Loading...
1992/01/07City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARy. 7., 1992, 5:00 P.M. .. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Daly, Pick~er and Hunter ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY S.~R~VICES: Chris Jarvi CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John POLYGRAPH EXAMINER: Detective James Gandy ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti FINANCE DIRECTOR: George Ferrone A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 12:30 p.m. on January 3, 1992 at the Civic C~nter kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Hunter 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. b. To meet with and give directions to the City's Real Property Negotiator concerning possible disposition of property located at 640 W. Katella Avenue to E.T.C. Anaheim. c. To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative regarding labor relations matters - Government 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. ) City Ha.l!, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 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. (5:11 p.m. ) INVOCATION: A moment of silence was observed in lieu of the invocation. FLAG SALUTE.'. Council Member Irv Pickler led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PRESENTATION AND INTRODUCTION - DELEGATION FROM NEUSS GERMANY.- Shirley Mendez, Chairman, Sister City Committee introduced the delegation from Neuss, Germany to the Mayor, Council Members and Chamber audience. The delegation was dressed in the traditional Rhine River Mardi Gras costumes as explained by a representative assisting the Sister City Committee. Mr. Joachim Lichius, the Neuss Delegation leader, then read a letter of appreciation from the City of Neuss to the City of Anaheim for officially greeting the 'delegation at a City Council meeting. The Mayor was also presented with a pewter plate from Neuss representing greetings from the City and all of its citizens. Mayor Hunter and Council Members personally greeted the delegation and welcomed them to Anaheim. It was an honor to have them present at the Council meeting. 119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Don Willet, Vice President, Orange County Fair Board who accepted on behalf of the Board. Mayor Hunter and Council Members congratulated Mr. Willet and the Board during the Centennial Celebration Year of the Orange County Fair and for having brought 100 years of exhibitions and entertainment to the County and surrounding communities. Mr. Willet accepted on behalf of the Board and encouraged everyone to attend the fair now in its 100th year, July 10-26, 1992 at the fairgrounds in Costa Mesa. 119': DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION: A Declaration of Recognition and Appreciation was unanimously adopted by the City Council to be presented to Donald Penfield, Senior Arson/Fire Investigator in the Fire Department upon his retirement from the City after over 26 years of service. Mayor Hunter and Council Members extended their congratulations and appreciation to Mr. Penfield for his many years of dedicated service to the City and citizens of Anaheim. MINUTES: Council Member Hunter moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held December 3 and December 10, 1991. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,352,577.85 for the period ending December 20, 1991; $3,174,502.44 for the period ending December 27, 1991 and $1,740,898.75 for the period ending January 3, 1992, in accordance with the 1991-92 Budget, were approved. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. Mayor Hunter recessed the City Council meeting until after the RedeVelopment Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5:22 p.m. ) Mayor Hunter reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:31 p.m. ) PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Mr. Bob Torres spoke to Agenda Item A3 and Mr. Stoio, Suggett and Currie spoke to Agenda Item A20. (See input and discussion which is included under these items on the Consent Calendar. ) ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: No items of public interest were addressed. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Hunter, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 92R-1 and 92R-2, both inclusive, for adoption and offered Ordinance Nos. 5281 and 5282 for first reading. Council Member Simpson was absent. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES: The titles of the following resolutions and ordinances were read by the City Manager. (Resolution Nos. 92R-1 and 92R-2 for adoption and Ordinance Nos. 5281 and 5282 for first reading. ) Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions and ordinances. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 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 Josefina A. Ramos for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 21, 1991. b. Claim submitted by Contemporary Services Corporation for indemnity sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 17, 1990. c. Claim submitted by Emmanuel S. Guevara for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 4, 1991. d. Claim submitted by Karl T. Oberlin for Wesley Oberlin for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 25, 1991. __ e. Claim submitted by Guillermo Perez for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 29, 1991. f. Claim submitted by Theodore and Margaret Peterson for indemnity sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 30, 1990. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. g. Olaim submitted by Tania Hadeel Saba for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 8, 1991. h. Claim submitted by Phyllis Talmage for indemnity sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 12, 1991. i. Claim submitted by Joan Ward and 20th Century Insurance for bodily injury and property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 26, 1991. j. Claim submitted by Wilshire Westmont H.O.A. for property damage sustained Purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 18, 1991. A2. 156: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Police Department Crime and Clearance Analysis for the month of November, 1991. 107: Receiving and filing the Statistical Report summary ending November 30, 1991, as submitted by the Building division. 140: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board meeting held November 30, 1991. 105: Receiv. ing and filing minutes of the joint Community Redevelopment and Planning Commission meeting held December 4, 1991. A3. 151: Considering the request of Taiyo Development California, Inc., for an Encroachment License for six directional signs to be placed within the right-of-way of: Santa Ana Canyon and Anaheim Hills Road, Nohl Ranch Road and Canyon Rim, Canyon Rim and Via Arboles, Canyon Rim and Fairmont Boulevard, Canyon Rim and Serrano, and Santa Ana Canyon Road and Fairmont Boulevard. (Continued from the meeting of December 17, 1991, Item A4.) Submitted was report dated December 6, 1991, from the Director of Public Works and City Engineer recommending denial of the request. Mr. Bob Torres, Taiyo Development California, Inc., 3625 Del Amo Blvd., Suite 160, Torrance 90503. Their project is located off Via Arboles and Canyon Rim Road, the Royal Ridge Development consisting of 49 lots. Since the project was completed 1 1/2 years ago, they have been struggling to sell some of the homes. They have done a study regarding signs that would direct home buyers to their area. Even with all of the advertising they have done in the media, it is difficult for people to find their development. They propose to install six directional signs which would meet all the requirements of the Building Industry Association (BIA). Their signs have been designed by Outdoor Dimensions who works with BIA. Taiyo has met the design criteria and submitted their plan to the City for approval. At the last Council meeting, he was made aware that staff recommended denial of the Encroachment License for the directional signs. Because of their hardship in selling the homes, their prices have been reduced considerably. He urged the Council to consider his request favorably and in so doing is open to conditions of approval being placed on the sign request. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - jANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. Council Member Ehrle then posed questions to Mr. Torres who clarified that there are seventeen lots left for sale including the lots with homes already built. He would like Council approval for signage for the homes and the lots not just the homes. Council Member Ehrle. He does not have a problem with the request. The Council has a responsibility to do whatever possible to help development and generate jobs in the community. If six signs will assist, he is in favor. He asked Mr. Torres the time frame involved. Mr. Torres answered one year. He would like to sell everything by June if possible; Council Member Ehrle. He does not have a problem approving the request for a period of twelve months. Council Member Daly. The City Attorney advised him he needs to abstain on this item because there is a conflict due to his employment with the BIA. Council Member Pickler indicated he was also abstaining on this item. City Attorney White noted that if the two members who did not abstain voted the same way, the motion would pass. It does not take three votes on a motion as it does with a resolution or an ordinance. Mayor Hunter. His vote will be in favor to allow the signage for a limited period of time not to exceed one year. At the conclusion of the Consent Calendar, this item was approved by the Council with Council Members Hunter and Ehrle voting for approval. Council Members Daly and Pickler abstained. Council Member Simpson was absent. A4. 158: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute three Easement Deeds to Heritage Place Homeowners Association for parkway landscape maintenance purposes. A5. 153: Approving an increase in the mileage reimbursement rate from 26.0 cents to 27.5 cents per mile to match the increase approved by the Internal Revenue Service for 1992. A6. 124: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-1: A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN LEASE FINANCING DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE REFINANCING OF ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER BETTERMENT III AND THE FINANCING OF ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER BETTERMENT IV; APPROVING THE FORM AND AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFERING AND SALE OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION RELATING THERETO; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF A CERTIFICATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO. Submitted was report dated December 24, 1991 from the Finance Director. George Ferrone, Finance Director. When the financing team caucused on December 23, 1991 to look at the condition of the market place, the savings appeared to be in the range of 3.25 million dollars. The market improved City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. dramatically over the past week and for the past two days he and the finance team have been working closely to negotiate additional cost savings. He then introduced Tony Fisher, Managing Director of Merrill Lynch, the City's underwriting firm, to give the current status. Tony Fisher, Merrill Lynch. The resolution before the Council if approved will enable their firmto go into the market tomorrow morning with the proposed bond sale. Based on interest rates as of this afternoon, they expect to generate present value reduction in the City's debt service obligations from the refinancing position of the transaction of over 4.4 million dollars which is around 700,000 dOllars higher than the target set back in November. Interest rates are currently at their lowest levels in the past twelve years in the municipal market place. This will enable them to use some of the financing vehicles to produce savings on the new money portion of the transaction in excess of $400,000 on a present value basis. A7. 123: Approving two agreements with Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (Santa Fe) to permit the construction, maintenance and operation (by Anaheim) of an electric supply line and a communication line over the track and premises of Santa Fe (at La Palma, east of Pauline Street - Agreement No. 1, and at Santa Ana and Atchison Streets · Agreement No. 2). A8. 123: Approving agreements with Resource Management International, Burns & McDonnell and Parsons Brinckerhoff, and authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute said agreements. A9. 175: ORDINANCE NO. 5281 - (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING CHAPTER 17.24 OF TITLE 17 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. , · Al0. 175: Approving the 1991/92 to 1995/96 Five Year Electric Underground Conversion Program. All. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with John Cappelletti Associates to continue consulting services, in connection with the Police Automated Systems Development, at a cost not to exceed $70,000. A12. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with PRC/Public Management Services, Inc., to continue consulting services, in connection with the Police Automated Systems Development, at a cost not to exceed $20,000. Al3. 123-. Approving an Agreement with Anaheim Interfaith Shelter, Inc., for 1991 Emergency Shelter Grant funds in the amount of $32,200 for a period of eighteen months from the date of execution. Al4. 123: Approving an Agreement with Hope House Corporation, in the amount of $8,125 for drug and alcohol rehabilitation services. Al5. 123: Approving a Fourteenth Agreement for Fair Housing Services with Orange County Fair Housing Council, in the amount of $57,576 and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. A16. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-2: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT SUBGRANT AGREEMENT (TITLE III EDWAA- 40% FUND) BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 1991 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1992. 106: Amending the Fiscal Year 1991-92 Resource Allocation Plan to increase revenue and expenditures in the amount of $30,000. Al7. 185: Determining that on the basis of the evidence submitted by Presley of Southern California (the property owner of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan development area SP87-1), that Presley of Southern California has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of Development Agreement No. 88-02 for the 1990-91 period under review. Al8. 114: Amending City Council Policy Number 111 relating to the election of the Mayor Pro Tempore. Al9. 12.3: Authorizing the execution of a contract with Anaheim Harbor Medical Clinic, to conduct annual firefighter medical examinations for a period of eighteen months, beginning January 1, 1992, for a total cost of $72,944 for 1992/93. A20. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5282 - (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.04.080 OF CHAPTER 18.04 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF TRAILS. Mr. Don Stolo, 7585 Martella Lane, Anaheim. Relative to this item, he is speaking on the areas in Anaheim Hills that are mostly developed. He is opposed to the equestrian/hiking trails for a number of reasons. The only plus that comes to mind is the obvious - the trails are an alternative place to take a walk or ride a horse. However, the system is seldom, if ever, used. The trails are deserted, unkempt and in need of repair. Along the trails there is graffiti, broken glass, weeds and fences are falling down. They are an eyesore and detract from the residences built in the area over the past ten years. The trails can be used by vandals to break into the backs of residences undetected, encourage graffiti and trash and expose the City to lawsuits and insurance claims for occurrences on or about the trail system. The City would have the perpetual cost of maintenance and rebuilding of the trails. He asked if the department has prepared budget costs for acquiring the right of way of property that has existing residential on it and if associated cost for insurance, maintenance, etc., to enhance the trail system could not be better spent on hard-core family help programs than spending it on a trail to ride horses that no one wants. Charles suggett, 7571Martella Lane, Anaheim. He submitted a petition signed by the residents on Martella Lane indicating that they are, "...opposed to the equestrian/hiking trails for reasons of liability, safety, maintenance and privacy." There are other better alternatives for which the money could be used, programs the City does not have the money to .maintain or provide. Trails are a big security problem for the backs of houses, insurance problems, and maintenance problems. He does not want the trails and he would like to see them abandoned and not expanded further. