1992/06/09City ..Rail, .Annhe~- california = cOUNCIl, MI~$ - dlINS 9, 199:~ 3s. 00 P.IN,
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in special session.
PRESENT =
ABSENT:
PRESENT=
COUNCIL MEMBERS= Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS= None
CITY MANAGER= James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY= Jack'White
CITY CLERK= Leonora N. Sohl
UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER= Edward Aghjayan
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER= Gary Johnson
PLANNING DIRECTOR= Joel Fick
DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCEs John Roche
CITY TREASURER = Mary Turner
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR = Dave Morgan
A complete copy of the agenda for the special meeting of the Anaheim City
Council was posted at 3=40 p.m. on June 5, 1992 at the Civic Center kiosk,
containing all items as shown herein.
Mayor Hunter called the special meeting of June 9, 1992 to order at 2:05 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECESS ALLOCATION PLAN {BUDGET}~ To consider the proposed
1992/93 Resource Allocation Plan.
FISCAL yEAR 199.2/93 DEPARTMENTAL. RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN WORKSHOP:
City Manager James Ruth. This is a public hearing to review and adopt the
City's 1992-93 budget pursuant to City Charter Sections 1202, 1203 and 1204.
Council has been provided the proposed budget document and supporting computer
print outs, information which has been available since May 5, 1992 for public
inspection. At the conclusion, the public hearing will be continued to
June 16, 1992 and may at Council's discretion be continued to sub?equent dates
prior to July 1, 1992 and still '~eet Charter requirements" "
Balancing the City's 1992/93 Budget was a difficult task, requiring a variety
of labor and operating expenditure reductions. Several strategies were
implemented including increased emphasis on economic development, productivity
improvements, increased privatization, continued downsizing and judicious use
of one-time monies and a continuation of the 2% Utility Users' Tax. The
budget assumes constrained wage growth for all employee groups. To set an
example, restraining cost of living and merit adjustments for manage=~nt and
professionals/technical employees will save the General Fund more than
$690,000 in fiscal year 1992/93. This is in addition to 1.3 million foregone
by ~ese employees whose a~l~riea were s£milarly restrained in fiscal year
1991/92. In a final effort to balance the budget, General Fund departments
were given targets to reduce an additional $862,000 from their operating
budgets.
One of the issues discussed on May 5, 1992 is the uncertain future the City
faces particularly relative to the State. The State's deficit is now expected
to exceed 11 billion dollars with no plan in place to address the problem.
Options may include the loss of all the City's cigarette tax and some or all
of the City's estimated 9.6 million motor vehicle license fee revenue. A
decision might not be reached until late August or September. A current
report was submitted to the Council today which was the result of a meeting in
Sacramento yesterday. Depending on the actions taken by the State to balance
the budget and the strength of summer tourism, it may be necessary to reopen
the City's budget to address any shortfall created by these events. The
391
:
Hall, Anahe£m, Ca!~fo~n~a - cOUNCIL Nl~s - dUNE 9, 199~ - ~00 P.M.
City's Budget Task Force is reviewing all alternatives and staff will be able
to return to the Council with the adjustments within 30 days after the
adoption of the State budget if necessary. .... ,
Today and on June 16, there will be budget departmental workshop ~presentations
with some changes in the order as listed on the agenda. The City Treasurer
and Finance Department will be making their presentations today ~nd Parks,
Recreation and Community Services Department on June 16, 1992. Also, there
will be a presentation by the Blue Ribbon Committee of the Chamber of Commerce
following the Budget Advisory Commism£on presentation today.
Council Member Pickler. Each year the City is waiting for the State to make
up its mind. He asked if they are prohibited from adopting the City budget at
the end of July or August to coincide with the State~ City Manager Ruth. The
City Charter requires adoption of the City budget no later than June 30 of
each year ......
Council Member Pickler. He suggested then it is perhaps a question that
should be placed on the ballot~ Mayor Hunter asked that th.e City Attorney come
back with a couple of options in this regard for the Council to look at.
Mayor Hunter referred to the report dated June 8, 1992 from the League of
California Cities marked urgent which reported that based on comments by the
State's Legislators, "it appears that the primary target will be cities
property tax and Vehicle License Fee revenues (VLF)", attached to. which was a
list showing the amount of loss of revenue for all of California's cities.
·
City Manager Ruth then introduced each department's budget presentation giving
its location in the budget document, budget totals, adjustments, capital
improvements (if any). He also reported the extent to which departments have
made expenditure reductions, many involving reductions in full-time Positions.
The following department heads then gave an overview of their departments
.proposed budget, some explaining their plans and goals for the coming year(s)
and accomplishments in the past fiscal year. Any changes from the plan
presented were also explained at this time:
Public Utilities General Manager, Ed Aghjayan - Public Utilities
Department - See Resource Allocation Plan (RAP) Pages 58-61
Public Works Director/City Engineer, Gary Johnson - Public Works
Engineering- RAP Page 39
Planning Director, Joel Fick- Planning Department (including Building
Division and Code Enforcement) - RAP Pages 54-57
Maintenance Director, John Roche - Maintenance Services - RAP Pages
51-53 (Fleet - Facility and Streets and Sanitation)
City Treasurer, Mary Turner (Treasurer/Business License) - RAP Page 66
Human Resources Director, Dave Morgan - Human Resources - RAP Page 67
ADJOURNMENT..- Council Member Hunter moved to adjourn the special meeting of
June 9, 1992, Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
(3=02 p.m.)
