Loading...
1993/07/20City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular session (adjourned regular meeting of July 13, 1993, held July 20, 1993) for a joint meeting with the City Planning Commission. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: Bob Kazarian, Richard McMillan, Maggie Mejia, Robert Schmahl, Dale Stanton, Joe White, L. Ward Wiseman PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Edward Aghjayan UTILITIES FINANCIAL SERVICES MANAGER: Michael Bell UTILITIES ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER-FIN. & ADMIN.: Darrell Ament A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 1:50 p.m. on July 16, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the adjourned regular meeting of July 13, 1993 (held July 20, 1993) to order at 2:07 p.m., all Council Members being present with the exception of Council Member Hunter. This is a joint meeting with the Public Utilities Board. Chairman Kazarian called the Public Utilities Board to order, all Board Members being present. (2:07 p.m.) Mayor Daly first welcomed the Public Utilities Board expressing Council's appreciation for their time in meeting with the Council. Ed Aghjayan, Public Utilities General Manager. In this dialogue, staff has taken only the position of preparing fact sheets and is not prepared to make any presentations, but answer any questions of the Council or the Public Utilities Board (PUB). The topics were selected by consultation with the PUB members and submitted to the City Council. He introduced the first item (see fact sheets on each of the items - made a part of the record). 175: JOINT MEETING-CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC RATE DECREASE: See fact sheet dated July 20, 1993 which explains the proposal from the Public Utilities Department for a 1.2 million dollar (1.3%) decrease in electric rates charged to industrial customers effective September 1, 1993. A public hearing is scheduled before the Public Utilities Board on August 5, 1993 at 3:30 p.m. relative to this proposed decrease. Chairman, Bob Kazarian. The 1.3 % works fine with the business retention group. The Utilities is competing with Southern California Edison and other power companies to attract new business to Anaheim. Utilities is one of the major cost items. Any help they can give will be a big assist. Council Members then posed questions which were answered by Mr. Aghjayan and Mike Bell, Utilities Financial Services Manager with comments from PUB members. Board Member Maggie Majia asked for a response from the Council - the Board has been concerned with industrial being higher and are also very 5O0 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. conscious not to adversely affect residential homes. She asked if they are in line with the assumptions. There was general Council consensus that the Council had given that as a policy direction. Ed Aghjayan. Staff has tried to maintain a sincere dialogue with their business customers. They have made statements to the Council and the Public Utilities Board that the business community has heard that they need to do something about that particular rate comparison. Staff feels it is living up to its commitment. They should pass the decrease on to them because they are being impacted the most. There is nothing wrong with doing that and then taking another look in January of 1995. Rates will not be increased in January of 1994 for any reason, except undergrounding. Their budget is balanced until January of 1995 with the exception of the undergrounding program. After the current budget, they came up with 1.2 million in refinancing. If it is not distributed, they will have 1.2 million in extra money. BUSINESS RETENTION PROGRAM: Ed Aghjayan. He submitted a new brochure staff has worked on with the Community Development Department (see brochure, "A Powerful Partnership for Business"). The reason the item is on the agenda is to see if it continues to be a program the Council wants to support and for any suggestions Council Members may want to make. Council Member Pickler. He feels the program has been a successful one and would like to see it continued. After a brief discussion between Council Members and staff, Darrell Ament, Utilities Assistant General Manager-Finance & Administration, explained some of the things that are being done to promote the program. They are working hard to get the message out and asked for recommendations from the Council relative to any additional forums where the program can be promoted. UTILITY RATE CASE APPROVAL PROCESS: Ed Aghjayan. This is on the agenda to see if there are any discussions about the present process. Bob Kazarian. He explained the extensive and formal process the Board goes through when considering rate increases. There is public testimony, intervenors to present testimony under sworn oath, a certified court reporter attends the meeting to provide a transcript, etc. The Board also looks at a tremendous amount of documentation before making its decision. With regard to the last increase, the Board recommended a proposal and the Council chose a different rate increase. He questioned if the Board then is the proper body to consider rate increases or should they come before the City Council and leave the PUB out of it. They are looking for guidance on that point. Discussion and questioning followed wherein Council Members gave their input relative to the current process and the different modes used for publicizing rate hearings. Council Member Feldhaus. He suggested there might not be enough notification so that citizens are informed of the hearings. He favors the use of the public broadcast channel as well as utility bill stuffers. 501 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Council Member Simpson. He does not believe there would be an appreciable change whether the rate hearings are before the Public Utilities Board or the Council. The present system works well. The PUB, having the expertise, can screen out the things that the Council might not. The Board is much closer to the issue than the Council. Perhaps, the last rate situation before the Council was an aberration because of the present economy. The Council should get as much information as possible in advance. When the matter came to the Council, they did the entire rate increase spectrum at one meeting - electric, undergrounding and water. Water and electric should be handled separately. He reiterated the present system should stay the way it is, but come to the Council in a more simplistic fashion. Mayor Daly. He agrees the process works well, but that electric and water should be handled at separate meetings before the Council. Newspaper ads are a good idea as well as cable tv opportunities as suggested by Council Member Feldhaus and utility bill stuffers, if doable. Public Utility Board Member, Joe White. He agrees that water and electric should be separate. When the Council gave the Board the authority to hold the public hearings, it was his understanding when the Board made recommendations to the Council, the Council could either accept or reduce the rates but could not increase them. He asked if it was legal. Mayor Daly. He asked the City Attorney, after the PUB approves a rate package, does the Council have the complete range of options to adjust the rate package up or down or can the Council only go down. Is it possible for the Council to add an increase other than what the PUB has approved. City Attorney White answered yes. The Council is not bound and limited by the maximum recommendation of the PUB. Mike Bell, Utilities Financial Services Manager. PURPA regulations require that certain issues be addressed at the hearings but does not establish any requirements for City Councils or ruling Commissions in terms of what actions they must take. They basically require a full public record and that certain issues be addressed. UNDERGROUNDING PROGRAM - PROGRAM SCOPE AND FUNDING: .... ~ Aghjayan. He referred to the one page fact sheet which outlined the .unding for the Undergrounding Conversion Program. He briefed the information contained therein. In the past year, the Council voted to have the department finance this year's undergrounding program one year to lower the amount of the increase by 1% which originally called for 2%. They are going to come back later this calendar year and propose going from 1% to 3% to get back to where they would have been. The program was designed to generate 45 million dollars over 5 years which is the current size of the program. Any decreases will result in a reduced scope of the program. For purposes of discussion, staff wanted to inform the Council where the program stood financially and to get a reading on what the Council wants to do. He reiterated the program is presently on schedule. It is really a life time plan that will take 50 to 60 years. Mayor Daly. The program that the PUB studied and recommended in 1990 was a good balance between accomplishing as much as is feasible on the major streets and very prominent locations. Public Utilities Board Member, Richard McMillan (and member of the sub-committee on undergrounding) one of the issues of concern to the 502 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Undergrounding Sub-committee they cannot partially fund and change their mind in the middle of a project because there is a long-range commitment on schedules, materials, manpower, routing, etc. They should establish a plan and stay