1993/11/09City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NO _V_V_V_V_V~B__ER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGER: John Lower
PARK SUPERINTENDENT: Jack Kudron
PRINCIPAL CIVIL ENGINEER: Natalie Meeks
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Gary Johnson
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 3:08 p.m. on November 5, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the meeting to order at 3:00 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:
Golden West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 40-92-46; Anaheim Stadium Associates
vs. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Superior Court
Case No. 44-81-74.
Dease dba the Wounded Knee Saloon, vs. City of Anaheim, U. S.
District Court Case No. CV93-1712-RG(Sx)
b. To meet with the City's Real Property Negotiator concerning
acquisition or disposition of certain real property interests
for property located generally at Douglass Road, owned by
Herb Douglass and Ted Douglass.
c. To meet with and give directions to its authorized
representative regarding labor relations matters - Goverrunent
Code Section 54957.6.
d. To consider and take possible action upon personnel matters
pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.
e. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1).
f. 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. (3:00 p.m. )
803
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 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.
(5:24 p.m.).
INVOCATION: Reverend John P. Lenihan, St. Boniface Church, gave the
invocation. '
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Bob Simpson led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PRESENTATION - MEETING NEWS' 1993 PLANNERS' CHOICE AWARD:
Mayor Daly presented a plaque to Lynn Thompson, the City's Convention Center
General Manager, the Meeting News' 1993 Planners' Choice Award, Convention
Center Category. The Meeting News is a preeminent industry publication that
represents the ideas and interest of the Meeting Planning Industry.
Mr. Thompson accepted the award on behalf of all the employees at the
Convention Center.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Daly
and authorized by the City Council:
Recognizing KeF Club Week in Anaheim, November 7-13, 1993
Recognizing November 13, 1993, as Releaf Anaheim Day
Recognizing Flu Prevention Week in Anaheim.
Nan Tipsati Enkun accepted the Katella High School Key Club proclamation and
Sally White accepted the Releaf Anaheim Day proclamation. Mary Wright later
received the Flu Prevention Week proclamation.
THE FOLLOWING WERE RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE
MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME:
Recognizing November 13 - 20, 1993,
as Scouting for Food Good Turn Week in Anaheim.
Recognizing the Hotline Help Center for its service to the community.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,170,913.46 for the
period ending November 5, 1993, in accordance with the 1993-94 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency, Housing Authority and Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation meetings.
(5:37 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:41 p.m. )
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Sharon Ericson. Her husband is a firefighter and it is appropriate to reflect
on the past two weeks of fire storms in Laguna Beach, Anaheim Hills, Los
Angeles County and Malibu. She explained the part her husband played in
combating the Malibu fire and how with mutual aid all fire departments respond
the best way they can to other cities and counties in need. She for one
applauds the efforts of Anaheim and all the firefighters who risked their
lives as they so often do. She wants those who degrade the firefighters
804
City Hail, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - S.'00 P.M.
during elections and other times by publicizing that they make too much money
with their overtime to ask themselves how much are the firefighters lives
worth. They are always there when needed and that's why "every one loves a
firefighter".
Later in the meeting, Council Member Pickler stated he resents the use of the
word degrading. They have always said that Anaheim has the best Police
Department and Fire Department anywhere and he would not want to be in their
position.
Amis David, 1585 W. Broadway (business), 419 S. Colt, Anaheim. He has
reviewed the Council meeting tape of last Tuesday. The ordinance that the
majority of the Council ascribed to (Ordinance No. 5403 - relating to sale of
goods or merchandise by vehicle - vendors) was labeled a compromise. However,
a compromise is where two distinct ideas are put on the table, talked about
and worked on. Other than the few minutes that Mr. Quinonez had with the Code
Enforcement Manager, there was no dialogue with the' community on the side of
the vendors. He wonders if the Council even knew the ordinance was coming
forth. If so, he believes Council Member Simpson and Feldhaus would have
shared that with them. He questions if it was the Code Enforcement Manager
who proposed something that was palatable only to his way of thinking. It is
certainly not palatable to those who work in this arena. He asked how can the
Council possibly think the vendors can continue to make a living by parking 10
minutes maximum and then moving 100 feet to another station and place. It is
not going to work. The City does not have the money to be spending for more
litigation. The Council has the responsibility to make it fair and reasonable
to all segments of Anaheim. What they have passed is mean spirited and it is
capricious and arbitrary. They have backed up a decent segment of the
community to go back to the courts. It is money they do not have and the City
does not have. The vendors were ready to acknowledge doubling the fees and
ready to acknowledge a reduction of the 1 hour but not to 10 minutes. He
hopes the Code Enforcement Manager has more decency to touch base with those
affected than only just the side he favors most. He cries out loud to the
Council's mean spirited action.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS=
Public input received on Items A13 and A14 (see discussion under those items).
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to waive reading in full of all
resolutions to be acted u~on for the Council meeting of November 9, 1993.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Simpson, the following items were approved
in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished
each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar~ Council Member
Pickler offered Resolution No. 93R-218 for adoption. Refer to Resolution
Book.