392
Hall, Anaheim, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~ 9, 1992 - 5:00
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS= Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER= James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY= Jack White
CITY CLERK= Leonora N. Sohl
CONVENTION CENTER GENERAL MANAGER= Lynn Thompson
STADIUM GENERAL MANAGER= Greg Smith
POLICE CHIEF= Joseph Molloy
LABOR RELATIONS DIRECTOR= Garry McRae
FINANCE DIRECTOR: George Ferrone
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND AUDIT MANAGER= Ken Stone
PARKS SUPERINTENDENT: Jack Kudron
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR= Annika Santalahti
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER= Greg Hastings
ASSISTANT PLANNER= Gregory McCafferty
complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
~ted at 3:40 p.m. on June 5, 1992 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
.~ems as shown herein. .~
· ~
Mayor Hunter called the workshop portion of the meeting of June 9, 1992 to 4
order at 3:02 p.m. -
PUBLIC HEARING - RECESS ALLOCATION PLAN (BUDGET): To consider the proposed
1992/93 Resource Allocation Plan.
FISCAL YEAR 1992/93 DEPARTMENTAL RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN WORKSHOP:
Departmental Budget presentations continued with the following: (See minutes
Special Meeting of June 9, 1992. )
Convention Center General Manager, Lynn Thompson - Convention Center -
Resource Allocation Plan (RAP) Pages 44 & 45
Stadium-Golf General Manager, Greg Smith - Stadium and Golf Courses -
RAP Pages 47-49
Police Chief, Joseph Molloy - Police Department - RAP Pages 28-31.
Labor Relations Director, Cary McRae - Labor Relations - RAP Page 64
Finance Director, George Ferrone - Finance Department (including
Purchasing and Reprographics) - RAP Page 68
During the course of some of the presentations, the Council posed questions
relative to the respective budgets which were answered by the department
manager, City Manager Ruth or Ken Stone, Program Development and Audit
Manager.
Council Member Daly requested additional information from the Public Works
Director/City Engineer. He would like to know what projects are actually
projects of his Department (Public Works/Engineering) entirely overseen by
that Department and that are part of the Department's budget vs. projects that
393
C£ty Hall, Anahe~, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NINIFTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Public Works/Engineering is coordinating that are not funded through their
department budget.
During the presentation by the Planning Director and subsequent questions to
the program development and audit manager, relative to sales tax projections
from new projects, Council Member Daly requested the following..
That later in the budget hearings they discuss sales tax
projections twelve months ago and twelve months before that and
how close those projections come in terms of bed tax and sales
tax. He feels there are lessons to be learned and they need to be
careful about projections for the coming year.
.B..UDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: Shirley McCracken, Chairperson,
Budget Advisory Commission. She summarized/briefed the Budget Advisory
Commission report to the City Council dated May 29, 1992 (made a part of the
record) which first outlined the formation and activities of the Commission
since it was established by the Council on September 17, 1991 with the
inaugural meeting of the Commission on October 9, 1991. The Commission has
been meeting twice monthly since that time. The Commission also examined and
deliberated six specific issues outlined in letter dated February 5, 1992 from
the Mayor. Pages i through 5 of the report to the Council gave the
Commission's recommendations on the following issues:
Budget format, economic development activities, transient
occupancy tax utilization, long-term financial planning,
privatization, personnel and benefit costs, and the Utility Users'
Tax. Each of the recommendations was discussed at length and
supported by a majority of the Commission members although not the
same majority for each item. The Commission examined the City
Manager's 1992/93 Resource Allocation Plan. It is a commendable
effort to balance the budget. They call attention of the Council
to the uncertainty of the revenue projections in the RAP. The
Budget Advisory Commission strongly advises Council to consider
the recommendations proposed by the Commission particularly with
reference to expense control. (The report also indicates that the
Commission anticipates forwarding specific recommendations
regarding the proposed plan to the City Council no later than
June 16, 1992.)
Mayor Hunter, on behalf of the Council, commended the entire Commission for
the time, effort and dedication in bringing forth the recommendations
presented to the Council. Council Members individually added their thanks to
the Commission.
Council Members then commented on certain aspects of the budget. Council
Member Ehrle noted that some people in the community have questioned whether
or not the Council is going to include the entire Gang/Drug Task Force
recommendations of approximately $5.5 million in the budget. Police Chief
Molloy had pointed out earlier (see minutes of the workshop session of
June 2, 1992 when the Gang/Drug Task Force report was presented to the
Council) that through the recent increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
that the City is implementing close to 1.1 million dollars of the $5,000,000
recommended to be allocated by the task force. His (Ehrle's) answer is no,
that that amount will not be a part of the budget. For one thing, as the City
Manager explained, the City at this time does not know what the State is going
to do to recover the $11,000,000,000 shortfall in the State budget. The State
394
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
could take over-S9,000,000 in revenue from the City. The City is looking at
what other cities have done with Redevelopment resources and if other funds
become available, those can be considered for allocation toward implementing
the recommendations. Staff is in the process of reviewing other
possibilities.
City Manager Ruth. He confirmed that was correct. The City also applied for
two grants totaling approximately 1.5 million dollars in the last two months.
That is another possibility. If the grants are awarded, they will implement
the programs that can be funded by those grants. The Gang/Drug Task Force
report and recommendations is an excellent guideline with excellent programs.
As soon as resources become available, the City Council will have to determine
policy direction and allocate those resources accordingly. It is important to
emphasize that the Council has allocated over $1,000,000 to this program
already and secondly that by the implementation of the 3/12 Program in the
Police Department, they have freed up the equivalent of an additional
thirteen Police Officers. During high crime periods, that extra patrol is out
there. It is a major commitment on the part of the Council. That is thirteen
additional on top of the twelve they hired from the 1.2 million dollars.
taff is preparing a comment on the request. They will also await word from
~e State. It would be totally irresponsible to do anything at this time
.~hout that information.