with it whatever it is. They cannot change the plan every year. Council Member Pickler. This is a program that all Councils have supported since he became a member in 1982. The Council in 1990 finally approved the program. If they start going backwards it will have a negative impact on the overall program. He does not want to see them back off of the established program but to move ahead; Council Member Simpson. He agrees. He would like to be able to see the program completed. Joe White. They neglected to do anything for 100 years and are now paying the price. To him, it is worth every penny. Council Member Pickler. He asked if the Public Utilities Board as a whole felt as positive as Mr. White; Public Utilities Board Member, L. Ward Wiseman. He would think that of all possible sources of a rate increase, this would be the most easy to justify to the public both from the standpoint of cosmetics and public health. Council Member Feldhaus. It should be a long-range plan and not predicated on f ire-year increments. Ed Aghjayan. They do have a long-term plan and have additional locations. What might help is to talk about how they would fund the next ten years and what streets - a general summary of what they are going to be looking at five to 10 years or beyond five years. They can add that as a one-page supplement to the plan to give some idea of what would be next. Mayor Daly. The plan Public Utilities came up with was an excellent one and all bases were covered very nicely. If they continue doing that, he feels the community will continue their support. The sub-committee work has been very helpful to the Council and they have defined a great balanced program. Board Member McMillan. He did not hear an answer relative to the 2% increase they would be proposing for the undergrounding program. They are pressing for that only because there are a lot of things for the sub-committee to do. He has not heard anything that indicates a yes or no. Council Member Pickler. He got the impression the Council said yes. He has heard some concurrence; Mayor Daly. He likes the 45 million dollar five-year spending plan; Council Member Pickler. He favors the program. Ed Aghjayan. He clarified they will be coming back in the September/October time frame relative to the increase which will be effective January 1, 1994. Mayor Daly. He is concerned about the timing of the decrease and then the 2% across-the-board increase just as Board Member White. The Board might want to go into that with staff when they get to that point. Public Utilities Board Member Dale Stanton. There is an established schedule and he is hearing that everybody is in favor of undergrounding. He questioned then why the Council rejected the proposed 2% increase which was called for in the five-year plan and Fiscal Year 1992/93. Mayor Daly. When the last Utility rate increase package came to the Council, there was confusion about all the various elements to the package. Staff did 503 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. suggest that there was an alternative and that the plan could be adhered to with short-term borrowing but there would be a price later. The Council made that decision. If he is questioning the commitment to the undergrounding program, the program is proceeding. Board Member Stanton. He understands but is asking if they should not now be considering in September or July a 3% increase in order to maintain the schedule. Ed Aghjayan. The schedule will then go to 3%. The Mayor is correct. Staff offered that as an alternative. The rationale was, if they wanted to find a way of lowering the overall increase, one alternative was to finance what they needed for undergrounding this year realizing it would be necessary to pay later. Instead of going from 1% to 2%, they would then have to go from 1% to 3% in January. They do have some low interest costs to pay for the coming year financing. They had to borrow money in any case to satisfy a momentary cash flow need. They borrowed 4 million dollars and added 2 million for a total of 6 million. Thus, there are also momentary interest costs but not significant to alter the total impact on the program. Board Member White. He opposed the electric rate increase the last time because it included the undergrounding of 1%, the reason being it was not an across-the-board increase. The homeowners were picking up the increase and the other side was not. REVISION OF PROTESTED BILL PROCEDURE: The recommendation is to change the file appeal body for contested billings from the City Council to the Public Utilities Board. Ed Aghjayan. The Municipal Code currently calls for a bill dispute process which in the final analysis brings the bill dispute to the Council. The Utilities Department thus far has been successful in settling most or all such contested bills. Council Member Pickler. He favors the revised protested bill procedure; Mayor Daly. Staff must be doing a great job since the Council has not had to hear any of the cases. ~d Aghjayan. After adding his praise for the work staff and customer service ~as done regarding protested bills, he explained they are prepared to bring the proposal back to the Public Utilities Board. If everybody agrees the procedure makes sense, it will give the customer and Utilities a more focused f O rum. Ed Aghjayan. Mr. Kazarian asked that this be a discussion item. Chairman Kazarian. He wants again to express the importance of maintaining their Capital Improvement program. While it is a sizeable part of the Utilities budget, it is a very important component. It is easy in times of recession to cut down on the Capital Improvement program. He just wanted to discuss the importance of maintaining system reliability. There are law changes everyday - for example, the Clean Water Act. The department is having to spend untold millions to upgrade the Lenain Filtration Plant because it is deemed ineffective in treating water in accordance with new clean water laws. There has not been a reduction in Capital Improvement programs and he wants it to remain that way. His point is, that it is an easy place to try to cut a budget but it is not a wise place. 504 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Council Member Pickler. He concurs with Mr. Kazarian. He is under the assumption that things that need to be done are being done. He asked staff if they foresaw a departure from the policy of maintaining the Capital Improvement program. Board Member McMillan. What he feels Bob is addressing, it was only two decades ago when the City's electrical system was in decay. It is very easy to follow into those footsteps. The last ten years have been very positive with regard to improvements, but twenty years ago it was not true. After further discussion, Mayor Daly stated he feels the point is well stated that in recent years they have been unanimously supportive of the Board's recommendations to invest in the power supply and maintenance programs. They appreciate the reminder. He then asked for a brief summary relative to water and specifically the underground water supply. Ed Alario, Assistant General Manager Water Services & Warehouse, gave a brief summary update noting that the City has two sources of water. They pump approximately 75% of the City's water and get the remainder from outside sources through the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). He also reported that because the Lenain Filtration Plant is shut down, water will cost them considerably more during the 18 month period it is down. They hope to have the plant back on line in March, 1994. Ed Aghjayan. Traditionally, 70 to 75% of Anaheim's water comes from ground water. They are presently in a very aggressive well drilling program. Staff has defined an aquifer at 1500 feet of very high quality water. It is also important that they be able to serve the growing East Anaheim Area. Normally they purchase 20 to 25% of their water from MWD. They see that ratio continuing with the exception of the 18 month period that the Lenain Plant will be down. Additional discussion/questions relative to water followed during which Mr. Kazarian reported on the status of the water now in State reservoirs as well as the MWD reservoirs. All are essentially full and they have gained about 100,000 acre feet in the underground aquifer after a seven-year drought which is very good. He also reported that the MWD is working to increase their capacity. They are expected to be filling an 800,000 acre foot reservoir near Hemet in Riverside County. It is a 1.6 billion dollar project out of MWD's 6 billion dollar capital project program and it will double MWD's storage capacity. SECURITY LIGHTING PROGRAM: Mayor Daly stated he has heard nothing but positive comments on the subject program. He asked if they are going to maintain the program as is or "beef it up". Ed Aghjayan. They hope to continue to expand the program. The biggest problem is that it is a very highly staff intensive program; Darrell Ament. They now have about 1200 lights and it is a staffing issue. They have partnered with Code Enforcement staff and are working closely with them. Additional discussion followed about the positive aspects of the Security Lighting program especially in reducing crime. Mayor Daly and Council Members thanked the Public Utilities Board for the work they have done as well as staff and for the informative workshop/joint meeting. 