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. ' Frank Currie, 7580 E. Martella Lane, Anaheim. He represents himself and three sons who live beside him. There are no horses in their area and none in any of the homes. They do not want horses, there are no horses and if the trail goes through, it will bring horses down in front of his house. They live in a private community with sixteen houses and every house is adamantly opposed. Mayor Hunter asked to hear from staff. Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. About three different issues are involved. Tonight's agenda item is only to assure the City can acquire trails on single-family parcels when those parcels are up for development. The current ordinance allows the City to do so with subdivision of lots. There is also the current issue with Martella Lane which is separate and apart that they need to deal with those homeowners directly. The third issue is whether to continue developing trails out in the hills at all. He reiterated tonight the request is for first reading of the proposed ordinance that would allow acquisition of trails for single-family homes. Council 'Member Pickler. He gets the impression that the trails are not being used but instead create an oppOrtunity for vandalism and something that is a detriment to the City. Chris Jarvi. He feels what was represented by the homeowners is not exactly the case. Council Member Ehrle. The trails are used considerably in Anaheim Hills and the homeowners are talking about an isolated area. Chris Jarvi. The trails are maintained very inexpensively. The City has a contract with the County that costs practically nothing, using County probation crews. The trails are used by joggers, less and less by horses. It adds to the community and he feels the people appreciate those trails. There is a connection between the existing trails that needs to be made to maintain the backbone system. When he first came to the City, there was a combination of a backbone system and feeder trails. They realized in talking to the Planning commission and Parks, Recreation Commission they were not going to be able to ma£n~a£n all ~he ~ra£1s on the ~aster Plan and General Plan and needed to do something to deal with that issue. All the feeder trails were eliminated and as a result ended up with a series of trails that are backbone trails. If there is one broken part of the link, there will be no trail at all. Mr. Stolo was talking about one of the backbone trails that needs to be connected in order to maintain the system. Staff is willing to sit down with him to discuss the matter and to maintain the trails with the least amount of impact. The trails have been maintained by the City since they were originally developed. He clarified that the proposed ordinance involves all future development primarily vacant land. Mayor Hunter. Only those properties on the trail route would have to dedicate. He lives in Anaheim Hills and knows that the trails are used. The proposed ordinance is addressing single lots and not subdivision lots. It is an amendment to the existing ordinance that has been in effect for twenty years. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992t 5:00 P.M. Council Member Pickler. He gathers that staff is going to look at whether or not the City is going to continue the practice; Mayor Hunter. The ordinance is for first reading tonight and not adoption. They understand the concern of the residents on Martella Lane but to say there are not many horses up in that area he does not know if that is correct. Don Stolo. The complexion of the area has changed tremendously. It used to be predominently a horse area, but it has evolved because of the value of the land to quite the opposite. There is a 1/2 acre requirement with set backs and easements and by the time the average size home is built on the property, there is no room for horses. He understood the proposal was about vacant land they are going to put a trail across, but his concern is that it will just force the issue in their area. The way the trail is structured in their area, if it comes through his property, it comes out on the street and at that point, they have been told that the City may choose to condemn the front of three or four of his neighbors homes to put in a trail. They do not want that process to start. Mayor Hunter. He does not believe the Council is talking about doing anything with property already developed, but only undeveloped parcels; Mr. Stolo stated that he understands but they see it as a step towards future taking in order to connect the trails. , Mayor Hunter stated he does not see the City using the power of eminent domain on private houses. City Attorney White. He confirmed the only thing the Council is making a decision on relates to adoption of an ordinance that would require, as a condition of obtaining a building permit, dedication of a horse trail just as now the City requires dedication of other types of right-of-way as long as it is called out on the City's General Plan. In the ordinance there is also a mechanism that allows property owners to seek a variance from that provision if they can indicate one of several factors existing as to their particular property. It is quite possible if the ordinance is adopted there will be properties for which the City does not acquire trail right-of-way where it is shown on the General Plan either because the property is already developed and will not be required to dedicate or because the property owner is not required to dedicate because he obtains the variance spelled out in the ordinance. At the conclusion of the Consent Calendar Ordinance No. 5282 was given first reading as offered by Council Member Pickler. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 92R-1 and 92R-2 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 92R-1 and 92R-2 duly passed and adopted. End of Consent Calendar. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTIONS CARRIED. City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992,. 5:00 P M. 173: ANAHEIM'S PARTICIPATION IN THE ORANGE COUNTY CITIES AIRPORT AUTHORITY (OCCAA): Council Member Ehrle referred to a letter received from Mr. Bill Mecham, Coalition for a Responsible Airport Solution requesting that the Council set for a public hearing the issue of whether or not Anaheim should remove itself from the Orange County Cities Airport Authority. (See minutes of October 22, 1991 where the issue was previously discussed.) He would like the Council to go along with his request to set the matter for discussion in a couple of weeks and allow anybody an opportunity to address the Council on the issue. He knows that Council Member Pickler may have certain feelings about the matter as well. Council Member Simpson has also conveyed some thoughts to him. He feels the best way would be to allow some discussion on the matter. Council Member Pickler. He has no problem with agendizing the discussion but would like to hold off doing so until there is a full Couhcil and at that time discussion be amongst Council members only. He does not think a public hearing is in order at this time. He received the letter just today and has not had an opportunity to analyze the situation. He would like more information before setting any hearing. City Attorney White stated that the Council can act tonight to agendize the matter for discussion at a later date; Council Member Pickler reiterated that the discussion at that time be only amongst the five Council members. Mayor Hunter. He clarified that the matter would be agendized for discussion purposes only but not a public hearing. A21. 