Council Member Daly. What he would like to see in staff's evaluation, it -~'
becomes a labeling problem. The Gang/Drug Task Force report includes some
_
programs that used to be funded in the City budget and are now called
something different, or are now contracted services or for which City funds
are provided, for instance, to the YMCA or the Boy's Club.
Mayor Hunter. He confirmed that was correct. People were present earlier but
left - representatives from the Orange County Congregation of Community
Organizations (OCCCO). It would be good for the City Manager to make a
response back to the Gang/Drug Task Force. Council Member Daly is correct
about a lot of labeling and miscommunication as to what is being done with
narcotic forfeiture funds and the .04% of 1% of the TOT. There is really
approximately 1.1 million already funded. While the task force was
proceeding, the City Council voted to go forward with the 1.1 million dollars.
Council Member Daly. What has changed in the last few years in the City, one
of the line item requests is funding of a Police Athletic League. Junior High
sports are no longer funded by the schools. If the City had the money to fund
an athletic league for youth, would they fund a Police Athletic League and
what would that consist of vs. an existing Junior High systom - why not
restore funding to that instead. That is what he would like to see the City
Manager get into in his evaluation.
City Manager Ruth. It is important to note in the Parks and Recreation budget
which the Council will hear next week, they have included an additional
$230,000 which had been cut out. They felt it was a high priority to restore
some of the outreach programs for youth and gangs in the community. That is
incorporated into the budget for Council consideration. That is in addition
to the 1.2 million for Police.
Council Member Simpson. What he would like to have is for staff to total up
all of the numbers to determine how many of the things recommended by the Task
Force are being done already and come up with a balance - how much would it
take to fund the program in its entirety and how much the City is actually
395
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5500 P.M.
doing at this t'ime. It would be good information for the Council to have
since they will constantly be getting calls on the matter.
Council Member Pickler. He believes there are certain people on the Task
Force that will not be happy until the Council does what the Task Force wants
them to do. He feels OCCCO does not care where the money comes from and want
it now. As a Council Member, it is necessary to think of the whole City. Ail
the monies are not available at this time. There are limited funds to do what
they have to do. The City is already actively involved in some of the areas
of concern.
Mayor Hunter. They will await a report from staff including the request made
by the Council Members.
ANAHEIM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE: Mr. Paul Bostwick,
Chairman, Blue Ribbon Committee. He read the June 9, 1992 report from the
Committee (previously made a part of the record) which contained four specific
recommendations (see page 2 of the report). The recommendations were prefaced
by five reasons why this year it was going to be even more difficult to have a
realistic balanced budget, one of the overriding concerns being the State's
budget shortfall of $11,000,000,000.
Mayor Hunter thanked the Committee for continually working with the City in
this endeavor.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to address the Council at this time notin~
that there would also be an opportunity to do so at next week's budget
hearings; there was no response.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to continue the public hearing on the
City's proposed 1992/93 Resource Allocation Plan (budget) to Tuesday, June 16,
1992 at 2:00 p.m. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
REOUEST 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.
City of Anaheim vs. Ertzen Associates, Inc., et al., Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 55-75-40.
Molnar vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No.
62-55-00.
LeMieux vs. Altec Industries, Orange County Superior Court
Case No. 65-58-67
b. To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative
regarding labor relations matters -Government Code Section 54957.6.
396
City Hall f Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
c. To'consider and take possible action upon personnel matters
pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.
d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1).
e. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as
are orally announced by the City Attorney, City Manager or City
Council prior to such recess unless the motion to recess indicates
any of the matters will not be considered in closed session.
Council Member Hunter moved to recess into Closed Session, Council Member
Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:35 p.m. )
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:35 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Pastor Marvin Jacobs, First Congregational Church in Anaheim,
~ave the invocation.
.AG SALUTE: Council Member William Ehrle led the assembly in the Pledge of
~-,llegiance to the Flag. ~
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Hunter aff~
authorized by the City Council: -
Flag Day and Pause for the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag
and our nation, June 14, 1992
119.'. DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Christian Miller for
his generous donation of $1,500 to the Canyon Hills Branch Library. The
donation was a part of the award he received being named Anaheim Hills Citizen
of the Year. Mayor Hunter and Council Members congratulated and commended
Mr. Miller noting that his act of generosity is one of the reasons he was
named Citizen of the 'Year confirming and extending his dedication and
commitment to his community.
119: DECLARATIONS OF RECOGNITION TO TRAFFIC SAFETY POSTER CONTEST WINNERS:
Declarations of Recognition were unanimously adopted by the City Council and
presented to the following youngsters whose winning posters were posted on the
Chamber wall:
Kyla Adams - 12 years old
Aya Felling - 12 years old
Juan Gomez - 13 years old
Bruna Martinez - 13 years old.
A representative from the Automobile Club of Southern California was present
to express words of commendation to the youngsters. Mayor Hunter and Council
Members also congratulated the four winners for their fine work.
119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Mike Sullivan,
President, Graffiti Removal Inc., acknowledging the company's outstanding
contributions to the "Paint Your Heart Out Anaheim" program.
397
C£t¥ Hall~ AnaheJ~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NINIFTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.N.
Mayor Hunter, Council Members and John Poole, the City's Code Enforcement
Manager highly commended Mr. Sullivan for assisting in this important
community program.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,869,990.10 for the
period ending June 5, 1992, in accordance with the 1991-92 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Hunter recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5: 46 p.m. )
Mayor Hunter reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:49 p.m. )
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Sharon Ericson and Marilyn Hauk spoke to
Item Al3 and David Hoskins, Ron Bengochea, Willy Stewart and Steve Halpert
spoke to Item A20. (See discussion under those items).