Al. 105= Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board
meeting held September 22, 1993.
140: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Public Library Monthly Statistical
Reports for July, 1993, and August, 1993.
8O5
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Golf Advisory Commission meeting
held September 23, 1993.
A2. 101: Approving Contract Change Order No. 1, in the amount of $15,926, in
favor of Hillcrest Contracting, for additional improvements to the Douglass
Road Parking Lot Improvement project.
A3. 124: Approving Contract Change Order No. 1, in the amount of $28,316, in
favor of Metro Builders & Engineers Group, Ltd., for Convention Center Car
Park Structure No. 1 (additional structural improvements and waterproofing of
concrete slab areas)
106: Amending the Fiscal Year 1993/94 Budget by increasing expenditures in
Account No. 560-514-5207-7851 by $28,316.
A4. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 12693, and the Subdivision
Agreement with The Presley Companies; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute said Subdivision Agreement. Tract No. 12693 is located on the east
side of Sunset Ridge Road of the Highlands, and is filed in conjunction with
Specific Plan No. 87-1.
A5. 123= Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with the County of Orange
for design and construction of improvements on Ball Road and Gilbert Street.
A6. 123: Approving an Agreement with the State of California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to receive funding to proceed with the Anaheim
Transportation Network Feasibility Study.
106: Amending the Fiscal Year 1993/94 Budget by increasing revenues and
expenditures in Program 3246, Commuter Services, by $15,000.
A7. 123: Approving a Reimbursement Agreement with Kaufman and Broad of
Southern California for storm drainage in the Weir Canyon Road Drainage
Reimbursement Area.
A8. 106: Amending the Fiscal Year 1993/94 Budget for Public Works -
Engineering Capital Improvement Program in accordance with Exhibits A, B, and
C of the Public Works staff report dated 10/29/93.
Ag. 160: Accepting the bid of Cal Tec, in an amount not to exceed $48,000
(plus applicable taxes) for the removal of one underground fuel tank, the
installation of one above-ground fuel tank, and the possible removal of
contaminated soil, in accordance with Bid $5201.
Al0. 160: Accepting the low bid of Ryder Aviall, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $37,500 (plus applicable taxes) for the overhaul of one engine
compressor assembly for Police Helicopter Nl1082, in accordance with Bid
$5204.
All. 160: Accepting the low bid of George Chevrolet, in the amount of
$748,500 (plus applicable taxes) for fifty police cars, in accordance with bid
$5194.
Council Member Feldhaus. He asked if the cars were safety ready when they
arrive or if additional costs are involved in converting the cars.
City Manager Ruth. He believes there is additional work required once they
arrive. They meet the specifications but it is necessary to add on.
8O6
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5.'00 P.M.
Police Chief Kennedy. Mr. Ruth is correct. They are basic police cars with
safety specifications coming from the manufacturer. They then require
additional equipment such as light bars, etc.
Al2. 160: Accepting the bid of West-Lite Supply Company, in the amount of
$171,466 (plus applicable taxes) for 1,500 70-watt H.P.S. fixtures; 600 150-
watt H.P.S. wall pack fixtures, and 580 150-watt H.P.S. flood light fixtures,
in accordance with Bid $5181.
Al3. 160: To consider authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change
order to Mariposa Horticultural Enterprises, for an additional not-to-exceed
amount of $35,000 bringing the two-year not-to-exceed total to $288,968 for
landscape maintenance at various City locations through December, 1993, in
accordance with Bid $4985.
Sharon Ericson, President, AMEA. Once again, this is to amend another
contract that caused some employees to be laid off a couple of years ago. It
is for an additional $35,000 and she believes the contract is expiring
December 31, 1993.
Later in the meeting, Council Member Feldhaus stated he was going to vote no.
A contract is a contract and he does not think $35,000 additional is
justifiable.
Council Member Hunter. He concurs. Since they have gone out to private
contracting on City medians, there has been sub-par maintenance on all the
medians. Down Santa Aha Canyon Road, the contractor only mows the weeds.
There is no longer grass and in his opinion since he drives that area
everyday, they look terrible. Ever since City employees have not been doing
this work, the quality of life has been diminished extremely in this
particular area. People living there complain about it. Sprinklers go on and
off at different hours and spray passing cars all the time. The police know
all the traffic accidents caused by this situation. The contractor has not
done a good job and is now asking for an additional $35,000 with only 1~
months to go. They should tell him no.
Mayor Daly. If there are management problems and if the Council is concerned,
they need to have a report from the City Manager to make sure the services
rendered are what they are supposed to be. The City has asked the contractor
to do additional work. Additional medians have been added to the contract and
that needs to be pointed out. That is one reason for the increase. He is
curious about the performance level on this contract and perhaps the City
Manager can talk to the Parks and Recreation Management team or perhaps Street
M&~n%~n&n~ an~ ge% a ~por~ ~ac~ on %he qual~%y an~ level o~ service.