101: HEARING - DRAFT EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY, PROPOSED KATELLA/DOUGLASS PUBLIC PARKING FACILITY: Submitted was report dated January 7, 1992 from the Director of Public Works and City Engineer, Gary Johnson recommending that the Council open the subject hearing, receive any public comments and close the hearing on the draft Expanded Initial Study for the proposed Katella/Douglass Public Parking Facility. Approval will result in 326 City own public parking spaces adjacent to the Anaheim Arena. City Attorney White. The purpose of the hearing is to receive public comments including those of the ~ro~ert~ owner that relates to the ~ro~osed ~arkin~ area. Those comments will then be incorporated into the final Expanded Initial Study. It would be staff's recommendation after hearing public comments that the item then be continued five weeks for the purpose of incorporating any comments received tonight and returned to the Council with the final documentation relating to the Environmental Quality Act Issues. Mayor Hunter opened the hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished to give input on the subject. Those comments will then be incorporated in the documentation and the matter continued for five weeks. Mr. Bruce B. Ostrusum, Law Offices of Lanak and Hana representing Mr. & Mrs. Robert Rindt, Sr., Truck and Auto Supply Incorporated property owners at 1650 S. Douglass Road. They have one concern and that is the Expanded Initial Study does not consider any alternative to the use of the property as surface parking as did some of the alternatives considered in the EIR for the arena. He believes it would be appropriate to do that. 10 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES ' JANUARY 7, 1992, 5.'00 P.M. There being no further persons who wished to give input, Mayor Hunter moved to continue the subject item for five weeks to February 11, 1992, Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney White. The comments of Mr. Ostrusum will be referred to appropriate staff members or consultants for consideration in conjunction with the documentation that will be returned to the Council for further consideration on February 11, 1992. ITEMS B1 - B16 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1991, INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JANUARY 7, 1992.- B1. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3470, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5: OWNER: ENDOWMENT REALTY INVESTORS, C/O TCW REALTY ADVISORS, ATTN: Aimee Brazeau, 400 S. HOPE STREET, LOS Angeles, CA 90071. AGENT: CINNAMON WORKS, Attn: Janet Shepard and Colleen Perry, 21707 Appaloosa Rd., Canyon Lake, CA 92587. LOCATION: 5556 "A# East Santa Ana Canyon Road. Property is approximately 10.63 acres located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road. To retain a semi-enclosed restaurant with (A) waiver of maximum number of wall signs, (B) permitted free standing signs, and (C) minimum number of required parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3470 GRANTED (PC91-194) (6 yes votes, and 1 no vote). Waiver of code requirement GRANTED, IN PART, waivers A and C approved, and waiver B deleted. B2. 179: VARIANCE NO. 1323, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 21: INITIATED BY: CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805. PROPERTY OWNER: JOSEPH AND EMANUELA DI RUGGIERO, 33010 S. Wilmington Avenue, Ste. 200, Carson, CA 90745. BUSINESS OWNERS: KARL AND FRANCESKA HONIGMANN, P.O. BOX 2352, ANAHEIM, CA 92814. LOCATION: 2230 West Colchester Drive. Property is approximately 0.85 acre located at the southeast corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street. To consider the termination or modification of Variance No. 1323 (to permit the sale of beer in conjunction with a restaurant) under authority of Section 18.03.091 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. ~CTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 1323 - request denied, variance terminated (PC91-195) (7 yes votes). The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date. B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3426 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNERS: EUCLID SHOPPING CENTER, 2293 W. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804. 11 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. AGENT: JAMES CARY, 9017 Morning Glow Way, Sun Valley, CA 92352. LOCATION: 1650-1696 West Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 18.6 acres located at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Euclid Street. Amendment to conditions of approval pertaining to required landscaping. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3426 GRANTED, subject to stipulation that at the end of the lease term, those signs would be replaced with monument sign, or if there are any changes prior to the end of lease, the signs would be changed to monument sign at that time (PC91-196) (7 yes votes). Approved Negative Declaration. B4. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4144, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11: OWNER: MCW INVESTCO INC., Attn: Margo Cagle, 27132-B Paseo Espada, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675. LOCATION: 1725 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 0.42 acre located on the west side of Brookhurst Street approximately 580 feet north of the centerline of Katella Avenue. Waiver of maximum number of freestanding signs, permitted location of freestanding~ signs, minimum distance between freestanding signs, minimum sight distance requirements for freestanding signs, unpermitted canopy "column" signs, and unpermitted garden wall signage to retain 3 freestanding signs, 2 canopy 'column" signs and garden wall signage. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4144 DENIED (PC91-197) (7 yes votes). The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date. B5. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3471, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14587 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: THE HERITAGE, A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, 1940 N. Tustin Ave., ~100, Orange, CA 92665. AGENT: CRAIG COMBS ASSOC., 1535 Monrovia Ave., Newport Beach, CA 92663. LOCATION.. ~ North Magnolia Avenue. Prop~r~y £g approx£ma~ely 9.9 acres located on the west side of Magnolia Avenue and approximately 662 feet south of the centerline of Crescent Avenue. To permit the conversion of an existing 128-unit apartment complex to a 128-unit, 21-1ot, air-space condominium complex. To establish a 21-lot, 128-unit, RM-3000 condominium subdivision with waiver of required lot frontage, minimum lot width, minimum floor area, permitted encroachments into required yards, minimum distance between buildings and minimum landscape setback adjacent to single-family residential zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3471 GRANTED (PC91-198) (6 yes votes, 1 no vote). Waivers of code requirement GRANTED, on the basis that the buildings are existing. 12 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. Approved Negative Declaration. NOTE: No action was take by City Council on Tentative Tract Map No. 14587 at their meeting of December 17, 1991, Item B7. B6. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3483 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: AHMAD JILANCHI AND ALIREZA TABESH, 1780 Skypark Circle, Ste. 240, Irvine, CA 92714. LOCATION: 719 - 729 North East Street. Property is approximately 0.74 acres located on the west side of East Street and approximately 210 feet north of the centerline of Wilhelmina Street. To permit a 12-unit 'affordable" condominium complex with waiver of maximum structural height, maximum lot coverage, minimum landscape setback adjacent to single-family residential zone and minimum site area per dwelling unit. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3483 DENIED (PC91-199) (6 yes votes, and I absent). Waiver of code requirement DENIED. Approved Negative Declaration. B7. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-09, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3481, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14603 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: DOMINIC and SONJA GELO, 3326 West Orange Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804. AGENT: BAHRA GHASSEMI, 3500 S. Greenville St., $G-23, Santa Ana, CA 92704. LOCATION: 3326 West Orange Ave. Property is approximately 0.50 acre located on the south side of Orange Avenue and approximately 530 feet east of the centerline of Danbrook Street. For a change in zone from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to the RM-2400 (Residential, Multiple-Family) or a less intense zone. To permit an 8-unit condominium complex with waiver of minimum recreational/leisure area. To establish a l-lot, 8-unit, RM-2400 condominium subdivision. ,ACTION T~/~EN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 91-92-09 GRANTED (PC91-200) (6 yes votes, 1 absent ). Waiver of code requirement GRANTED, IN PART, minimum recreational/leisure area- total of 5500 square feet. CUP NO. 3481 GRANTED (PC91-201). NOTE: No action was take by City Council on Tentative Tract Map No. 14603 at their meeting of December 17, 1991, Item BB. Approved Negative Declaration. B8. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3477 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: SHAW/CROoKALL, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, 160 Newport Beach, CA 92660. AGENT: WILLIAMSON & SCHMID, Attn: Robert Sundstrom, 15101 Redhill Ave., Tustin, CA 92680. 13 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. LOCATION: 1350 South State College Blvd. Property is approximately 9.18 acres located on the southeast corner of Winston ROad and State College Boulevard. To permit an industrially-related design center to include showrooms, warehousing and office uses with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3477 GRANTED (PC91-202) (6 yes votes, I absent). Waiver of code requirement GRANTED. Approved Negative Declaration. B9. 155: VARIANCE NO. 4158, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 90-140, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 288 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED): OWNER: IDM CORPORATION, P.O. BOX 57, Long Beach, CA 90801. LOCATION: IDM BUSINESS CENTER, ANAHEIM. Property is approximately 6.0 acres located on the west side of State College Blvd. and approximately 570 feet south of the centerline of Orangewood Avenue. Waiver of required lot frontage to establish a 2-lot commercial office subdivision. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4158 GRANTED (PC91-203) (6 yes votes, i absent). NOTE: No action taken by the City Council on Tentative Parcel Map No. 90-140 at their meeting of December 17, 1991, Item B9. Approved EIR NO. 288 (previously certified). B10. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3479 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: JAMES V. MOHLER, HERBERT B. FROMMHOZ, 874 N. Batavia, Orange, CA 92668. AGENT: ON K. SIM, 1355 N. Lighthouse, Anaheim, CA 92806. LOCATION: 425 South Anaheim Blvd. Property is approximately 1.16 acres located on the northwest corner of Santa Ana Street and Anaheim Boulevard. To permit an automotive brake shop and the retail sales of T-shirts (manufactured on-site) within an existing industrial building. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3479 GRANTED, for one year, (PC91-204) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. Bll. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3480, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 1: OWNER: ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP of ORANGE, 2811Villareal Drive, Orange, ca ~2~?. AGENT: REV. JOHN LENIHAN, 120 North Janss Street, Anaheim, CA 92805. LOCATION: 124 North Resh Street. Property is approximately 0.33 acre located at the southeast corner of Chartres Street and Resh Street. To permit a charity distribution center within an existing 1,313 square-foot single-family structure and in conjunction with an existing church. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3480 GRANTED (91-205) (5 yes votes, 1 absent, and 1 abstained). 14 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. B12. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4162, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5: OWNER: CALIFORNIA DRIVE-IN THEATRES, INC., 120 N. Robertson Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048. LOCATION: 1520 N. Lemon Street. Property is approximately 24.9 acres located at the southeast corner of Durst Street and Lemon Street. Waiver of required improvement of setback areas and required screening of parking area to establish 30 additional parking spaces for an existing outdoor swapmeet/drive-in theater. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4162 GRANTED (PC91-206) (6 yes votes, i absent). B13. 179: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14130, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3301 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: ~ OWNER: BLASH MOMENY, 27762 Pebble Beach, Mission Viejo, CA 92692. LOCATION: Property is approximately 4.41 acres located at the northwest terminus of Garland Circle and approximately 450 feet west of the centerline of Boisserac way. Amendment to conditions of approval pertaining to the provision of vehicular access to Orchard Drive and review of revised site plan for substantial conformance findings in conjunction with a previously-approved 19-1ot (18-unit) residential subdivision. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3301 APPROVED. Tentative Tract Map No. 14130 DENIED. NOTE: No action was taken by City Council on Tentative Tract Map No. 14130 at their meeting of December 17, 1991, Item B10. Mitigated Negative Declaration previously approved. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date. B14. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2876 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: DAVID CHAVEZ, 4420 E. La Palina Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: JIM A. MARQUEZ, PLANNING DESIGN, 1860 S. Elena Ave., Ste. A, Redondo Beach, CA 90277. LOCATION: 4420 East La Palina Avenue. Property is approximately 1.8 acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue an~ approximately 300 feet west of the centerline of Lakeview Avenue. Request an amendment to conditions of approval pertaining to time limitation to retain a recreational vehicle storage yard and caretaker' s residence. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 2876 APPROVED, 10-year time extension, (PC91-207) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date. 15 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: B15. 155: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-01 - FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW OF ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPM~.NT, SIGNAGE PLANS, AND EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AND MATERIALS AND REQUEST_ OF DETERMINING PERMITTED LAND USE: REQUESTED BY: Brad Geier, Taubman Company LOCATIONs Property is located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Roosevelt Road, and further described as the Anaheim Hills Festival Center. Petitioner requests review of precise plans as required by Specific plan No. 90-01 and also requests determination whether outdoor seating in conjunction with a restaurant is permitted. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved for outdoor seating, with plans to be approved by the Traffic and Planning Departments. B16. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3304 - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS: REQUESTED BY: ROBERT C. DRUARY, REILLY/CARROLL PROPERTIES, INC. LOCATION: Property is located at the northwest corner of Canyon Creek Road and Serrano Avenue (sycamore Canyon Plaza). Petitioner requests approval of substantial conformance with approved plans. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Request for approval of substantial conformance with approved plans - CUP NO. 3304 - APPROVED (1 beer & wine license for pizza restaurant approved). Council Member Pickler requested that the Council receive the material on Consent Calendar Items from the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator sooner; City Clerk Sohl explained that the delay in this case was an exception. End of the Planning Commission Items. B17. 179: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - VARIANCE NO. 3709: Request by A.K. Patel, 1742 Kingham Way, Fullerton, CA 92633. The property is located at 5109 Copa de Oro Drive. The petitioner requests a time extension to comply with conditions of approval retroactive to December 8, 1991, to expire December 8., 1992. Variance No. 3709 is for waivers of maximum structural height and minimum rear yard setback to construct a 2-story, 35-foot high, single-family residence in the Scenic Corridor. Submitted was report dated December 12, 1991 from the Zoning Administrator recommending that the Council grant the time extension to expire December 8, 1992. MOTION: 'Council Member Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time on Variance No. 3709 to expire December 8, 1992, Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 16 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. B18. 179: REOUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3315: Request by Jarrell W. Garsee, Anaheim First Nazarene Church, 1340 N. Candlewood Street, Anaheim, CA 92805. The property is located at 1340 N. Candlewood Street. The petitioner requests a time extension to comply with conditions of approval retroactive to December 18, 1991, to expire December 18, 1992. The CUP is to expand a church and child day care center and permit temporary modular structures, and waive minimum number of parking spaces, minimum setback for institutional uses and maximum structural height. Submitted was report dated December 16, 1991 from the Zoning Administrator recommending that the Council grant the time extension to expire December 18, 1992. MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time on Conditional Use Permit No. 3315 to expire December 18, 1992, Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. ITEM B19 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF DECEMBER 26, 1991 - DECISION DATE: DECEMBER 30, 1991, INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JANUARY 9, 1992: B19. 179: ARCADE PERMIT NO. 1012: REQUESTED BY: ROBERT KLUVER, NEW AGE ARCADE, 5221 E. Orangethorpe Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807. LOCATION: 5221 E. Orangethorpe Avenue. To permit 35 amusement arcade devices. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Arcade permit No. 1012 DENIED (ZA91-60). End of the Zoning Administrator Items. Cl. 107: APPLICATION FOR A POOL ROOM PERMIT - LUCKY JOHN'S OF ANA~_IM: Requested by John Hilding Johnson, 21081 Red Jacket Cir., Huntington Beach, CA 92646. LOCATION: The facility is located at 3478 E. Orangethor~e Avenue - Lucky John's of Anaheim. The petitioner requests a pool room permit to operate 15 billiard tables in conjunction with on-premise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with food services. Submitted was report dated December 13, 1991 from the Code Enforcement Manager, John Poole recommending that the subject pool room' permit application be approved. .MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved that the application for pool room permit for Lucky John's of Anaheim be heard in conjunction with the request for an arcade permit for Lucky John's which is Item D2 on today's public hearing agenda. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 17 City Hall, Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7t 1992~ 5:00 P.M. See public hearing item D2 on today's agenda where the matter was discussed and subsequently continued for three weeks. C2: 108: ANAHEIM HILTON HOTEL AND TOWERS - TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ASSESSMENT APPEAL: Determination relative to the hearing of an appeal by the Anaheim Hilton and Towers, of a total assessment (including penalties and interest) of $213,815.59 transient occupancy tax payments. Submitted was report dated January 2, 1992 from the City Treasurer, Mary Turner recommending that the Council either refer the matter to an outside hearing officer and authorize the City Attorney to contract for said services or to set a hearing before the City Council and establish a date and time for said hearing. MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved that a hearing be set before the City Council and that a date and time be established for said hearing. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION · CARRIED City Attorney White. Relative to the date for the hearing, it will be left to the discretion of the City Clerk and the hearing set accordingly. D1. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - ARCADE PERMIT NO. 1010: Requested by Fiesta Arcade, 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard, ~H-8, Anaheim, CA 92804. LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard. The request is to permit 25 amusement devices. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Arcade Permit No. 1010 APPROVED (ZA91-48). HEARING SET ON: A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested by Council Members Daly and Pickler at the meeting of December 3, 1991 and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - December 26, 1991 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 27, 1991 Posting of property- December 23, 1991 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See decision of the Zoning Administrator - Z.A.91-48 of November 21, 1991. Mr. Barry Thaxton, 9111 Marchand Avenue, Garden Grove was present. He is the representative for Mr. Klm, sole proprietor for the Fiesta Arcade. Mayor Hunter asked to hear from staff. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. Code Enforcement has reviewed the operation since the approval of the Indoor Swapmeet a couple of months ago. There have been many problems associated with the operation. There is vending 18 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5:00 P.M. outside the building, vending inside without health permits, etc. They have been working with the Health Department on certain food booths that are a problem. Until Mr. Kim gets some of the problems squared away, staff recommends that the application be denied. Barry Thaxton. In this case, the arcade itself has no food preparation or sales. The facility itself is in a highly-industrialized area. There are approximately 540 booths within the facility. They have not been aware of any of the outside vending problems. Mr. Klm is primarily concerned with starting his first business in the United States. He chose the arcade business as a means by which to establish himself. Because of the swapmeet hours, 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., this would alleviate any potential nighttime problems. From that stand point, they feel the permit should be approved. They see no outstanding events that could cause a degrading of the area or the community. Answering Council Member Ehrle, he explained that the operation is similar to arcades in shopping malls. The majority of the customers would be children who come with their parents. Because of the area, the possibility of local neighborhood kids patronizing the arcade would be slim. Council Member Ehrle. He feels the operation is becoming totally different than what the Council originally approved. If they approve requests such as this, it will get totally out of hand to the point where they will have to evaluate the entire CUP. He is going to oppose the arcade permit. It does not belong in a swapmeet. This was the first business of its type in Anaheim approved in a location where it was felt it would work. In his mind, it is not working. COUNCIL ACTION: There being no further persons who wish to speak either in favor or in opposition, Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Council Member Ehrle moved to deny the request for an arcade permit (Arcade Permit No. 1010) by Fiesta Arcade. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White stated that under the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code Section 4.14.0.45, it would be in order for the City Council to make findings if it is proposed to deny the arcade permit that the permit be ~en£ed base~ upon a ££nd£ng that approval would be contrary to the public interest, health, safety and general welfare and for reasons previously annunciated by the Code Enforcement Manager and Council Member Ehrle. Council Member Ehrle incorporated the comments of the City Attorney into his motion of denial. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. . D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - ARCADE PERMIT NO. 1011 LUCKY JOHN'S ANAHEIM: REQUESTED BY: J.H. Johnson, 21081 Red Jacket Circle, Huntington Beach, CA 92646. 19 City Hallt Anahe!mt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992t 5=00 P.M. LOCATION/REQUEST: The facility is located at 3478 E. Orangethorpe Avenue in the Lake Center Shopping Center. The request is to permit 15 amusement devices. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Arcade permit No. 1011 was approved (ZA91-55). HEARING SET ON = A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested by Council Members Daly and Pickler at the meeting of December 10, 1991 and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - December 26, 1991 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 23, 1991 Posting of property- December 27, 1991 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See decision of the Zoning Administrator dated December 5, 1991 - Z.A.91-55. APPLICATION FOR POOL ROOM PERMIT - LUCKY JOHN'S ANAHEIM: Requested by: Same as above. Location: Same as above. The petitioner requests the pool room permit 'to operate 15 billiard tables in conjunction with on-premise sale and consumption of alcholic beverages in conjunction with food services (see item Cl on today's agenda wherein the Council determined that both the pool room permit and the arcade permit would be combined into one hearing). City Attorney White. The Council by motion earlier determined that they would consider both the pool room permit and arcade permit together; however, each should be acted upon separately at the conclusion of the public hearing. Mayor Hunter asked first to hear from staff. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He referred to his staff report dated December 13, 1991 wherein he recommended approval of the pool room permit. There has been additional information in the past day that would cause staff to change the recommendation of approval to denial. The applicant has stated he is not going to conduct the restaurant or food service. The Conditional Use Permit approved by the Planning Commission was for sale of alcholic beverages in conjunction with food Mayor Hunter asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. John H. Johnson, 21081 Red Jacket Circle, Huntington Beach and A.L. Johnson, 11774 Tannas Avenue, Fountain Valley were present to answer questions. Mayor Hunter. The Code Enforcement Manager just recommended denial of the application. Apparently when the applicant was before the Planning Commission, the Commission granted the Conditional Use Permit on the basis that food would be served in conjunction with alcoholic beverages. It is his understanding 20 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, ~00 P.M, that an ABC (Alcohoic Beverage Commission) license that was originally to be issued has since been changed to a different ABC license. He asked the applicant(s) to address that issue first. It was the Council's understanding that the establishment was going to be a sports bar where food was going to be at least 50% of the business, but that has changed dramatically. John Johnson. He does not know where that information came from. He submitted a package of information to the Council last week and it is the same information he supplied to the Planning Commission when he was granted the Conditional Use Permit. They were never licensed as a restaurant. They had to qualify, not as a restaurant, but as a bar through the CUP process. They do intend to sell food and have every intention of doing so. The information is completely contrary to any kind of logic. In the first place, they had to qualify under bar type requirements for parking requirements. They intend to operate fully as previously described. They are not a restaurant - there are two different qualifications - one is bonafide eating establishment under the Business and Professions Code that ABC is required to operate under. There is no such thing as a requirement of 50% food. They cannot guarantee how much food they will serve. They do intend to sell food. It was not a part of the CUP granted by the Planning Commission. Mayor Hunter asked to hear from Officer Gandy who had conversations with the ABC. Officer Jim Gandy. The Vice Detail approves all ABC license applications that come through the City. In this case the application was for a type of license which was an on-sale eating place similar to Marie Callendars or Black Angus. There is no age limit on patrons. He (Gandy) requested some restrictions be placed on the license which are restrictions that ABC finds consistent with those types of businesses. He got word back from ABC that Mr. Johnson did not like those restrictions and did not agree to the restrictions being placed on his license, so he changed his license to an on-sale general public premise which is more or less a bar and no food is required. Therefore, signs must be posted at the door that no one under 21 years of age is allowed. There is no requirement to serve food at all. John Johnson. Officer Gandy does not have his facts straight. They applied with the ABC which has different requirements for a restaurant than the City of Anaheim. Anaheim requires 25% of the gross floor area for kitchen. Secondly, they qualified under the CUP process on a bar-type requirement. Because he did not dedicate 25% of his floor space, they did not let him qualify for parking under the restaurant requirements. They .never changed their license over from a bonafide eating establishment which does not require 50% food. It requires food be available for guests. They will have cook-your-own steak, soups and sandwiches and everything to go along with it. The reason he did not convert over was not because of the CUP, but because of the fact tha~ the Police Department when he was going through the CUP process chose to ignore the process and go to ABC at the llth hour placing restrictions on his license that if interpreted literally he could not have the word bar in his sign, cocktail or beer or the word Budweiser displayed anywhere. 21 City Hallm Anaheimm California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7~ 1992, 5:00 p.M. Council Member Pickler then posed questions to Mr. Johnson to determine whether persons under 21 would be admitted to his establishment; Mr. JOhnson stated that under a bondifide eating establishment that is correct. Officer Gandy. They orginally applied for a type of license which was a bonafide eating establishment but it is his understanding in a telephone conversation with Mr. Johnson that he decided to change it to a public premise where he must have a sign posted not admitting anyone under 21. Mr. Johnson. It was not a condition of the CUP to have a bonafide eating establishment. He would not qualify under restaurant requirements. It was up front all the way. He then explained at length the further process he went through with Officer Gandy, ABC, etc., which brought him to this point and in concluding stated that he was concerned that he did not find out until the 11th hour that there was a protest from the Police Department and was shocked. He also did not know that the arcade and pool room permit were not a part of the CUP process and that they had to be processed and acted upon separately. Mayor Hunter asked Mr. Johnson if he would be amicable to continuing the hearing for three weeks and in the meantime meet with Mr. Poole and Officer Gandy to discuss the matter and see where there might have been some miscommunications; Mr. Johnson answered that he was happy to do that a month ago but that Officer Gandy refused to sit down with him. He is agreeable to