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Gina Hainline, Anaheim Municipal Employees
Association (AMEA). The Association has been going through the line item
budget. It is the Association's opinion that during the period of recession,
the City has been and is continuing to spend money foolishly. They will be
bringing forward information to substantiate their claim. She then spoke to
additional areas of concern - that the burden rate charged against the ~
employees of the City as evidenced by a survey they did is excessive; why are~
these charges coming out of the General Benefits Fund in the first place; that
so much time is being spent on and in the CR-Area that residential areas, -
parks and City facilities are suffering; that contracted employees working on
the City's streets do not present a good image for the City and they do not
want the citizens to think they are City employees for their appearance and
productivity. She urged the Council to ask AMEA and the employees of the City
some of the questions they are asking management. It is important for the
Council to listen to their input before making a decision.
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 Ordinance No. 5309 for adoption and Ordinance No. 5313 for
introduction. Refer to Ordinance Book.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was read
by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5309)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance.
Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. 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 Southern California Gas Company (attn:
Mary Gums/No. E-257613-35-MG) for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about February 18, 1992.
b. Claim submitted by Truck & Auto Supply for indemnity sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 1, 1992.
398
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNS 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
c. Claim Submitted by Diane Romans for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 3, 1991.
d. Claim submitted by State Compensation Insurance Fund for bodily injury
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19,
1991.
e. Claim submitted by Ray R. and Marianne Camien for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 5,
1992.
f. Claim submitted by Pacific Truck Equipment Inc. for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 15,
1992.
g. Claim submitted by Judy L. Chapman for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 25, 1992.
h. Claim submitted by Edward J. Adams for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 27, 1992.
i. Claim submitted by Brad Bergman for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 15, 1991.
J. Claim submitted by William L. Fletcher for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 28, 1991.
k. Claim submitted by Delvin L. Fuller for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19, 1991.
1. Claim submitted by Troy Taylor for bodily injury sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about November 25, 1991.
m. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company (attn: Mary
Gums/No. K-256865-MG) for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about January 21, 1992.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission meetings held April 15, 1992, and May 20, 1992.
105: Receiving and fil£ng minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board meeting
held April 22, 1992.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Park and Recreation
Commission meeting held April 22, 1992.
173: Receiving and filing a Petition for Modification filed before the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California in the matter of the decision
of Michael S. Mitchell, dba Mickey's Space Ship shuttle for authority to
operate as a passenger stage corporation between certain portions of Los
Angeles County and Orange County and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
and John Wayne Orange County Airport.
A3. 150: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Laubach Electric, in the amount of $13,600 for Julianna Park Security
Lighting, and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of
399
City H&11, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving
any irregularities in the bids of both the iow and second low bidders.
A4. 175: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Calitex, Inc., in the amount of $143,463 for Sycamore Street 12" Watermain
Replacement, and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms
of the award, awarding the contract to the second iow bidder, as well as
waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the iow and second iow bidders.
AS. 175: Awarding the contract to the lowest amd best responsible bidder,
Kana Pipeline, in the amount of $125,783 for construction of Meter Vault
Rehabilitation, and in the event said Iow bidder fails to comply with the
terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as
waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the iow and second low bidders.
A6. 169= Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of
Neighborhood Preservation Area II - Phase 2 Project, by Nobest, Incorporated,
and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of
Completion.
A7. 175: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Williams Supply Company, in the amount of $250,532 for construction of Water
Valve Replacement Phase VI, and in the event said iow bidder fails to comply~
with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder,
as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second~-
iow bidders.
A8. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14603, and the Subdivision
Agreement with Bahram Ghassemi and Fahimeh Javadi, and authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. Tract No. 14603 is located at 3326
West Orange Avenue and is filed in conjunction with Reclassification No. 91-
92-09 and Conditional Use Permit No. 3481.
Ag. 123: Approving an Agreement with the State of California to receive a
$100,000 grant (Petroleum Violation Escrow Account grant) to carry out the
development of the Anaheim Energy-Efficient Signal program, and authorizing
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement.
Al0. 123: Approving an Amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement of the
Central Orange County fixed Guideway Agency to admit to full membership the
cities of Buena Park, Garden Grove and Stanton, and authorizing the Mayor to
execute said Amendment.
All. 175~ Recommendation for award of contract to the lowest and best
responsible bidder, E.R. Paul Company, in the amount of $3,500,000 for Linda
Vista Pump Station Modification was continued to the meeting of June 16, 1992
as recommended by staff.
A12. 160: Accepting the bid of G & W Electric Co., c/o Banes Associates,
Inc., in the amount of $75,980 for 20 SF-6 subsurface switches, in accordance
with Bid $5053.
A13. 123: Accepting the low bid of, and authorizing the execution of a
contract to Landscape West, Inc., in the amount of $38,400 for landscape
maintenance at city library facilities, for a two-year period with two one-
year optional extensions.
400
City Hall, ~nahe£,=, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~JNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Sharon Ericson,'President, AMEA. The subject bid came in at $38,400 for two
years or $19,200 per year. The Parks Department would have charged $95,000
per year. The contractor also charges for extras. If that is the case, she
feels there is something wrong with the City's charges. Since parkway medians
have been contracted out, there has been a noticeable decline in the quality
of the work being done. She is tired of hearing everyday for the last year
what ie going to be contracted out next and they are sick of worrying about
their jobs. As fast as the City is contracting out, they are hiring more
management people. Relative to the burden rate, it is ludicrous what the City
is charging on top of their pay. As long as rates are "padded" employees can
never compete with contractors even if they came in at normal prices.
Marilyn Hauk, Vice President, AMEA. She first asked what the $19,200 figure
represented; Jack Kudron, Parks, Superintendent, answered the difference
between the labor and the total cost to maintain the libraries is supplies,
equipment and overhead.