505 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Chairman Kazarian. He thanked the Council for listening to them and likewise for being able to listen to the Council's thinking process on Utility matters. They need that type of interchange on a regular basis. ADJOURNMENT- PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: By general consent the Public Utilities Board meeting was adjourned. (3:34 p.m.) By general Council consensus the City Council adjourned the regular meeting of July 13, 1993 (held July 20, 1993). (3:34 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 506 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Lisa Stipkovich A complete copy of the .agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 1:50 p.m. on July 16, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the meeting of July 20, 1993 to order at 3:35 p.m. REQUEST FOR 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: Dease, dba The Wounded Knee Saloon vs. City of Anaheim, USDC Case No. CV93-1712RG(Sx) 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. By general Consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. Council Member Hunter was absent. (3:35 p.m.) AFTER RECE$S= The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, with the exception of Council Member Hunter and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:37 p.m.). INVOCATION: Lt. Troy Trimmer, The Salvation Army, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Frank Feldhaus led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Mary Ruth Pinson for her service on the City's Parks and Recreation Commission for 16~ years, 507 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. having been chairperson for three terms. Mary Ruth is now serving as a member of the Community Redevelopment Commission. Mayor Daly and Council Members commended Mrs. Pinson for her dedication and commitment to the Anaheim Community. A plaque was also presented in recognition of her work on the Parks and Recreation Commission. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $5,385,010.93 for the period ending July 16, 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. (5:45 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (6:02 p.m.) ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Russell Schmitt, 5104 E. Woodwind Lane, Anaheim. He is present to ask the Council's help in preventing serious injury or death to one or more of the children who live and play near the 5100 block of E. Woodwind Lane. (Mr. Schmidt subsequently submitted letter dated July 14, 1993 attached to which was a petition from the residents on Woodwind.) He read his letter which basically explained the concern he and the residents have with what they consider an unsafe condition resulting from speeding on Woodwind Lane from people who do not live there thus endangering their children as well as other children who frequently play on that block. He relayed a recent accident which occurred prompting them to ask for assistance. As stated in the petition, the residents are "...requesting the City of Anaheim to place a barricade at the corner of Post Street and Woodwind Lane between the northwest and southwest corners thus making Woodwind Lane between Kellogg Drive and Post Street a cul-de-sac with entrance to Woodwind Lane only from Kellogg Drive". Mayor Daly. He asked Mr. Schmitt if he had an opportunity to discuss this problem with the City's Traffic Department; Mr. Schmidt answered that he had not. Mayor Daly. He asked the City Manager to refer the matter to proper staff; a representative from the Traffic Engineering Department was present to discuss the matter with Mr. Schmidt. Mike Mendoza, 5203 E. Woodwind Lane, Anaheim (corner of Post and Woodwind). He has been fighting the problem for two years through the school and the school board who turned the matter over to the fire marshall. Where the kids are exiting from is not a parking lot but a field on which activities are taking place. Everyday there are from 100 to 200 cars in the field. They go through the stop sign at Post and Woodwind. The fire marshall told him the gate cann0t be closed because it is a fire entrance, but it is not. Other access points are not available. A sign is posted on the gate that says it is to be closed and only open during certain days and hours. He clarified for the Mayor that Mr. Schmitt is asking for something different. He (Mendoza) is saying that the gate is 90% of the problem. They want the Council's help to try to solve the problems that are occurring in the area. Mayor Daly. He asked that Mr. Mendoza give his phone number to staff. Staff will then combine both requests in order to assess the best course of action. 508 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Dr. Mary Ommanney, Psychologist, Psychological Guidance Center, 1019 W. La Palma, Anaheim. Next Tuesday, there is an item scheduled to come before the Council and she is asking for help to better prepare for the presentation. The Psychological Guidance Center has been in operation since 1955 and there have been no incidents or problems in the 38 years of operation. They are on the staff at CPC Brea Canyon Hospital, Yorba Hills and St. Jude's. Those facilities have expressed a need for a recovery home that would be supportive of people in a twelve-step program after they have been in-patients in the hospital. They decided to expand their operation and have a recovery home as well as their out-patient facility. Everything was fine until the Planning Commission met and they came 15 minutes after the item was over. The Planning Commission decided to inform the tenants next door, the nursery school, but not the owners. At the next meeting, many people were present and expressed concern. They have never been through this process before. She does not know whether to get letters from the three hospitals and have the directors attend the meeting. They felt totally ill-equiped. It was so unpleasant last time they are wondering if they should proceed. City Attorney White. Dr. Ommanney should obtain a copy of the appropriate sections in the Zoning Code that specify the criteria for the approval of what he is assuming is a conditional use permit which indicates the type of evidence that should be presented in front of the Council. It is up to each individual applicant on how best to proceed. She should contact the Planning Department. The Zoning representative at the counter will point her to the right sections of the code as to the type of evidence that is germane. Council Member Simpson noted that the Planning Director, Joel Fick was present who would be happy to help Dr. Ommanney. City Attorney White. The first thing she should do is to check with the City Clerk's Office to determine exactly what is on the agenda next week. He is not sure it is a public hearing. It may be a typical informational consent calendar item coming from the Planning Commission. Melinda Cafuentes. They purchased a home at 217 E. Sycamore. They wanted to knock down the garage currently there and build a two-car garage. They went to the Building Department and Building and Safety said there was no problem. They have access through the alley so there is no curb access. They had to cut the curb and were referred to Engineering and they had no problems either. The problem arose when they were told permits could not be issued unless they signed a form dedicatlng 6~ feet of their property. The lot £9 irregular - 67~ x 50 feet. If they dedicated 6~ feet, they would have to knock down their porch and take a foot off that. They asked who would be able to help them and have not been successful in finding that help. The Mayor's assistant suggested that she speak to the Council. City Attorney White. There is a procedure to follow. He assured through the City Manager's Office the speaker can be put in touch with someone who can explain that procedure. There is a process regarding dedications that allows the applicant to file a petition that can come to the Council relating to relief from the dedication requirement in certain instances if certain facts are present. 509 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. After further explanation from Mrs. Cafuentes, Mayor Daly stated that there is an administrative alternative and she should leave her name and address with the City Clerk's Office and will subsequently be referred to the right staff people to handle the matter. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Public input received on Item A3 (see discussion under that item). MOTION: Council Member Simpson moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of July 20, 1993. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Hunter was absent. 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-153, 93R-158 and 93R-159, both inclusive, for adoption and offered Ordinance No. 5384 for adoption. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book. Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Providence Farming Co., attn: Harvey Levich, for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 13, 1993. b. Claim submitted by Scott Michael Ereckson, c/o Scott W. Hanssler, esq., for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 30, 1993. c. Claim submitted by Alfonso Herrera for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 3, 1993. d. Claim submitted by Southern California Edison Co, attn: R.D. Crosby, for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 27, 1993. e. Claim submitted by Dale Jacobs, c/o Paul J. Wallin, esq., for bodily injury ~u~ained purp0r~e~ly ~u~ ~0 a¢~i0n~ of ~he City on or ab0u~ April 28, 1993. f. Claim submitted by Geronimo Gregory Uribe for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 27, 1993. g. Claim submitted by Paul and Lois Roth, c/o Dale J. Peroutka, esq., for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 18, 1993. h. Claim submitted by Maria Del Carmen Cardoso for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 22, 1993. 