City Manager Ruth. They are in the process of preparing plans and
specifications and going out to bid. The contract terminates January 1. If
there are problems, he assures the Council they will be tightening those. He
will be reviewing this with staff and will come back to the Council with some
tight specifications. Three additional areas were added. One thing difficult
to estimate is vandalism and damage done by automobiles going into center
dividers, timers broken, broken sprinkler heads, etc. They had 10% in the
contract and this has exceeded the 10% mostly in the eastern part of the City.
These were actually unanticipated costs which unfortunately have come up at
the end of the contract. Staff reviewed the matter to see if it could be done
with City personnel but there were insufficient people to do the work.
807
City Hall, Anaheim, Californi& - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Simpson asked with as many questions as there are, if they
could postpone this item for one week and get a report; City Manager Ruth.
That can be done.
Jack Kudron, Park Superintendent. On the extra work that is authorized for
the contractor, it is authorized in advance. If they have a controller or
back flow device taken out by a car, it has to be fixed. The contractor does
not initiate the work. The City authorizes the work and they give the City a
price. Further questions were then posed to Mr. Kudron by Council Members
Hunter and Feldhaus at the conclusion of which Mr. Kudron explained that
contingencies are built into the base bid but in the contract it is
specifically stated that certain types of work, particularly irrigation work
caused by acts of God, accidents or vandalism are not covered by the basic
contract. For instance, there was a major wind storm in November of 1992 and
they spent over $1,500 in restaking new trees on the new Weir Canyon median.
Those are the kinds of costs that cannot be anticipated.
Mayor Daly. What the Council is looking for is more complete justification
for the additional services in the contract. Staff is recommending the
services and not the contractor. What is unclear is how much is due to
unforeseen actual charges beyond the control of the contractor and beyond
reason for the contractor to absorb and how much additional cost is due to the
City to do that additional median maintenance work.
Council Member Hunter. What they need to do on all of these, every time the
contractors come in and want more money is to put their "feet to the fire" and
not just approve those increases.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to continue Item A13 for one week.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A14. 137: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-218: RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN LEASE FINANCING DOCUMENTS; APPROVING THE FORM
AND-AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION
WITH THE OFFERING AND SALE OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION RELATING THERETO;
AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO. (1993
Anaheim Arena Financing Project - approximately $125 million.)
Phil Knypstra, 2520 Gelid, Anaheim. He notes they are proposing to refinance
the $103 million debt. It is more than a refinancing, it is increasing
indebtedness by over $20 million and that was not the original deal which he
read from the first to the last page. He then briefed his concern and
concluded by asking a number of questions relating to the proposed
refinancing.
Mayor Daly. Mr. Knypstra needs the opportunity to get fully disclosed answers
to some of the questions raised. He w0ul~ like ~he City Manager to answer
some of the questions and because they cannot be answered in two words, it may
mean an opportunity for Mr. Knypstra to sit down with the City professional
staff members.
Mr. Knypstra. What he mainly wants to know is if this is a different deal
than the original deal on the Arena.
City Manager James Ruth. The City's agreements with Ogden did not include the
conditions that they would have if they had a hockey team or NBA franchise.
Those were negotiated after the Arena deal was done with Ogden. When Ogden
did negotiate a successful agreement to bring an NHL franchise to the City, it
was going to require additional financing by them of $12.5 million which they
8O8
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe£m~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOV~_~_ER 9~ 1993 - 5:00 P.H.
were going to have to pay the Los Angeles Kings and there were also tenant
improvements necessary to accommodate a hockey franchise - around $17 or $18
million. They came back to the City and wanted to add that to the debt
service of the Arena. They did so with the stipulation that they would give
the City a full Letter of Credit so the City would not be exposed for that
cost. Even though they obtained additional debt, they got a better financing
mechanism going through the City as a non-profit and were able to get better
financing. That debt is fully insured. The City has no exposure and no
liability for that additional fund. The City was able to get a much better
interest rate driving the debt service payments for the overall Arena down
which will facilitate the opportunity for the City to accrue some profit much
quicker than they would have otherwise. One of the real benefits of bringing
an NHL franchise to the City, with the original agreement there was eight
years where the City would have been obligated to contribute $2.5 million a
year for eight years in the event that there was no franchise. When Ogden was
successful in negotiating with Disney, that obligation went from $2.5 million
to $1.5 million a year and they were able to successfully negotiate as one of
the conditions of cooperating with Ogden to do the additional financing for
the franchise fee and tenant improvements. The City was able to negotiate
away the first three years of that $1.5 million agreement. Basically the City
saved $4.5 million. For the first three years, the City has absolutely no
financial obligation whatsoever for the Arena. Two or three weeks ago, the
City went out and refinanced the Certificates of Participation (COP) for the
land acquisition and were able to save $2.8 million in that refinancing. The
City Council has agreed to, in effect, escrow that money and use it for the
fourth and fifth year of that $1.5 million obligation. Right now, if the City
never gets an NBA franchise, the City will only be obligated for three years
or a maximum total of $4.5 million that they would have to contribute toward
the Arena in the event they do not get another franchise. It is a $120
million project free and clear to the City at the end of the 30 year
management agreement. By refinancing, there is no additional exposure to the
City, it has given the City an opportunity to get a franchise, to eliminate
the $1.5 million for five years and everybody appears to be a winner. The
refinancing is going to make the project a lot more financially solid and the
return to the City in terms of a profit will come much sooner as the result of
that refinancing.