Mrs. Hauk continued if that is the case, and that is what it cost the City for
material, equipment and supplies, perhaps the City should be using the
contractor's suppliers. Not only is the contractor going to do the work for
!ess money, but also at what it costs the department in one years time just
_or supplies. Many times items which are routine for City crews become extra
for the contractors. She then addressed other portions of the contract which-
were of concern. In concluding, she stated that she continues to believe that~
the real motivation behind a lot of contracting out has nothing to do with t~e
budget but a bigger item - union busting. -
Al4. 129: ORDINANCE NO. 5309 - ADOPTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 6.40.110 TO CHAPTER 6.40 OF TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO CODE ENFORCEMENT. (To allow enforcement of
fireworks ordinance by Fire Department Captains of Fireworks Ordinance).
A15. 123: Approving an Agreement with the State of California Environmental
Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control, to develop a model
community resource conservation and environmental education program, and
authorizing John J. Hills, Utilities Environmental Services Manager, to
execute said agreement on behalf of the City.
A!6. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5313 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.03.092 OF CHAPTER 18.03 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION OR MODIFICATION OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS OR VARIANCES.
Al7. 123: Approving an Agreement with Anaheim Union High School District to
facilitate Summer Sports Camps.
Al8. 175: Receiving and filing a Notice of Filing from Southern California
Edison Company (Docket No. ER92-548-000) with United States of America Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission a Supplemental Agreement for the integration of
non-firm energy from Anaheim's Entitlement in San Juan Unit 4 between Southern
California Edison Company and the City of Anaheim.
A19. 153~ Authorizing all full-time City of Anaheim Employees to participate
in a one-time accrued vacation buy out to provide a cash donation to a
severely injured City employee.
401
City liall~ Anahe£m~ Ca~.£fornia = COUNCX~ MINU'I~$ = JUNE 9~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
A20. 123: Accepting the bid and authorizing the execution of an Agreement
with Schlumberger Industries, Inc., Water Division, in the amount of $574,354
for the annual large meter/back flow device test, repair, and/or replacement
and small meter replacement for a period of one year beginning July 1, 1992,
with option to extend for three additional one year terms, all in accordance
with Bid $5008.
David Hoskins, Water Meter Shop Supervisor. His main concern relative to the
subject proposed contract is the way the bids read where the meter contractor
supplies the meters to the City. They are supplying their own brand, Neptune
meters. In his opinion, some other manufactures make a superior meter. He
then explained why. (Part of the explanation also involved a comparison of
certain meters with the Neptune meter.} He concluded that his concern is, if
the bid is accepted as is, the City will lose control over getting prices on
cheaper bide on meters as years go by because they will be controlled by the
contractor and also the opportunity to install superior design meters that
would increase revenue to the City which he feels would surpass the savings of
the contract. Further, he feels that service provided by the City's Meter
Shop Crew would be better than that provided by the contractors. He explained
some of the things that the crew had done to help contractors over and above
what is called for in the performance of their duties. He confirmed for
Council Member Daly that the information he presented to the Council had not
been shared with the management of the Utilities Department. ~
Ron Bengochea, 1751 S. Nutwood, Anaheim, Union Chairman. He is present ~
tonight to repeat some of his past statements (see minutes of May 12, 1992) -
and to give some new information and concepts to show why in his opinion
privatizing the Water Meter Shop might not be in the City's best interest. He
first clarified that relative to the productivity issue which he had addressed
previously, they are not asking for a year to pick up productivity by 30%.
They had already brought it up 25% to 30% by reorganizing how work is
scheduled. They indicated that in an additional year, they could maintain
that 30% level or higher. He then spoke to several aspects of the proposed
contract which were of Concern such as the portion on replacement of water
meters, meter parts availability, quality of service, emergency repairs, etc.
He also offered some recommendations. In concluding, he stated some times
cheaper is not better and the proposed move could come back to "haunt" the
City at a later date, but at the expense of employees, families and residents.
They have no control over decisions made by management. He urged the Council
to vote no. Management and the Union should get together to try to solve the
problems and concerns.
Willie Stewart, 4056 Lumbardey Street, Chino. He represents Local 47 of the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). The Utilities is
proposing that the Council sell to the lowest bidder their union members jobs.
He is not convinced that the proposal is based on controlling costs but is
convinced it is based on privatization. If the management of the Utilities
was truly interested in controlling costs, their first effort would have been
to approach the Local Union or any other organization that represented City
employees and discussed with them their concerns about controlling costs and
seek their assistance and cooperation in reducing those costs. The City has
not done that. When they were told of the plan, the Local's Business
Representative and Union Chairman Ron Bengochea approached the City and asked
for the opportunity to work with the City if they had a problem with costs.
The.City has refused to do so. If for no reason, but to give the contractor a
lower cost to shoot at. Mr. Stewart addressed many issues in his extensive
presentation. In concluding, he emphasized the consequences of the proposed
402
City Ha!l· Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9· 1992 - 5~00 P.M.
action on the employees involved, those presently working in the Meter Shop
for wages and benefits that Utility Management agreed to. He urged the
Council to think about the negative message they will be sending to all
employees. Further, if the bid is legitimate, and they do not believe it is,
it is worth approximately $600,000 and at least 25% of that will leave the
community. The Council is also probably aware the Union is going to be
challenging the action through the arbitration procedure and have some hopes
of being successful. He asked at the very least that the Council back off
approving this item until that issue is resolved.
Council Member Ehrle. Before the Public Utilities General Manager addresses
the issue, he would like to speak from his point of view. The Council
establishes policy and directs the City Manager and staff in the manner in
which they want the City run. He was elected with one concept in mind,
supporting the employees of the City which he has done. He also pledged his
support to the taxpayers of the community to streamline government.