510 City Ha11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M. A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission meeting held June 10, 1993. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Service Board meeting held June 10, 1993. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission meeting held June 23, 1993. 105: Receiving and filing Disclosure of Property Interests in Redevelopment Areas from Mitchell T. Caldwell, Planning Commissioner. A3. 175: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Elser Constructors, in the amount of $780,840 for Fairmont 12 KV Underground Conduit/Vault System Phase II (Canyon Rim Road); 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. John Stevens, Sasco Electric. He represents Sasco as manager of Contracts Administration. They are a bidder on the subject job and are really the lowest responsible bidder. Their bid was $749,148 at a savings to the City of $31,668. In the recent past, they have been doing work for the City. They have sent a letter to the City. At one time during the process, the procurement department wanted to award to Sasco but received a letter from Elser threatening a lawsuit. Elser cited the reasons why - they were technical in nature but one centered upon by the City's procurement department concerned bid item 6. Mayor Daly interjected and asked if staff first had a comment on the matter. City Attorney White. Both the Public Work's Department and his office are very familiar with the situation being presented. He then explained the specific problem having to do with the requirement in the bid proposal stating in the event of any discrepancy between a unit price and extensions of a unit price on a bid, that the City is obligated to calculate the bid amount based upon the unit price rather than the extensions that the contractor or bidder has provided. He then explained the discrepancy in detail concluding that ~fter the recalculation and retotaling, the bid which Sasco submitted turned .Jut not to be the lowest bid. Case law is clear that is not proper procedure to follow. He believes staff has followed the right procedure in awarding to Elser rather than Sasco. John Stevens. He stated it is true there was a discrepancy in line item 6. They put in an amount of $4,115 for a unit price and also $4,115 for the total price. The quantity to the very far left was 93. A mistake was made. They thought it was going to be a lump sum item so $4,11~ was ~on~£dered lump sum. It is obvious to the reader that multiplying 93 by $4,115 would be an enormous number. There is also something in the bid documents which allows the City to waive technical discrepancies if determined to serve the best interest of the City. Sasco is the lowest bidder by nearly $32,000 - they are highly qualified and have a good reputation with the City. He also feels that the case cited does not apply completely as it might be suggested. Elser also made a mistake in their bid on line item 3 very similar to Sasco but their mistake is forgiven. He would suggest that the City does have an opportunity if they want to of putting everybody on a level playing field. Throw out all the bids or forgive the error that was made by Elser in line item 3 and 511 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. forgive the error made by Sasco in line item 6 and depend upon the intent of the parties. City Attorney White. Both the Elser and Sasco bid were calculated by staff in the same manner. The Elser bid did contain a similar error but in the recalculation, while they made a mistake in the line item, when the extensions were carried out, the bottom line turned out to be exactly correct based upon the City's recalculation and what they submitted. That is the difference. Thomas Kopasich, 195 Bonnie Jean, Anaheim. He works for Elser Constructors. The City is satisfied they are a reputable contractor. He is present to maintain the integrity of the competitive bidding statute. What Sasco is leading the City Council to believe is that they should be given the option of selecting one of two numbers. Either $749,000 that they are urging should be their low bid or $1,127,000 which is what would be calculated looking at their actual bid documents. They are given an option of being low bidder or take the position that they made a mistake on their bid. They should not be given that option. Elser was not given that option. Elser followed the rules. A4. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-158: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND SERVICE EASEMENTS. (Abandonment No. 93-8A, pedestrian and trail easement located from the cul de sac, north side of Maychelle Drive to the Santa Ana River Trail, suggested date for public hearing August 10, 1993.) A5. 123: Approving a revised Program Supplement to the Agreement with Caltrans on Motorist Information and Route Guidance System Elements. A6. 184: Approving a First Amendment to the Emergency Consultant Agreement with Eberhart & Stone, Inc., in the amount of $75,000 for emergency services performed prior to April 19, 1993. A7. 160: Accepting the low bid of Altec Industries, Inc., in the amount of $46,504 for one one-ton chassis with a 29-foot aerial device, all in accordance with Bid #5162. A8. 123: Approving Agreements with the City of Yorba Linda Public Library and the Placentia Library District for utilization of the City's Integrated Online Library System. A9. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-159: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT MASTER SUBGRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 1993 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1994. (To provide funding for admin£~t~ativ~ and t~aining a~ivi~£~ ~o~ a~ul%~ an~ y~u%h ~e~ve~ in the JTPA Program.) 152: Authorizing the City Manager to execute said JTPA Agreement on behalf of the City. Al0. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 5384 - ADOPTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DELETING SECTION 1.01.391 OF CHAPTER 1.01 OF TITLE 1, ADDING SECTIONS 14.32.510, 14.32.520 AND 14.32.530 AND AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 14.32, OF TITLE 14, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE IMPLEMENTING CIVIL PENALTIES FOR PARKING AND STANDING VIOLATIONS. (Introduced at the meeting of July 13, 1993. ) 512 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 93R-153: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THOSE PARKING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, THE CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE AND OTHER CODES RELATING TO PARKING AND STANDING OF VEHICLES IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. Ail. 123: Approving an Agreement with Carolyn Griebe & Associates, in an amount not to exceed $36,000 for public relations services in connection with the development, promotion, coordination, and implementation of the anti-graffiti program. Al2. 117: Receiving and filing a Summary of Investment Transactions for June, 1993, as submitted by the City Treasurer. Al3. 124: Approving the revised Americans With Disabilities Act language now contained in the Convention Center Lease Agreements. Al4. 123: Approving a Third Amendment to Agreement with Montgomery Watson Americas, Inc., in the amount of $185,991 for the consulting engineering services for the Linda Vista and Olive Hills Water Modifications Projects, as recommended by the Public Utilities Board at their meeting of July 1, 1993. Al5. 123: Approving an Agreement with Power Engineers, Inc., at a cost not to exceed $74,882 for consultant services to perform an electric system protection evaluation study. Al6. 152: Approving the funding recommendations, training categories, selection of the JTPA service providers and vendors for the period from July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994; and authorizing the JTP Manager to execute the necessary subcontract agreements and modifications thereto. Al7. 123: Waiving Council Policy 401 and approving an Agreement with DGA Consultants, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $135,500 for engineering design services for design of a satellite parking lot for the Anaheim Arena and for street improvements to Douglass Road and Cerritos Avenue. Council Member Pickler. He asked what the money was going to be used for; City Manager Ruth answered it is allocated for the design improvements · necessary for the improvement of Douglass and Cerritos. He clarified the ~oney comes from the Bond Funds sold relating to the Arena. The money is in ..ne construction fund and will be used for design purposes. Relative to the ~.arking lot, they will come back with an absolute lease which would have to be ~pproved by the Council. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 93R-153, 93R-158 and 93R-159, both inclusive· for adoption: AYES.' NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS.' Feldhau-~, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-153, 93R-158 and 93R-159, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5384 for adoption: AYES: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 513 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5384 duly passed and adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. Al8. 105: RESIGNATION FROM PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL: MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to accept the resignation of Lynn Thompson from the Board of Directors of the Private Industry Council. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 179: URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 5386: Adopting an interim measure prohibiting certain uses of property which may be in conflict with a zoning proposal the City is studying or intends to study and declaring that this ordinance is an urgency measure which shall take immediate effect. Mayor Daly. He is going to ask the City Attorney to introduce an ordinance which would place a moratorium on the operation of adult entertainment businesses in the City for a period of 45 days. City Attorney White. Last Wednesday, the City received word from the Federal District Court in Los Angeles that the court in a lawsuit relating to the Wounded Knee Saloon on Brookhurst Street had ruled the City's adult entertainment ordinance provision requiring conditional use permits for adult entertainment businesses and specifically relating to those uses that the United States Supreme Court has previously deemed to constitute free expression under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, had been declared unconstitutional in that case. As a result of the court decision, City staff is recommending that the City Council authorize staff to pursue drafting possible amendments to be considered by the Planning Commission and the City Council to amend the current adult entertainment ordinance. They anticipate having those amendments back to the Council for consideration within the next 45 days. In connection with that, he has drafted and staff is recommending for Council consideration a moratorium ordinance that would prohibit the establishment of any new adult entertainment businesses within the next 45 days while City staff is studying and preparing possible amendments to the City's ordinance. The moratorium ordinance if adopted will take effect this evening. Staff was unable to have it prepared in time to be placed on the normal Council agenda. It is important for the Council to consider the matter this evening because it is possible that other businesses may be seeking to establish in Anaheim without the City having in place ordinances that relate to the establishment of those businesses. If allowed to go in before they adopt new or different regulations, it is possible those businesses could be located in a manner which would be in conflict with the new regulations adopted. Because the need to act was not known in time to place the matter on the normal Council agenda and because it is not in the public interest to wait an additional week, he is recommending that the Council adopt a motion waiving the 72-hour posting provision of the Brown Act to consider the moratorium as he described. MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to waive the 72-hour posting provision of the Brown Act including the findings articulated by the City Attorney. 514 City Hall, A_n_aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney White. Because it is an urgency ordinance, it is necessary that he read the entire provision. The City Attorney thereupon read the proposed ordinance (Ordinance No. 5386) in full. Subsequently, Mayor Daly stated because the item was not on the Agenda, at this time he is asking if anyone is present who wishes to speak to the proposed ordinance. James Pack, he happened to be sitting in on the meeting. He is a citizen of Tustin but he is opposed to establishments like this if adult entertainment means what he thinks it means. Before a vote was taken on the ordinance, City Attorney White, at the request of Council Member Pickler, explained how such adult businesses are protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution. A vote was then taken on the foregoing ordinance. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 5386: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING AN INTERIM MEASURE PROHIBITING CERTAIN USES OF PROPERTY WHICH MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH A ZONING PROPOSAL THE CITY IS STUDYING OR INTENDS TO STUDY AND DECLARING THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS AN URGENCY MEASURE WHICH SHALL TAKE IMMEDIATE EFFECT. Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5386 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5386 duly passed and adopted and effective immediately. ITEMS Bi - B6 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 28, 1993 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JULY 20, 1993: 31. 155: FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 316, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 92-93-05, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3566: OWNER: California State Teachers' Retirement System, a Public Entity, 7667 Folsom Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95826 AGENT~ O'Connor Realty Advisors, Inc., Attn~ Mike Strle, Vice President, 11601Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Donuhue Schrib~r, 3501 Jambor~ R~ad, St~. 300, Attn~ Bra~ D~¢k, President, Development, South Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 444-600 North Euclid Street. Property consists of two irregularly-shaped parcels of land: Parcel 1 consists of approximately 38.25 acres bounded on the north by Crescent Avenue, on the east by Loara Street, on the south by the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5), and on the west by Euclid Street (Anaheim Plaza). Parcel 2 consists of approximately 8.82 acres located at the northeast corner of Crescent Avenue and Euclid Street, having approximate frontages of 620 feet on the north side of Crescent Avenue and 640 feet on the east side of Euclid Street. 515 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. To consider certification of Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 316 (Anaheim Plaza Project). To reclassify subject property (Parcel 1) from CG (Commercial, General) to CL (Commercial, Limited). To permit the phased construction of a commercial retail center with an indoor entertainment facility, an automotive repair and parts installation facility in conjunction with a major retail tenant, semi- enclosed restaurants (outdoor dining/food court), and an auditorium/community meeting room with waiver of minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway, permitted encroachment into required yard areas, landscaping of required yards, parking lot landscaping, maximum sign area, maximum number of freestanding signs, maximum area of freestanding signs, minimum distance between freestanding signs and/or roof signs, maximum height of freestanding signs, maximum number of roof signs, maximum area of roof signs, maximum height of roof signs and maximum height of illuminated roof signs. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Final Supplemental EIR NO. 316 CERTIFIED Reclassification No. 92-93-05 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC93-72) (4 yes votes, 2 abstained, and 1 absent). CUP NO. 3566 GRANTED (PC93-73). DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 93-01 CONTINUED to the Planning Commission meeting of July 26, 1993. Appealed by the agent, Donahue Schriber. Set for City Council public hearing this date (See Item D2). See Item D2 on today's agenda. This item was subsequently continued to Tuesday, July 27, 1993. B2. 179: CLASSIFICATION NO. 92-93-10 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Leonard J. Lawicki, 1691 S. Euclid Street, Anaheim, CA 92802, James J. Fornator and Marion R. Fornator, 603 S. Adria, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION: 1707 and 1713 West Sallie Lane. Property is approximately 0.44 acres located on the north side of Sallie Lane and approximately 110 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Street. To reclassify subject property from the RS-7200 to CL Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 92-93-10 GRANTED (PC93-74) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. B3. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3611 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Cynthia L. Floriani, 217 N. Emily Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION; 217 North Emily Street. Property is approximately 0.15 acre located on the west side of Emily Street and approximately 145 feet south of the centerline of Cypress Street. To permit a 537-square foot "granny unit" in conjunction with an existing single-family residence with waivers of (A) maximum lot coverage, and (B) minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3611 GRANTED, IN PART-waiver A deleted (PC92-75) (6 yes votes, 1 absent ). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED. Approved Negative Declaration. 516 City Ha11~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. B4. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3613 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church of Anaheim AGENT: Thomas Meyer, 222 N. East Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 222 N. East Street. Property is approximately 8.2 acres located at the southeast corner of Cypress Street and East Street. To permit 3 portable classrooms (2,880-square feet total) in order to expand an existing private elementary school with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3613 GRANTED, for 7 years, to expire on June 28, 2000 (PC93-76) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED. Approved negative Declaration. B5. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1215 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Fred B. Kenney, 3200 E. Carpenter Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 3200 East Carpenter Avenue. Property is approximately 5.89 acres located on the south side of Carpenter Avenue and approximately 80 feet east of the centerline of Shepard Street. (Camelot Golfland). Review of revised plans to permit a 3,482-square foot children's play area within an existing amusement facility. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission approved revised plans for CUP NO. 1215 as being in substantial conformance. (PC93-77) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Negative Declaration previously approved. B6. 108: PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO AGE LIMITATIONS FOR ADULT ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reviewed for comments relative to potential adoption by City Council. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. B7. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5385 FOR ADOPTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 92-93-07 located at 1007 West Lincoln Avenue to the CL zone. (Continued from the meeting of June 15, 1993, as it relates to the public hearing (D3) on agenda this date.) (Introduced at the meeting of July 13, 1993.) Council Member Daly offered Ordinance No. 5385 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 5385: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5385 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5385 duly passed and adopted. B8. 179: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3390: 517 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. REQUESTED BY: Dwyer J. Beesley, 125 N. Gilbert #206, Anaheim, CA 92801 The property is located at 209 N. Gilbert Street and the petitioner is requesting an extension of time retroactive to May 21, 1993 and to expire May 21, 1994 to comply with conditions of approval. Conditional Use Permit is for the construction of a 9-unit affordable senior citizens apartment complex with waivers of minimum building site area per dwelling unit, maximum structural height, minimum structural setback from the street, and minimum setback to single family residential zoning. Mayor Daly. He opposed the project two years ago when it first came before the Council and continues to have concerns with the proposal. He will continue to vote in opposition. Council Member Pickler. He knows Mr. Beesley has one of the projects on Gilbert now and it is a good project. With this project, there is going to be a chain of such units on Gilbert. Eventually the other single-family lots are going to do the same thing and thus will inundate the area. He is also going to oppose the extension of time. City Attorney White explained that the conditional use permit will expire if the Council does not grant the extension. If it is approved, they should do so with certain conditions specified in the staff report of July 13, 1993 from the Zoning Administrator Annika Santalahti and those should be incorporated into any motion to approve. He also clarified for the Mayor that if there is a split vote regarding the requested extension, by Council rule, the issue would automatically carry over to the next meeting when a full Council was present which he believes will be next Tuesday. MOTION: Council Member Feldhaus moved to approve the requested extension of time on Conditional Use Permit No. 3390. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. Council Members Feldhaus and Simpson voted yes, Council Members Pickler and Daly voted no. Council Member Hunter was absent. Because there is a tie vote, the matter is, therefore, automatically carried over to the next meeting for a full Council vote. B9/B10. 155: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - THE DISNEYLAND RESORT - ENVIRONMENTA?. IMPACT REPORT NO. 311; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 331; THE DISNEYLAND R_RSORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 (INCLUDING ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, A DESIGN PLAN AND GUIDELINES AND A PUBLIC FACILITIES PLAN) ; AND ANAHEIM COMMERCI/~T. RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL HEIGHT ORDINANCE: (1) To consider a request dated July 14, 1993 by Centralia School District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort submitted by Marshall B. Krupp of Community Systems Associates, Inc. (2) To consider a request dated July 14, 1993 by the Garden Grove Unified School District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort submitted by Marshall B. Krupp of Community Systems Associates, Inc. MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to deny the request by the Centralia School District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort as submitted by Marshall B. Krupp of Community Systems Associates, Inc. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Marshall B. Krupp, President, Community Systems Associates, Inc., 730 E1 Camino Way, Suite 200, Tustin, CA 92680, spoke. The 518 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. rehearing request has been authorized by both the Garden Grove Unified School District Board of Education as well as the Centralia School District. In addition, he would also like to request in consideration of the discussions which have occurred over the last week with the two districts, City staff, City Manager, Mayor Daly and representatives of Disney, that they also might consider this evening a waiver of the statute of limitations on EIR 311, GPA 331, SP 92-1, including all applicable resolutions and ordinances for a period of 30 days beginning July 24, 1993 subject to the following conditions: (1) An agreement mutually executed by the districts and the City prior to 12:00 noon, Friday, July 23, 1993. (2) That the two school boards authorize the execution of such an agreement. (3) That the Disney Company agree to the waiver. It appears that there potentially could be a resolution of the dispute between the parties and it would appear to be in everyone's best interest if they all agree to extend that period of time to allow continued discussions to occur. If they do not consider that request of waiver, they have no other option but to pursue what other remedies they have. Mayor Daly. He asked Mr. Krupp if the request for a waiver on the statute was part of the written request. Marshall Krupp. It is not. The request has come about as a result of several phone calls that took place this afternoon from different parties and some rumors that are spreading that it might be in everybody's best interest to try to resolve the matter before any lawsuits are filed. Because the Council only meets tonight, it might be appropriate if the parties can agree before Friday to those conditions, including Disney, so they would not have to come back to the Council and call for a special meeting prior to July 24. He confirmed for the Mayor that the request applies to both districts subject to the same three conditions. Mayor Daly asked Mr. Krupp if he had any additional comments. ~arshall Krupp. They believe they can support all the grounds and facts that nave been presented for the rehearing and would be disappointed if the Council did not give them an opportunity to bring those to the Council in a more comprehensive manner outside of the complexity of the hearing that took place previously before the Planning Commission and Council. The district still believes in and supports the project in concept but believes there is a necessity to provide for adequate mitigation. The last 30 days has not brought forth the final solution. A rehearing will give that opportunity. Mayor Daly asked if staff had any comments to offer to the verbal request. City Attorney White. He would offer three points - the first is that the additional request is not on the Agenda and by law the Council cannot take an action on something that is not on the agenda without making certain findings as to why this could not have been agendized in a timely manner and why it is urgent to protect the public health, safety and welfare to act on it tonight. Secondly, Disney is not present and they are most affected by any waiver. He would be hesitant to take any action that affects their development rights without informing them that the item is being considered tonight. Thirdly, in the event that any party feels it is necessary to preserve their rights to file litigation, that does not mean that litigation has to be pursued without 519 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. an opportunity to explore settlement. In any litigation they always entertain settlement proposals. Marshall Krupp. There is a representative from Disney in the audience, but he is not sure he is capable of binding Disney. City Attorney White. He would like Mr. Krupp to indicate whether or not he contacted Disney officials and who he contacted that he would be coming here tonight and making this request to the City Council concerning their project. Marshall Krupp. He is not representing they contacted Disney but requesting action by the City Council with a condition that would make it subject to Disney's concurrence. If Disney does not concur, the statute of limitations would remain and they will then proceed as appropriate. City Attorney White. The mere fact somebody may file a lawsuit does not preclude the parties continuing to negotiate to settle. Council Member Pickler. The only thing he would like to say, in his opinion, Centralia and Garden Grove School Districts are doing something that is self serving and not in the best interest of Orange County, the City or the State. It is wrong to try and thrust all their problems onto Anaheim and Disneyland. It is positive they are still negotiating and that is a step in the right direction. The project is one that will benefit all. A vote was then taken on the motion by Council Member Daly, seconded by Council Member Feldhaus to deny the request by Centralia School District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort submitted by Marshall B. Krupp of Community Systems Associates, Inc. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to deny the request by the Garden Grove Unified School District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort as submitted by Marshall B. Krupp of Community Systems Associates, Inc. Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. AFTER RECESS: Chairman Daly reconvened the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, all Agency Members being present with the exception of Agency Member Hunter. (7:17 p.m. ) D1. 161: CONTINUED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL: To consider the proposed allocation of public funds for the purpose of paying all or part of the value of the land for, and the cost of the installation and construction of, certain buildings and other public improvements to be jointly owned by the City and the Agency, to wit, City Hall West and appurtenant improvements, pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement, as amended, by and b~ewe~n the City and eh~ Agency (the "Ag~m~ne"). The pu~po~ of eh~ jo£ne public hearing is to receive testimony from the public regarding the proposed expenditure of Agency funds. Public Hearing continued from the meeting of July 13, 1993 to this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - June 29 and July 6, 1993 RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV) ..... : Making certain findings with respect to City Hall West. 520 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV) ..... : Approving First Amendment of Cooperation Agreement for City Hall West. RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV) ..... : Approving the Co-Tenancy Agreement for City Hall West. RESOLUTION NO. (COUNCIL) ..... : Making certain findings with respect to City Hall West. RESOLUTION NO. (COUNCIL) ..... : Approving First Amendment of Cooperation Agreement for City Hall West. RESOLUTION NO. (COUNCIL) ..... : Approving the Co-Tenancy Agreement for City Hall West. Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. She is asking for an additional continuance on this item. They have not been able to get clarification from the Bond Counsel for the Utilities Department as of yet on the specific documents. Staff will make sure they provide a memo on whether it will be a revised packet or exactly what the status will be. Chairman/Mayor Daly asked for clarification if she is planning on bringing the item back next Tuesday or is there uncertainty that will happen. Lisa Stipk0vich. She is meeting tomorrow with the bond counsel for the Utilities Department and will know more than. She clarified she prefers to have the matter continued rather than removed from the agenda at this time. Otherwise, they will have to renotice the public hearing. She will give advance notice whether it can be revised for next week. MOTION: Agency/Council Member Pickler moved to continue the joint public hearing one week to Tuesday, July 27, 1993 at the request of staff. Agency/Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Agency/Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: By General Agency Consensus the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency meeting was adjourned after discussion regarding the graphic's program for Anaheim Plaza under public hearing Item D2 of the City Council meeting (see discussion under that item). (8:20 p.m. ) D2. 155: PUBLIC HEARING - FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NO. 316, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 92-93-05, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3566: OWNER: California State Teachers' Retirement System, a Public Entity, 7667 Folsom Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95826 AGENT: O'Connor Realty Advisors, Inc., Attn: Mike Strle, Vice President, 11601Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Donahue Schriber, 3501 Jamboree Road, Ste. 300, Attn: Brad Deck, Vice President, Development, South Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 444-600 North Euclid Street. The property consists of two irregularly-shaped parcels of land: Parcel 1 consists of approximately 38.25 acres bounded on the north by Crescent Avenue, on the east by Loara Street, on the south by the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5), and on the west by Euclid Street (Anaheim Plaza). Parcel 2 consists of approximately 8.82 acres located at the northeast corner of Crescent Avenue and Euclid Street, having approximate frontages of 620 feet on the north side of Crescent Avenue and 640 feet on the east side of Euclid Street. 521 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. To consider certification of Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 316 (Anaheim Plaza Project). To reclassify subject property (Parcel 1) from CG (Commercial, General) to CL (Commercial, Limited). To permit the phased construction of a commercial retail center with an indoor entertainment facility, an automotive repair and parts installation facility in conjunction with a major retail tenant, semi- enclosed restaurants (outdoor dining/food court), and an auditorium/community meeting room with waiver of minimum structural setback abutting an arterial highway, permitted encroachment into required yard areas, landscaping of required yards, parking lot landscaping, maximum sign area, maximum number of freestanding signs, maximum area of freestanding signs, minimum distance between freestanding signs and/or roof signs, maximum height of freestanding signs, maximum number of roof signs, maximum area of roof signs, maximum height of roof signs and maximum height of illuminated roof signs. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Final Supplemental EIR NO. 316 CERTIFIED Reclassification No. 92-93-05 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC93-72) (4 yes votes, 2 abstained, and 1 absent). CUP NO. 3566 GRANTED (PC93-73). The Development Agreement No. 93-01 was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 26, 1993. HEARING SET ON: The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the agent Donahue Schriber, and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - July 8, 1993 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 8, 1993 Posting of property - July 9, 1993 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 28, 1993. Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. As part of the hearing tonight, staff would like to have a short presentation regarding the entitlement package for the Anaheim Plaza. The Council has seen most of the land use proposals and previously approved as the Agency or City the overall project. Tonight are the actions the Council would need to take in order to approve the entitlements. One of the things they feel is important for the Council to review is the graphics package. A short presentation will be made by the Graphics Consultant, Graphic Solutions, Simon Andrews. The item was trailed from the A~ency meetin~ (Agency 3). The Plannin~ Commission a~proved thi~ and al~o th~ R~d~v~lopm~nt Commission. Th~r~ ar~ al~o r~p~~ntativ~ from the neighborhood group. She further confirmed that the site plan had not changed in any way. Simon Andrews, Graphic Solutions. He gave a slide presentation explaining the graphics plan in detail, the main theme being agrarian, consisting of very strong contrasting colors creating visual drama. (Also see Anaheim Plaza, sign plan dated May 12, 1993, prepared by Graphic Solutions which included center identification and site signage, tenant and ancillary signage, i.e. sign type criteria, project signage menu, sign location plan, submittals and approvals, design guidelines, tenant signage menus and exhibits which were briefed in the presentation. The actual plans were also subsequently posted 522 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. for viewing by the Council.) At the conclusion of his presentation, he explained that Mrs. Stipkovich has a package which spells out three waivers and conditions which they would like to clarify. (See letter dated July 20, 1993 to the City Clerk from Graphic Solutions - re: Anaheim Plaza/CUP 3566/Appeal of Approvals related to the graphic's program.) The three items were, (1) waiver (k) - maximum area of roof signs, (2) condition (5) and (3) condition 26. The submittal listed what was approved under each item and what was requested and