doing so at this time. Council Member Daly. The Council has heard quite a few requests for pool room permits. He for one wants to hear from the Police Department whether six months before or at the 11th hour. The Council relies on the police. If the process was confusing to Mr. Johnson, in looking at his application, he can see why perhaps staff was confused as well. Mr. Johnson stated it is his understanding that he is to contact Officer Gandy and discuss the matter with him; Mayor Hunter clarified that was correct and with Mr. Poole as well and then return in three weeks to continue the public hearing. City Attorney White, commenting on Mr. Johnson's misunderstanding that the arcade and pool room permit were included in the CUP, apparently when Mr. Johnson envisioned his businessf he envisioned it as a bar and grill with pool tables and an arcade. However, under the co~e, the Planning Commission only has jurisdiction to issue a CUP for the bar and grill because it involves the sale of alcohlic beverages. The arcade and pool room permit is under the jurisdiction of the Zoning Administrator and that is why they are on separate tracks. MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to continue the public hearing on Arcade Permit No. 1011 for Lucky John's of Anaheim for three weeks to January 28, 1992 which will be combined at that time with the application for a pool room permit for Lucky John's of Anaheim and be heard as one item but with a separate vote on each at the conclusion of the public hearing. Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 22 City Hal~., Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, $:00 P-M- D3- ~34: ~UBL~C HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AME~~NT NO. ~22, REC~SSIF~CAT~ON NO. 91-92-06, WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. ~461, TENTATIV~ TRACT MAP NO- ~4575 AND NEGATIVE D~CLARAT~ON: OWNER: LUNDAR AND ELIZABETH YUH, 4400 MacArthur Blvd. $900, Newport Beach, CA 92660. AGENT: NEWPORT PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT, 4400 MacArthur Blvd. $900, Newport Beach, CA 92660. LOCATION: 3253 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 0.48 acres located on the north side of Ball Road and approximately 350 feet east of the centerline of Oakhaven Drive. Petitioner requests an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan redesignating the property from the existing Low Density Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation. For a change in zone from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential-Agriculture) zone to the RM-2400 (Residential, Multiple-Family) zone, or a less intense zone. ' affordable' RM-2400 condominium To establish a l-lot, 9-unit, , subdivision with waiver of minimum site area per dwelling unit, maximum structural height and minimum front yard setback. ~CTION TAKEN By THE PLANNING COMMISSION: GPA NO. 322 GRANTED (PC91-186) (5 yes votes, i abstained, and 1 absent ). Reclassification No. 91-92-06 GRANTED (PC91-187). CUP NO. 3461 GRANTED (PC91-188). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED. Tentative Tract Map No. 14575 APPROVED. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by Yuriko L. Okubo, resident and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - December 26, 1991 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 23, 1991 Posting of property - December 27, 1991 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 18, 1991. APPLI CANT ' S STATEMENT: __ A1 Marshall, Newport Pacific, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., Newl~Drt Beach. He is surprised to be before the Council tonight. They had previously agreed to Mrs. Okubo's concern about a block wall in back of her property and agreed to raise the wall to the 8-foot height she requested. She then appealed the decision to request that the developer do so. They had already stipulated to the 8-foot wall. They were then informed by Mrs. Okubo's · 23 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7, 1992, 5~00 P.M. neighbor that he did not want anything over 6 feet. The developer then agreed to stay with 6 feet on the neighbor's property. The wall will vary according to their request. They will do whatever the Council directs them to do in working with the neighbors. He clarified that they agree to construct an 8-foot wall behind Mrs. Okubo's property and drop down to 6 feet on the neighbor's property and go on across. She originally wanted 14 feet but when they explained what a 14-foot wall would be like, she agreed to 8 feet. Newport Pacific had already -agreed to the request. Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak. Yuriko Okubo. She lives adjacent to the project. When she discussed the situation after the second hearing with Mr. Marshall, he mentioned the neighbor's side is 2 feet lower than her side. She was very concerned because her request was 8 feet from her level. According to the Civil Engineer, their side would eventually be elevated to her level. She wants to know precisely how high the wall will be. She wants 8 feet from her side. She also honors the next door neighbor's wish as long as it is on their side. She wishes them to be the same way to her. She wants to protect her view. Her den is facing the condominiums. Council Member Pickler. Mr. Marshall stated on her property there is going to be an 8-foot wall. That was stipulated at the Planning Commission. Jerry Bakke.~ (Next door neighbor). He does not know why they are worrying about his property. He has a wall there now and he is satisfied with that. Ail they have to do is put a wall behind Mrs. Okubo's place and the problem will be over. What they are going to get is a wall that is 2 feet higher. It is going to block the sun. He has worked with the developer. The only thing he is asking, he does not want to end up with two walls behind his property. If the developer wants to leave his wall and go across and just put a wall behind Mrs. Okubo, it is okay with him. If the City forces the developer to put in a wall, he would like his torn down and a new wall constructed. If there is going to be something on top, he would rather have a wrought iron ~ne~ go aa~onn nn~ n~ hav~ n~m~h£ng %ha~ blocks the sun. A1 Marshall. They agreed to do 6 feet across and then go to 8 feet. If they build a new wall they will remove Mr. Bakke's and if they come to it and continue it they will only build one wall located on the property line as per the Civil Engineer. They have no problem with either request. E.NVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Ehrle, the City Council approved the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 24 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 7t 1992t 5:00 P.M. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION.- The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 92R-3 through 92R-5, both inclusive. ) Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 92R-3 through 92R-5, both inclusive, for adoption approving General Plan Amendment No. 322, approving Reclassification No. 91-92-06 and granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3461, incorporating Mr. Marshall's agreement with regard to installation of an 8-foot wall across Mrs. Okubo's property and a 6-foot wall across Mr. Bakke's property, one wall only and not a double wall. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-3: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 322, EXHIBIT 'A#. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-4: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-06. ..RESOLUTION No. 92R-5: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3461. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS.' Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES.- COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 92R-3 through 92R-5, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 14575, Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: Council Member Pickler moved to adjourn to Saturday, January 11, 1992 at 8:00 a.m. at the Convention Center for a workshop session. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (6:56 p.m. ) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 25