Mr. Stewart misstated that the employees in the meter shop were going to lose
their jobs. Those jobs are going to be absorbed into the Utilities
Department. He totally supports the proposal. It is for one year. After one
year, or even after 15-days, they can always change that decision. He is
~ing to go forward with privatization in streamlining government.
~d AghJayan, Public Utilities General Manager. Many things have been said -~
which he does not disagree with. He believes the public sector can be just as
efficient if not more so than the private sector. He has been managing publ~
utilities for 25 years. In Anaheim, the City's rates are lower because it is-
a public utility. However, there are times where there exists one particular
operation that may not be as cost effective as other parts of the operation.
It does not mean the people are not working hard or are not efficient. He
then answered some of the specific concerns expressed relative to the kinds of
meters that will be used, correction of defective work, etc. He also stated
that he agrees with the statement that management and the union should get
together to solve problems, they do that virtually in every area. Relative to
the proposed contract, he believes there will be some problem areas which will
have to be worked out. That is part of the process of giving the contract a
one-year trial. Staff has looked at the matter on a conservative basis. At
the end of year, they will have a good idea of the cost savings. It may be
that they will not want to continue the contract for a second year. Further,
his staff has worked diligently with the Human Resources Department so that
no employees would be out on the street. When people are given lay-off
notices, they do have bumping rights. Despite the fact that other people are
impacted, no one will lose their job as a result of this activity. The
problem is that it is a different job and in some cases at a lower rate of pay
which he explained. People's jobs and lives are being affected but they have
tried to mitigate that impact.
Council Member Daly. He asked if they are looking as aggressively at
management positions as they are at rank and file; Mr. Aghjayan answered
absolutely. Of the twenty-seven jobs eliminated in the past two years in the
department, nine were management positions including one assistant general
manager.
Steve Halpert. He is employed by the City of Anaheim in water production. He
spent 10 years in the Water Meter Shop. His position on this item is
consistent with the previous speakers. It seems in order to get the best
people when hiring managers, it is necessary to compensate accordingly. There
is a feeling that more money equals better qualified personnel. When it comes
403
C£ty Hal:].r Anahe£mr Cal:i. forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9f 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
to the labor force, however, that does not seem to apply. Management always
tries to find the cheapest labor. He then relayed an incident that occurred
at Laura Scudders in 1982 involving the Meter Shop Crew where that crew
prevented a shift at the business from being shut down as well as other
incidences where employees assisted customers even under difficult
circumstances. He also shared some of his experiences with contractors which
were not positive. He urged the Council to look at this issue very closely.
He does not believe the private sector can do a better job. It takes at least
one year to figure out the system.
Council Members then gave their comments relative to the input received on
Items A13 and A20. Council Member Pickler. It is difficult to make these
changes. When jobs are involved, the City tries to accommodate the employees
but that does not seem to satisfy the union. Private industry does not try to
find other jobs. Instead employees are given their "pink slips". If the City
can save $90,000 by contracting out in this case, it is necessary to do so and
to find money wherever possible to keep the City moving. If the contractor
does not produce, the contract can be terminated. He votes not just with the
employees in mind, but all of the City's citizens.
Council Member Simpson. The most difficult decision for him is the fact that
there will be six less jobs in the City. He cares about City employees and is
concerned about their Jobs. There are business decisions that have to be ~
made. Although he wishes he could say the situation as it stands is going toT.
be all over soon, he feels it is going to go on for sometime. ~'
Council Member Daly. He respects everything that was said about the value of
public employee jobs and the quality of the work done by these employees. As
far as he is concerned there are no "sacred cows" in the City budget and he
will not hesitate to contract out management jobs as well. He is looking at
every line item of the budget and if anyone can bring forward savings or areas
where money is being wasted, he will look at those items carefully and will
question them until he gets good answers.
Mayor Hunter. He echoes the sentiments of Council Member Simpson. These are
difficult times and as was pointed out in the workshop earlier today, the
$11,000,000,000 State Budget deficit may further impact the City's budget by
the loss of millions of dollars in DMV Registration Fees and some property
taxes. The budget today is about 1.5 million dollars out of sync to be
balanced by the General Benefits Fund. (City Manager Ruth stated it is on the
PERS rebate money from the State.) If the State does move to take away a
portion of the City's revenues, the budget will have to be revisited
throughout the City in all departments. Staff has been up front on where the
money is and where it is going. Relative to Item A20, the Council does not
want to do this but if it involves a savings of between $260,000 and $300,000
and not one employee is going to lose his or her job, it is a decision they
have to make as Council Members who are not only representatives for the
employees but also the entire City. Some of the decisions that he and the
Council Members are having to make now are the toughest decisions they have
ever had to make. He believes it is a misconception that this is employee vs.
employer and unions vs. management. They are all really trying to work
together.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5309 for adoptions
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
404
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5309 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CARRIED.
RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (7:06 p.m. )
AFTER RECESS= The Mayor called the meeting to order all Council Members being
present. (7:20 p.m.)
A21. ORDINANCE NOS. 5310 AND 5311: Adding a new Chapter 15.01 to Title 15 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to license requirements of contractors and
subcontractors - Alternate A and Alternate B. This item was continued from
the meeting of May 12, 1992 to this date. Both ordinances were introduced at
the Council Meeting of June 2, 1992.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue consideration of the subject
~rdinances for 4 weeks. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION
%J~RIED.
...TEMS B1 - B7 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 18, .1.992,
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JUNE 9, 1992:
..B1. 134: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 329 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
Initiated by: City of Anaheim, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim CA
92803.
LOCATION: Anaheim Boulevard between La Palma Avenue and Lemon Street.
A City-initiated amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan
deleting a segment of Anaheim Boulevard designated as a Primary Arterial
Highway, between La Palma Avenue and Lemon Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GPA NO. 329 GRANTED (PC92-64) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Set for a public hearing.