subsequently on pages four and five what was requested and a discussion as to why. Extensive discussion and questions by the Council followed which were answered by Mr. Andrews, Mrs. Stipkovich and Jan Wohlwend, O'Connor Management, General Manager of Anaheim Plaza. Additional comments were provided by Brad Deck, Donahue Schriber representing CALSTRS. He noted it is important to keep in mind this is one of two regional sites in Anaheim. They have created a unique sign program which is absolutely necessary for the revitalization of the new Anaheim Plaza for two specific reasons - it has been a difficult site to market from a tenant standpoint. They have been successful in obtaining commitments from four of the major tenants for the area south of Crescent. One of the major reasons was that they were able to provide them with signage both visible from the I-5 and Euclid. The other reason, they believe this kind of signage helps set Anaheim Plaza apart from other centers. It is unique, different and it creates excitement. They have found in their other developments this kind of graphics program does create the kind of shopping experience customers are looking for today. He then gave a status report of the development during which he explained they are working through major tenant commitments and currently are fast tracking those in hopes of trying to obtain commitments from the major tenants in order to start construction in the fall, hopefully by next month. They are also striving for a schedule which would deliver a store to Walmart in the Fall of 1994. It is based upon that schedule that they are before the Council today asking for approval of the graphics and the balance of the entitlements. Lisa Stipkovich. One of the other major elements that will set this project apart is the landscaping plan. The Council did review and approve the concept plan that they think is very significant in terms of the level of landscaping. The landscaping and graphics work together. The trellis was discussed as part of the landscape program for the area and staff is prepared to show that to -he Council. Mayor Daly opened the public hearing. Jeff Kirsch, 2661W. Palais, Anaheim. He is speaking to the EIR. Relative to solid waste disposal, the City will still be served by the same limited landfill space as the Disney project. How can a statement be made that for this project which has a comparable demand as the Disney project that it can ~e Inslgn~Ican%. He ~s also concerne~ a~out the tra~£1c £1ow in the area especially with regard to Euclid. In view of the past problems in the West Anaheim area that have, in his opinion, been the consequence of inadequate review, he is asking that they give this project the review it deserves in the area of infrastructure particularly on these two topics. Miriam Kaywood. (She was on the RAP Group Executive Committee. The group of concerned residents who formed as a coalition relative to the redevelopment of Anaheim Plaza.) They went over many facets of the project with the hope that it would occur. They are at the point now where it is in a reality mode. Walmart has agreed to commit. The people who talked to her cannot wait for it to open. They looked into everything that went into the rebuilding. It has 523 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. to be remembered this was previously a shopping mall. It was the only regional mall at the time. It is not something new that people will be traveling to. There will be improvements to the freeway. They are looking forward to that and to the tax returns coming to the City that have been delayed. She urged unanimous approval and they are looking forward to the project being built and completed. There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Daly closed the public hearing. Council Member Feldhaus posed questions relative to the automotive parts and repair facility in conjunction with the center, as well as the freeway sign (P1) and the entry signs (P2) conditioning those so that they require vines that will grow up the signs to prevent graffiti or at the first sign of graffiti, that it be removed within 24 hours and then vines planted. Lisa Stipkovich. Relative to the automotive facility, it is a part of the Walmart Store; Mr. Andrews answered relative to the graffiti problem reporting that there are a number of techniques available to discourage and also help remove graffiti and they would take those precautions. Mayor Daly. The Council has only had a couple of days to review these final items relative to the project. Therefore, he respectfully requests a 7-day continuance. He would like to resolve the few questions and concerns he has. He is impressed and excited about the sign graphics and feels they are very attractive. He has some questions about traffic circulation and parking and some other issues. He would like the time to review all of the details of the proposal. MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue the subject public hearing to Tuesday, July 27, 1993. Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, additional discussion took place as a result of questions posed by Council Member Feldhaus to Mrs. Kaywood regarding whether or not the RAP Group had discussed the automotive parts and repair facility. Mrs. Kaywood reported, not specifically but there was such a facility as part of the Broadway. Since an automotive facility had been there before, there was no concern voiced by anyone. Council Member Pickler asked if a one-week delay was going to be a problem; Lisa Stipkovich. It is not going to be a critical problem. They are anxious to get this behind them and get moving, but she believes a week is something the developers can live with. Mayor Daly. He asked what the thinking is on pads A,B and C. Lisa Stipkovich. There was a requirement as part of the agreement. There is an incentive of about 1.2 million dollars for entertainment uses to come into the center. In their negotiations with Walmart, they have significantly impacted what could or could not be done in that area. They are still searching for uses that can comply with the City's requirements for entertainment. Walmart has eliminated some uses because they do not want any problem with parking. Mayor Daly. It is one of his concerns. The center in some ways is being transformed into a giant parking lot for Walmart. The original presentation called for a major entertainment component with some community features at Euclid. 524 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Lisa Stipkovich. It is not a requirement that they build entertainment but they will not get the incentive money if they do not have an entertainment use that is compatible. Staff has been searching out alternatives along with the developers. Brad Deck. The original plan called for roughly 40,000 square feet of entertainment use. They had actually identified a number of different users but never could come to terms on the financial aspects and could never convince Walmart that that use was compatible with their use. They specifically introduced one concept called Exhilirama and they could not get the Walmart people comfortable with that type of use. They are very opposed to anything that would encroach upon their parking field. They are now looking at a number of different options for freestanding buildings that would be quasi-retail entertainment oriented uses. It is not a question of filling the parking spaces but whether or not they can fill them and still qualify for the reimbursement. Lisa Stipkovich. They could subsititute retail in that area but they would not get the economic incentive. Mayor Daly. He asked if there were fast food possibilities on Euclid and if they would be allowed on pads A, B or C. Lisa Stipkovich. She does not believe it is restricted. It will qualify for incentive money but it is not restricted in terms of the agreement. However, it would require an additional CUP. The Council/Agency would have to see that again, if they came in and substituted fast food. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion to continue the public hearing for one week. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. It was noted that the public hearing portion is closed as of this hearing. Cl. COUNCIL COMMENTS: 114: ANAHEIM HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER: Council Member Feldhaus. He is interested in having a temporary citizens committee formed to develop recommendations for an Anaheim Hills Community '~enter in conjunction with existing community services to look at potential sites, size, etc. City Manager Ruth. Staff has already worked very closely with the community and a considerable amount of work has been done to indentify various sites. One of the major problems is funding. Mayor Daly. He asked that staff submit a summary"of the work that has already been done and a summary of what has been studied. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Council Member Pickler moved to recess into Closed Session to consider the balance of the Closed Session items listed on today's agenda. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (8:25 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Council Member Hunter. (approximately 8:55 p.m.) 525 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 20, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent the City Council meeting was adjourned. (8:56 p:.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 526