Council Member Simpson. In layman's terms, the City's exposure went from $2.5
million for eight years to $4.5 million exposure total which will only take
place in years 6, 7 and 8. This assumes that there will be no NBA team and
that other events are not successful enough to offset the indebtedness. He
asked, if Mr. Knypstra gets that understanding and is satisfied, if he would
come back and tell the Council that as well.
Mayor Daly. He feels it would be helpful to the Council Members, the public
and the media, since the question comes up over and over, for the City Manager
to summarize all the things he said - how the deal changed, what the asset is
worth, what the City's budget position is starting this year, the City's
maximum legal obligation, the worst case, all of the financial projections on
this project. It should be summarized in a two or three page document with a
phone number for a contact person.
City Manager Ruth. The Public Information Office has been working on a
release of this nature subject to Council approval of the documents tonight.
A15. 174: Approving the revised Citizen Participation Plan for the Community
Development Block Grant program.
8O9
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Al6. 123.' Authorizing the City Manager to sign a Donated Space Agreement
with the County of Orange Health Care Agency to utilize Brookhurst Community
Center for purposes of providing preventive health services such as screening,
referrals and education to senior citizens, 55 years and older.
City Manager Ruth answering Council Member Feldhaus stated that the request is
for two times per month. If they require additional dates and they are
available, staff will come back to the Council and request authorization.
Al7. 129: Appropriating $19,238 from the General City Capital Outlay Fund
for security fencing and an automatic gate at Fire Headquarters.
A18. 140: Approving the closure of Anaheim Public Libraries this year on
December 24, 1993, and on December 31, 1993.
Al9. 123= Approving a lease agreement with the Consumer Credit Counseling
Service of Orange County to use 300 square feet of office space in City Hall
West to counsel residents experiencing financial difficulties.
A20. 175: Receive and file notice of Southern California Edison change of
rates for scheduling and dispatching services under the provisions of Edison's
Transmission Service Agreements with certain entities, including Anaheim.
(on file)
A21. 123: Approving an Owner Participation Agreement between the Anaheim
Redevelopment Agency, the City of Anaheim and Universal-Alloy Corporation, in
connection with a business retention and expansion project for Universal
Alloy's facility at 2971 La Palms Avenue. (Continued from the meetings of
10/26/93 Item Al7, and 11/2/93, Item A6.)
A22. 184.- Reviewing the need for continuing the Proclamation of the
Existence of a Local Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on
September 7, 1993, and ratified by the City Council on September 14, 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 No. 93R-218 for adoption~
AYES =
NOES =
ABSENT
COUNCIL MEMBERS= Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS = None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-218 duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSEN~ CALENDAIt. MO~ZONG CARRIED.
A23. 121: HEARING - CONDEMNATION OF REAL PROPERTY - SINCLAIR STREET -
ABANDONED WATER WELL SITE:
Submitted was report dated November 9, 1993 from the Community Development
Department recommending the condemnation of real property located east of
Sinclair Street on the southside of Cerritos Street, an abandoned water well
site.
. Rob ZurSchmiede, Property Service Manager. After briefing the staff report,
he stated if there are any property owners present who would like to speak,
they are restricted in what they can comment on. The City's special counsel
is present as well.
810
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Daly opened the hearing and, upon advice by the City Attorney, asked if
anyone was present to testify on the matter, either the property owners or a
representative; there was no response.
Mayor Daly closed the hearing.
Council Member Daly offered Resolution No. 93R-219 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-219: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY TO CONDEMN
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION WITH RESPECT
TO THE WIDENING OF CERRITOS AVENUE. (Condemnation of real property located
east of Sinclair Street, on the south side of Cerritos Street - Abandoned
water well site.)
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-219 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-219 duly passed and adopted.
ITEMS B1 - B6 FROM THE PLANNING COMMXSSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 1993
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS NOVEMBER 9 · 1993~
B1. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3639 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Aetna Life Insurance Co., c/o Lincoln Property Co.,
30 Executive Park, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92714
AGENT: Dennis Ingram, 1919 South Vermont Avenue, Suite 600,
Torrance, CA 90502
LOCATION: 385 North Muller Street. Property is approximately 1.66
acres located on the west side of Muller' Street and approximately
1,310 feet north of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue.
To permit a 13,400 square foot church with waiver of minimum number
of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3639 GRANTED, for five years, to expire on 10/18/98 (PC93-
113) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Waiver o£ code requirement' APPROVED.
Approved
B2. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 93-94-03, AMENDMENT TO SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD
ACCESS POINT STUDY· EXHIBIT NO. 7 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNERS: City of Anaheim, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805
C. Robert Longslet & Sons, Inc., P.O. Box 14478, Long Beach, CA
90803
LOCATION: A portion of the S.A.V.I. Canal. Request to amend Exhibit
No. 7 of the Santa Aaa Canyon access point study to provide access to
property located at 6270 East Santa Ana Canyon Road.
To reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (SC) zone to the
CL (SC) zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
811
City Hallr Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - S:00 P.M.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 93-94-03 GRANTED (PC93-114) (6 yes votes,
1 absent).
Amendment to Santa Aha Canyon Road Point Study, Exhibit No. 7,
GRANTED, (PC93-115). NOTE: Council review required for Amendment to
Santa Aha Canyon Road Access Point Study (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Since a public hearing before the Council is required, this hearing will be
scheduled at a later date.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS:
B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3573 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL
OF A SIGN PROGRAM FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CAR WASH:
REQUESTED BY: Elvin L. Whipple
LOCATION: 201E. Ball Road.
Petitioner requests review and approval of a sign program for a
previously approved car wash.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved sign program for car wash (CUP NO. 3573) (6 yes votes, 1
absent).
B4. 179: PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO NOTICE AND HEARING DATES,
CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061:
REQUESTED BY: Planning Department Staff
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended adoption of draft ordinance to City Council (6 yes votes,
1 absent).
B5. 179: REVISED SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION AND PETITION FORMS FOR
RECLASSIFICATIONt CONDITIONAL USE PERMITSt VARIANCES AND TENTATIVE
TRACT/PARCEL MAPS, CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061:
REQUESTED BY: Planning Department Staff
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved the revised supplement to petition and petition forms as
requested (6 yes votes, I absent).
B6. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 599 - REOUEST FOR TERMINATION:
REQUESTED BY: Randal L. Whipple and Elvin L. Whipple
LOCATION: 201 E. Ball Road.
Petitioners request termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 599 (to
establish a hofbrau with on-sale beer).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 599 TERMINATED (PC93-116) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
END OF THE PLAN~ING COMMISSION ITEMS.
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. 155: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 312,
RECLASSIFICATION NOt 92-93-09, WAIVER OF CODE. REOUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 3608:
812
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINIFTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5~00 P.M.
OWNER: Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking, a California Corporation, 1301
E. Orangewood Avenue, $130, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: Philip R. Schwartze, 27132 Paseo Espada, #1222, San Juan
Capistrano, CA 92675
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1235 South Beach
Boulevard and is approximately 4.5 acres located on the west side of
Beach Boulevard and approximately 330 feet south of the centerline of
Ball Road. The request is to permit an automobile fluid drainage
area and used automobile sales area in conjunction with an automobile
dismantling and recycling facility on the adjacent parcel to the
south (in the City of Stanton) with waiver of maximum fence height.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 92-93-09 WITHDRAWN (7 yes votes).
CUP NO. 3608 DENIED (PC93-104) (5 yes votes, and 2 no votes).
Denied waiver of code requirement (5 yes votes, and 2 no votes).
EIR NO. 312 Certified and required findings of fact were made.
Planning Commission did not adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, or the Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 69 (5 yes
votes, and 2 no votes).
HEARING SET ON: An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was submitted
by the owner, Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking and continued from the meeting of
October 26, 1993 to this date. The public hearing portion of the meeting was
closed at that time - see minutes that date.
At the meeting of October 26, 1993, the Council certified EIR No. 312 as being
in compliance adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a
Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The public hearing portion was then closed and
the matter continued to November 9, 1993 giving an opportunity for staff to
prepare a proposed resolution incorporating revisions to conditions of
approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE REOUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - October 14, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 13, 1993
Posting of property - October 15, 1993
City Attorney White. The public participation portion has been closed. The
Council previously certified the EIR (see minutes October 26, 1993) and
·
adopted the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project. Staff was
then instructed to prepare a proposed resolution for Council consideration.
The document presented this evening with today's date is the latest version
that contains the staff recommendations. That resolution has been referred to
and commented upon by the applicant's legal counsel. He believes that the
information in the resolution has been agreed to by the applicant at this
point. He will be happy to answer any questions. Otherwise, the Council
should ask whether the applicant has any comments or questions.
Mayor Daly. He asked if Planning staff is satisfied that all possible
appropriate conditions on the project have been included in the proposed
resolution.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. Of note, one of the conditions not included in
the package but discussed at the last meeting was a $5 per vehicle recycling
fee as in the Stanton agreement. The City Attorney's Office in consultation
with the applicant's attorney determined attaching such a fee to this
resolution was not appropriate. It is not contained within the resolution.
813
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NO--ER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
There are also only one or two very minor clarifications; upon explaining what
they were, the City Attorney clarified for Mr. Fick that those two minor
issues had already been handled.
Mayor Daly. Relative to the possibility of a per car charge to be assessed at
this facility, he would like to know the applicant's reaction. He is going to
suggest that the City adopt a fee or a tax of $20 per car for facilities such
as this one to apply citywide. He is also going to suggest a working number
but until the Council formally acts, they will not know what that is. He will
propose, in concept, the charge of $15 per car plus an annual cost of living
adjustment. It is not on the agenda tonight and the Council could not act
until a future date.