See public hearing Item D3 on today's agenda.
B2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3506 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
Owner: Vineyard Christian Fellowship, 5340 E. La Palma Avenue,~Anaheim,
CA 92807.
AGENT: Phil Schwartze, 27132-B Paseo Espada, Ste. 1222, San Juan
Capistrano, CA 92675.
LOCATION: 5300-5340 East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 23
acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue approximately 141 feet
west of the centerline of Brasher Street.
To permit a school (Preschool - 12) in addition to a previously approved
church.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3506 GRANTED for Preschool - Grade 8 (PC92-65) (5 yes votes, i no
vote, and I absent).
Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Council Member Pickler. He would like to have this matter set for a public
hearing. Staff in report to the Planning Commission dated May 18, 1992,
page 5, recommends that it not be approved. They are in the process of trying
405
C£ty Hall, Anaheim, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~ 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
to formulate pians for this Redevelopment area. The petitioners first asked
for permission to have a church and were granted that permission and now they
are asking for a school. He does not feel that a school belongs in that area
and will be a detriment to the children who are going to be there.
Mayor Hunter. He disagrees. He has been out to the church. The facility is
state of the art and they have spent literally millions improving the
industrial buildings into one of the finest facilities in America. What they
have done is remarkable. They have a large space available for pre-school and
their program includes a satellite program which is a world-wide program.
Council Member Pickler. He has seen the facility and knows what the Mayor is
trying to convey. When the initial presentation was made to the Council, they
were granted permission to have a church in the industrial area. He feels
they knew they wanted a school at that time. With a school, there will be
competing traffic with the industrial area. There are people in the area who
won't come to the Council to say that the use does not belong in that area
because it is a church. This is going beyond what they should be doing in
putting children in that area.
Council Member Daly. He does not want to set the matter for a hearing because
he has a strong feeling that a Council majority does not wish to do so. It
will be a long hearing and he does not sense anybody else is concerned with ~
the staff recommendation. Staff recommended against approval. The Planning.,-~-
Commission granted a CUP for a school, grades I through 8. The original -~'
request was for grades 1 through 12 and for a five-year period only. With a -
five-year period, they are going to spend a lot of money. It is a serious
land use question. Redevelopment has spent about $1,000,000 on a study that
would revise the land uses in the entire northeast industrial area. There is
a car dealership across the street from the church and the City has tried to
lure other car dealerships across the street. He is not sure this is good
land use planning. He asked when they applied for a church if they said
anything about a school.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. At the time they applied, they were
interested in a school but the zoning code did not allow schools in the area
in conjunction with a church. They decided to go ahead with a church and
possibly come back later with a school. In the meantime, the Planning
Commission and Council adopted a code amendment which would allow a CUP
process for a school. They then came back later with a school. The spaces
they are asking for now were used for Sunday school purposes.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. She then clarified for Council
Member Daly that the number of students is established by Condition 3, or set
at 480 with regular school hours to be 8:15 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Council Member Daly. If they had heard from even one property owner, he would
be willing to concur in setting the matter for a hearing, but they have not.
A school is compatible with a church even though a church and school may not
be compatible with the area.
The matter was then trailed until later in the meeting at which time Council
Member Daly stated he did not want to set it for a hearing if it is going to
be an exercise in futility. He asked for an indication from the Council how
they felt about the proposal. Council Members Ehrle, Hunter and Simpson all
stated that they favored the proposal. Council Member Daly thereupon did not
406
C£t¥ Hall, Anaheim, .Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
concur in settiflg the matter for a hearing because the indication from three
Council Members is that they favored the project.
No action was taken by the Council on this item.
B3. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4179, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11:
OWNER: Desantels Company, 125 Lakeview Drive, Woodside, CA 94062.
AGENT: Innovative Graphics, Inc., Attn: Scott Angotti, 833 N. Elm
Street, Orange, CA 92668.
LOCATION: 2809 East Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 2.17 acres
located north and east of the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Rio
Vista Street.
Waiver of permitted location of freestanding signs to construct a 25-foot
high, 279 square-foot, freestanding sign.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4179 GRANTED (PC92-66) (4 yes votes, 2 abstained, and 1
absent).
B4. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4178, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11:
OWNER: Alpha Beta Company, A Delaware Corp, Attn: David Pine, 248 Palm
Drive, Arcadia, CA 91007.
AGENT: Innovative Graphics, Inc., 833 N. Elm Street, Orange CA 92668.
LOCATION: 460 S. Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately 2.9 acres
located on the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Canyon Rim Road. -~
Waiver of permitted type of freestanding signage and permitted location OT
freestanding signs to construct a second 6-foot high, 60 square-foot, -
shopping center identification sign and to retain a 6-foot high, 60 square
foot, shopping center identification sign.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4178 GRANTED (PC92-67) (6 yes votes, i absent).
B5. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4182 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Elsie Menuey, 27681 Via Turina, Mission Viejo, CA 92692.
AGENT: Blash Momeny, 27762 Pebble Beach, Mission Viejo, CA 92692.
LOCATION: 2260 West Orange Avenue. Property is approximately 0.9 acre
located on the south side of Orange Avenue and approximately 715 feet west
of the centerline of Brookhurst Street.
Waiver of required lot frontage, minimum building site area, minimum
building site width and required location and orientation of single-family
structures, to construct 8 single-family detached residences.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4182 GRANTED (PC92-68) (6 yes votes, i absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B6. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-21, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14698 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Helen Josephine Stueckle, 700 Juniper Place, Anaheim, CA 92805.
AGENT: Marilyn Liekhus, 700 Juniper Place, Anaheim, CA 92805.
