrator Annika Santalahti. She also clarified
for the Mayor that the CUP does not impose a time limit but there is a maximum
enrollment limit. If it works out to be successful, they would have to come
back and get a new CUP or whatever to increase the enrollment.
B2. 179~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3609 AND NEGATIVE DECLABATION:
OWNER: Anaheim Redevelopment, 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA
92803
AGENT: Watt Management, 2716 Ocean Park Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA
90405
LOCATION: 188 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 10.8
acres, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim
Boulevard, with frontage of approximately of 540 feet on the west side
of Anaheim Boulevard and 334 feet on the east side of Clementine Street
and 315 feet on the north side of Oak Street.
To permit on-premise sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages in an
enclosed restaurant, with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3609 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA93-31).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B3. 179~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3600 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Imperial Properties, 3188 Pullman, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
AGENT: Yves Masquefa, 4455 Feather River Road, Corona, CA 91720
LOCATION: 5753-A East Santa Aha Canyon (Yves Bistro). Property is
approximately 4.2 acres, located at the northeast corner of Santa Aha
Canyon Road and Imperial Highway.
To permit the expansion of a gourmet restaurant with outdoor seating and
on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine and with waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3600 APPROVED Added conditions, including outdoor area shall not
be open for people to be able to walk through (Decision No. ZA93-32).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3601 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
B5.
OWNER: Scott Burnham, 770 The City Drive #215, Orange, CA 92668
AGENT: Alex Perez, 23822 Palmek Circle, Lake Forest, CA 92630
LOCATION: 407-476 South Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately
7.0 acres located at the Northeast corner of Anaheim Hills Road and Nohl
Road.
To permit on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine in a 2,400
square-foot restaurant with an outdoor seating area.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3601 APPROVED, IN PART, denying the outdoor seating area
(Decision No. ZA93-33).
Approved Negative Declaration.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4224, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5:
343
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
OWNER: Suresh Jhawar, 8085 East Sandstone Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808
AGENT: Frank Ghalili, 5728 Rocking Horse Way, Orange, CA 92669
LOCATION: 5180 East Copa De Oro. Property is approximately 1.0 acre
with frontage of approximately 198 feet on the north side of Nohl Ranch
Road, maximum depth of approximately 210 feet and 450 feet west of the
centerline of Rolling Hills Place.
Waiver of minimum rear yard setback, and orientation of dwelling
adjacent to an arterial highway.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Variance No. 4224 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA93-34).
B6.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4225, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5:
OWNER: Leslie & Chilio Doi, 2839 Puente Street, Fullerton, CA 92635
LOCATION: 569 East Peralta Hills Drive. Property is approximately 1.07
acres, with frontage of approximately 140 feet on the east side of a
private road, extending south of Cerro Vista Drive having a maximum
depth of approximately 332 feet, and being located approximately 430
feet south of the centerline of Peralta Hills Drive.
Waiver of required setback to construct a 1,542 square-foot addition to
an existing 4,110 square-foot single-family residence.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
variance No. 4225 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA92-35).
END OF TEE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS.
B7. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5370 - INTRODUCTION: Amending Section 18.05.091 of
Chapter 18.05 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code Relating to business
signs permitted in the CL-HS Zone. (Continued from the meeting of April 27,
1993.)
Council Member Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5370 for first reading. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5370: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION
18.05.091 OF CHAPTER 18.05 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO BUSINESS SIGNS PERMITTED IN THE CL-HS ZONE.
B8. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4126 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 91-173 EXTENSION OF
TIME:
Request by Doug Browne, West Street Development Company, Inc., P.O. Box
18021, Anaheim, CA 92817-8021
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 901 North West Street, on
the west side of West Street approximately 760 feet north of the
centerline of North Street. The petitioner requests an time extension
retroactive to June 4, 1992 to expire June 4, 1994 for Variance No. 4126
to comply with conditions of approval. Variance No. 4126 is for a
waiver of required lot frontage, minimum lot area and minimum lot width
to permit a 3-lot, RS-10,O00 residential, single family zoned
subdivision.
This matter was continued from the meeting of May 4, 1993 to this date in
order to obtain input from the developer, Doug Browne.
Doug Browne, 151 S. Quintana, Anaheim. When he originally obtained approval
on the parcel map associated with the variance, he planned to build larger
344
City Hall, Anahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - IO.Y 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
homes on the site. At this time, larger homes are not selling. Working from
the elevations posted on the Chan~er wall, he explained instead of
approximately 3,000 square foot houses, he is submitting new plans to Building
for plan check. They are unique and will be the subject of an article in the
Orange County Register. The houses are now designed to edify what was
original early downtown architectural instead of new modern stucco houses.
They have 2,000 square foot floor plans designed for first or second time
homebuyers. There will be an additional 2,000 square feet upstairs (bonus
room). Whoever purchases the homes can later expand the house so they will
never have to move. He confirmed there are still three houses, the footprint
of the houses has changed and instead of $375,000, they are now designed to
sell for under $250,000.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of
time retroactive to June 4, 1992 to expire June 4, 1994 for Variance No. 4126.
Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
C1. COUNCIL COMMENTS:
161: MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION:
City Clerk Sohl. The Council will be adjourning to 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday,
May 25, 1993 for a joint meeting with the Community Redevelopment Commission.
She asked if there are any questions the Council would like to see as part of
the agenda for the joint hearing.
Mayor Daly. He would like to discuss Anaheim Plaza issues and the post
offices both downtown and Loara as well as the status on the Brookhurst and
South Anaheim Boulevard Redevelopment Study areas.
Council Member Hunter. He noted on the agenda this evening there was an item
regarding people doing improvements to their commercial buildings in the
Redevelopment area. He would like more information on that. He notes a lot
of work is being done to the Kraemer Building which is now entirely empty. He
believes there is an opportunity to get 5% loans and that should be
publicized.
Mayor Daly. It is a business relocation incentive. It summarizes what they
have done for some of the restaurants and some of the other businesses in the
downtown area.
ADJOURNMENT: By General Consent the Council meeting was adjourned to Tuesday,
May 25, 1993 at ~:0O p.m. for a joint meeting with the Community Redevelopment
Commission. (7:20 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
345