Philip Schwartze, agent for the applicant. He cannot speak directly to the
issue since it is not an item he has had an opportunity to discuss with the
applicant. His guess is that a fee of that kind would not allow the business
to stay in operation. There is not another facility similar to theirs in
nature within the City.
Mayor Daly. He suggested that perhaps the City Attorney could frame a
proposed condition or if it would be a verbal commitment by the applicant that
City government is considering a per car charge to apply to all such
facilities in the City. Whether it is $10 or $15 a car would be up to future
Council action.
City Attorney White. He would suggest prior to approval of the permit, for
the applicant to indicate whether or not they would be willing to' stipulate
not to oppose the concept of adopting such a city-wide tax on automobile
recycling facilities, a per vehicle tax. The amount of the tax could be
subject to further discussion and objection depending on the amount. He feels
it would be appropriate to ask if the applicant would oppose such concept.
Burt Pines, Attorney for Pick Your Part Auto Wrecking. He has listened to the
staff comments and reviewed the resolution before the Council. They
appreciate the opportunity staff has given them to review and comment and also
appreciate staff responding and making adjustments where they thought their
comments were worthwhile. His client is agreeable to the conditions now in
the resolution. Relative to the general issue raised, he hopes that it is not
going to delay any further approval of the project. It has been years in the
works and the process has strained the budget of the business. Relative to
the tax, staff briefly considered the possibility of a recycling fee of $5 a
car and that was not going to be feasible for the business even now. They
will be processing about 12,000 to 15,000 cars a year - times $20 is
approximately $300,000. He urged the Council to again support the program as
they did at the last hearing. It does provide for a need in the community and
will revive the site itself. Both Stanton and Pick Your Part agreed that the
sales tax revenue would be split 50-50 even though Stanton would be entitled
to that. He urged the Council to not at this late stage propose something
else in the way of taxes. They did not believe the recycling fee was valid
because it did not meet the legal requirements of a fee in terms of both the
Constitution and the Government Code. He believes his client would have
problems with any further financial burdens on the project. They have other
things to deal with such as the City transportation impact fee which they did
not know about. There has to be a limit to how much a business or a project
can sustain. Without their client present, they cannot agree to any type of
tax. If it is something they consider for everyone, they will have to deal
with it during that period of consideration. He urged that they not delay the
project any further.
814
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
A brief discussion then followed upon questions posed to staff by the Mayor
regarding the transportation fees and how those funds would be spent.
City Attorney White. There is a mechanism built into the recently adopted
ordinance that would allow the applicant to obtain a hearing in the event they
object to the amount of the fee. It would then come back for a later
determination as to whether or not there was justification for waiving a
portion or all of the fee based upon the circumstances in the ordinance at
that time. Before the Council tonight is not a determination of either the
amount or whether or not there will be a fee but the Transportation Management
ordinance itself creates the mechanism under which that will be determined.
Council Member Pickler. He believes they should approve the resolution as is.
As far as the tax, it is something the Council has directed staff to report
on. Then will be the appropriate time to talk to the applicant. He feels the
resolution before them tonight should stand on its own and they can get into
the subject of the tax later on.
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 93R-220 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 3608. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-220: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3608.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-220 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT .-
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-220 duly passed and adopted.
000: COUNCIL TO CONSIDER CITY-WIDE FEE PROGRAM FOR AUTO DISMANTLING
FACILITIES:
Mayor Daly. He is asking staff and the Council to consider the preparation of
a citywide fee program for auto dismantling facilities. He asked if there are
any Council Members who disagree that staff should prepare a recommendation
for a citywide fee program for these types of facilities.
City Attorney White. It should be structured as a tax to avoid the inherent
problems of a fee. They will draft an ordinance and follow the procedure on
noticing and will provide copies of the proposed ordinance to the applicant as
well as other recycling operators. AIM and Pick Your Part are the only ones
he knows of.
Council Member Hunter left the Council Chamber. (6:50 p.m. )
D2. 170: PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 91-164, CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT, CLASS
OWNER: R.H. Siegle, 919 East South Street, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: DMC Engineering, 4840 Irvine Boulevard, Ste. 208, Irvine, CA
92720
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 919 East South Street
and is approximately 3.6 acres located at the northwest corner of
South Street and Rose Street. The request is for approval of a
two-lot subdivision.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 91-164 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA93-54).
815
City Hall t Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested
by Council Members Pickler and Daly at the meeting of October 12, 1993 and
public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - October 28, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 28, 1993
Posting of property- November 1, 1993
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Zoning Administrator dated September 16, 1993, also
see Zoning Administrator Decision No. ZA93-54 which contained the conditions
of approval.
Mayor Daly. He asked staff to summarize the request and the recommended
conditions.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, briefed the request working from an
aerial map posted on the Chamber wall as well as the conditions imposed under
Decision No. ZA93-54 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 91-164. In connection
with the zoning decision, she approved the project and all conditions were
retained. She verified with the City Attorney's Office that if variances were
obtained that the Parcel Map Decision would not be impacted. In other words,
there would not have to be another public hearing on the Parcel Map.
Mr. Siegle will have to address his specific concerns. It is her
understanding that there should be a variance processed by Mr. Siegle. She
does not believe the Council today can grant any waivers from the code since
nothing has been advertised.
Mayor Daly. He asked if the applicant or Council Members disagree with any of
the thirteen conditions and are those considered variances.
City Attorney White. The conditions that are at issue are Conditions 1
through 4 which relate to dedication and improvement of the street
right-of-way and also Condition 8 which relates to the improvement of the
driveway. Ail of those conditions are code requirements in the Zoning Code.
Even if the City Council deleted all the conditions, when the applicant
applies for a Building Permit, he would find out that he would be required by
code to comply with all of the requirements the Council deleted. The ability
the applicant has is to file for a variance from the Zoning Code requirements
which is a separate process. Then, based upon evidence presented, the
Planning Commission or City Council would have the authority to modify those
requirements. Staff does not believe there is justification for the variance
from the dedication requirement but the applicant has the right to apply. The
only thing he could suggest, Conditions 1 through 4 and 8 could be modified in
a way to indicate these are the requirements of the Parcel Map unless a
variance is obtained. It would seem that would be the most the Council could
do tonight. Even if they did everything the applicant asked, thege are gtill
the requirements of the code for which a variance would have to be processed.
Council Member Pickler then posed a line of questions to the City Attorney in
order to determine what the Council could do to assist Mr. Siegle in doing
what he wants to do. During the course of discussion, the City Attorney
reiterated the Council has the ability to give Mr. Siegle a variance at a
later date if he meets the criteria in the code to approve the variance. The
variance would then run with the land.
816
City Ha11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NO _VEM~_ ER 9~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Staff input was also given by Natalie Meeks, Principal Civil Engineer and Gary
Johnson, Public Works Director/City Engineer relative to the questions posed
by Council Member Pickler.
The City Attorney then clarified that the bottom line from staff's position is
that the proper procedure is not being followed. Ail of this can be
considered. It may get approved or not, but the place it should get
considered is through the appropriate procedure that is laid out in the code
which is to file for a variance and go through the Planning Commission and
have them determine if the facts warrant granting the variance or not.
Subsequently, if the applicant wants to appeal, that can come back to the
Council. The code requires dedication of the property in conjunction with the
subdivision. Mr. Siegle has to dedicate the property if he is subdividing,
which he is doing.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing and asked to hear from the applicant.
Ray Siegle, 832 N. West Street, Anaheim. He is the owner of the property at
919 E. South Street. Nobody ever mentioned a variance to him. From what he
has read in the subdivision code, this could be approved by the City Engineer.
In 1984, he was required to build an 8 foot concrete block wall 800 feet long
along Rose alley and a 200 foot, 8 foot block wall on abandoned Water Street.
Now the City is requiring him to dedicate additional property which is valued
at about $220,000. In the following paragraph after the irrevocable
dedication that the City is not going to take, it clearly states that within
6 months he will complete all of the improvements and they are putting a note
on the Parcel Map that these improvements will be done before the map is
filed. He questioned, who will buy the property with that kind of
encumberance.
Mayor Daly suggested that they take each of the 13 conditions in the Zoning
Administrator decision and have Mr. Siegle indicate the ones that are of
concern to him.
Mr. Siegle answered generally he has a concern with anything that pertains to
the easements and dedications. (See pages 2 and 3 of ZA Decision 93-54
listing the 13 conditions imposed as part of the approval of the Tentative
Parcel Map. )
No. I (a) - his understanding is that an 8~ foot easement is already there.
That would incur another 1~ feet. They could concede that and make that
dedication.
(b) Ok
(c) He does not understand what the corner cutoff is and sees no need
for this until it is more thoroughly explained.
No. 2 - It was clearly spelled out in 1981 the City would waive curbs and
sidewalks and they were not required to be installed until the property is
developed. Extensive discussion then followed on this item including input by
the Public Works staff indicating that improvements on South Street are being
done prior to final map approval, and the pedestrian access and drainage
improvements they feel are appropriate at this time.
No. 3 - It is an irrevocable offer that the City will not act on, but it
spells out that he is locked into this condition.
817
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5.'00 P.M.
Natalie Meeks. The condition is an improvement certification based on the map
to identify to future property owners that improvements are required prior to
further development of the property. In Condition No. 4, it clearly states
that the requirement shall be required prior to further development of the
property.
Mr. Siegle. Neither of those are acceptable to him, it would place him in an
untenable position to market his property. He questioned why the restrictions
are being placed on a piece of property before hand that will put him out of
the market to dispose of the property. If there are requirements, they should
be addressed when someone comes in to purchase the property. He further
explained for the Mayor that he was not apprised of any of these dedications
until the date of the Zoning Administrator meeting on September 2, 1993. At
the hearing, the Zoning Administrator stated that the City Council would be
incapable of doing anything to change this without going back to the Planning
Commission. He also clarified that staff did not explain what the procedure
for a variance is. He does not want to know and he refuses to even apply.
This is a piece of property that belongs to him. He feels it is nothing short
of blackmail. If he did not decide to cut his property in half, none of this
would have happened. Now that he wants to divide it, since the person who is
leasing the property wants to own it, the City is trying to take a large
portion away and he feels there is no justification. There is nothing on the
map that requires it. He is possibly interpreting it the way he would like,
but in his reading of the code, this could have gone through without these
requirements at this point.
No. 5 - That has been addressed and signed off.
No. 6 - Ok
No. 7 - Ok
No. 8 - They are in the process of resurfacing the front lot right now. It is
ok with reservations. They demonstrated on the tentative parcel map that
there is adequate parking for the amount of buildings on Plot i and the area
on Plot 2. They have variances in place for parking on two conditional use
permits that are on the property. He does not see any reason at this time to
restripe the whole place for some future use. It is just going to be an
exercise in futility. If it was a deciding factor, he would say fine and go
ahead and restripe but still use the property as before.
No. 9 - Ok
No. 10 - Ok
No. 11 - Ok
No. 12 - They are in the process of addressing that now. It is not ok.
No. 13 - No comments made.
Mr. Siegle. He is in a situation where they have to get this done or else he
is going to lose the tenant he has on the property. The tenant has indicated
if it is not complete by the end of December, his lease is up in a year and he
is gone.
Mayor Daly. Having heard what the Attorney said, he asked Mr. $iegle what is
his request.
818
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Mr. Siegle. He would like the City Attorney to explain to him what it says in
the engineering code on the dedication. At best it is ambiguous.
Mayor Daly. He would propose an interim step and have Mr. Siegle and his
engineering firm meet with the City Attorney. The Council is in a difficult
circumstance. The City Attorney is saying that the Council does not have the
administrative authority to delete or adjust the conditions and the only way
is through a waiver process. He is going to propose a one-week continuance
and have the City Attorney put some of those thoughts in writing for the
Council and in the meantime have the applicant meet with the City Attorney.
He does not see a solution this evening.
The City Attorney then confirmed for Mr. $iegle that he will unequivocally say
to him that the code requires compliance with Nos. 1 through 4. The only way
to deviate is through a variance or waiver process built into the code that he
(Siegle) has a right to apply for.
He would have to go to the Planning Commission and state reasons why he
believes he does not have to comply.
If approved, he would then get relief.
The City Attorney and Zoning Administrator then answered additional Council
questions revolving around the time frame involved if a variance is filed.
Mrs. Santalahti explained if a variance was filed immediately, it would take
about 6 weeks to get to the Planning Commission.
City Attorney White, answering Council Member Pickler, explained that the
Council could do anything it wants with regard to Conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4 but
it would not change the fact that those conditions are requirements of the
Municipal Code and staff does not have the ability to process the Parcel Map
without a waiver or variance being approved. What he would suggest, if the
Council wanted to act tonight or whenever that they could add a condition as
follows:
"That the Anaheim Municipal Code requirements set forth in Conditions 1,
2, 3, 4 and 8 above shall be modified to the extent a variance is
approved from such requirements pursuant to applicable provisions of the
Anaheim Municipal Code." If that was added and Mr. Siegle obtained his
variance, he could do what he wants. Mr. Siegle was informed 30 days
ago that the 6 weeks procedure was available at the time of the Zoning
Administrator's decision but he has chosen not to do so and said he was
not interested in applying.
Mr. Siegle. He would request a one-week continuance of the public hearing.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue the public hearing on Tentative
Parcel Map No. 91-164 for one week. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the
motion.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Pickler asked that staff look at the
matter very closely to see if there is a way to resolve the situation during
the one-week continuance.
Mayor Daly. He would encourage the applicant to meet with staff and bring to
bare as much expert information as is available.
Council Member Simpson. He asked the City Attorney if the Council added the
condition suggested by him, will it speed the process if a variance procedure
819
City Ha11~ Anahei~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
is followed; City Attorney White. It will not speed it up because it would
still require ~Mr. Siegle to go through the variance process which is 6 weeks.
The sooner he files for a variance, the sooner it can get processed and an
answer given. The answer this week and when he comes back next week is not
going to be different than it is tonight. It will just be a week further down
the line. If he were to counsel Mr. Siegle, it would be to try to file the
variance application as soon as possible.
Council Member Pickler asked if they wanted to change the Anaheim Municipal
Code, how long would that take; City Attorney White. It would be 38 days
minimum or approximately 6 weeks as well.
Council Member Pickler. Once they make a decision on this, he is going to ask
the Council to ask staff to review this aspect of the code to see if they want
to keep it the way it is. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion to
continue this item for one week. Council Member Hunter was absent. MOTION
CARRIED.
Cl. COUNCIL COMMENTS.-
114: FIRE IN ANAHEIM HILLS:
Mayor Daly commended the diligent work done by City staff in apprehending the
person involved in starting the recent fire in Anaheim Hills.
ADJOURNMENT: By general consent the Council adjourned. (7:38 p.m. )
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
820