LOCATION: Subject property consists of approximately 3.97 acres bounded
by Water Street to the north, Anaheim Boulevard to the east, Stueckle
Street to the south and Lemon Street to the west (excluding the parcel
located on the northeast corner of Stueckle Street and Lemon Street and
the parcel located on the north west corner of Stueckle Street and Anaheim
Boulevard.
To reclassify a portion of the property from the CH and CG zones to the CL
zone.
407
C£t¥ Hall~ Knahe~, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
To establi~'h a 7-lot, commercial/residential subdivision with waiver of
required street improvement.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 91-92-92 GRANTED (PC92-69) (6 yes votes, I absent).
No action taken on waiver of code requirement.
Tentative Tract Map No. 14698 APPROVED (see 5/19/92 Council agenda, item
B10).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B7. 166: PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO SPECIAL EVENTS PERMITS AND
TEMPORARY SIGNS, FLAGS t AND BANNERS:
The Planning Commission has recommended modifications to the proposed code
amendment pertaining to special events, permits, temporary signs, flags
and banners. The Ordinance is to be presented at a later date.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
BB. 179: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3390:
Request by Dwyer Beesley, The Dwyer J. Beesley Company, 'Real Estate
Development), 300 N. Tustin Ave., Suite 201, Santa Ana, CA 92705.
LOCATION/REOUEST: The property is located at 209 North Gilbert Street.
The petitioner requests an extension of time retroactive to May 21, 1992,
and to expire on May 21, 1993 to comply with the conditions of approval
Conditional Use Permit No. 3390. The permit is to construct a 9-unit
affordable senior citizens' apartment complex with various waivers.
Submitted was report dated June 1, 1992 from the Zoning Administrator, Annika
Santalahti recommending approval of the requested extension of time
retroactive to May 21, 1992 to expire on May 21, 1993.
Council Member Pickler. He is speaking against the time extension. There are
too many senior citizen homes. Some are not now occupied. He lives in this
area and does not feel the project is warranted. There is a single-family
home there now and that is what it should be because there are other
single-family residences in the area. Otherwise there will be apartments or
similar projects on four or five different lots in the same area.
Mayor Hunter. He voted for the project when it was before the Council. As he
recalls, Mr. Beesley went to great lengths to assure that it would be built
with everything the City wanted. His other project is adjacent to or in the
same area.
Council Member Pickler. He asked if there was a demand for senior homes;
Annika Santalahti. Community Development could best answer that question.
Mr. Beesley has held off on this project because~of financing difficulties.
Laura Monical, Associate Planner, Community Development Department. With this
project, because of affordability, the affordable units would be rented right
away. Developers are having trouble renting the market rate units, but
projects with good amenities and nicely built units are renting. In this
project, there are three units that will be affordable that came from the
density bonus program and are being built under the senior ordinance. The
monthly rent will be $491 to start. Also the developer applied for HUD
Section 8 Certificates where the tenant pays a portion of the rent and is
subsidized for the rest. The application is in process for the other units.
There will be five affordable units out of the nine units proposed.
408
C£t¥ Rall, Anaheim, Cal££ornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00
Mayor Hunter. 'There is a waiting list of literally thousands for Section 8
Housing in the City. Many people call him about the availability of this type
of housing.
Council Member Daly. If this developer is using that vehicle to get the
project approved, there are a lot of apartments in the City that are vacant
and many landlords who are not willing to pursue Section 8. He is not sure
that Section 8 affordability should drive this decision. He opposed the
project originally because he thought it was a bad land use decision. That
part of Gilbert has become a mess because of bad land use decisions. He is
also against the time extension.
MOTION:. Council Member Hunter moved to approve the requested extension of
time on Conditional Use Permit No. 3390 retroactive to May 21, 1992 to expire
May 21, 1993 as recommended. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion.
Council Members Pickler and Daly voted no. MOTION CARRIED.
Bg. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5312 FOR ADOPTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone
~roperty under Reclassification No. 91-92-16 located at 113-215 South Atchison
treet and 615 East Broadway from the ML zone to the RS-5000 zone.
ntroduced at the meeting of June 2, 1992, Item B4. )
~IVER OF READING - ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was rea~
my the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5312)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5312 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5312: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING
(Reclassification No. 9'1-92-16 located at 113-215 South Atchison Street and
615 East Broadway from the ML zone to the RS-5000 zone).
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5312 for adoption:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT.' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
~h, Mayo,: d~ela,~d O,d£naneo ~o. §~1~ duly paaa~d and
B10/B11. 179: ORDINANCE NOS. 5314 AND 5315 FOR INTRODUCTION:
Council Member Simpson offered Ordinance No. 5314 for first reading, amending
Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 86-87-22 located
generally at State College and Katella Avenue (southeast corner) from the ML
zone to the CO zone; and Ordinance No. 5315 for first reading, amending
Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 91-92-15 located at 610
S. Sunkist Street from the RS-A-43,000 zone to the RS-7200 zone.
ORDINANCE NO. 5314: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 TO
REZONE PROPERTY UNDER RECLASSIFICATION NO. 86-87-22 LOCATED GENERALLY AT STATE
COLLEGE AND KATELLA AVENUE (SOUTHEAST CORNER) FROM THE ML ZONE TO THE CO ZONE
409
City Hall~ Anahe:i.~, Cal£fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - ,.TUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00
ORDINANCE NO. 5315: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 TO
REZONE PROPERTY UNDER RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-15 LOCATED AT 610 S. SUNKIST
STREET FROM THE RS-A-43,000 ZONE TO THE RS-7200 ZONE.
SWEAR-IN OF THOSE TESTIFYING AT PUBLIC HEARINGS:
The City Attorney announced that it is appropriate at this time for all those
intending to testify at any or all of the public hearings including staff be
sworn in at this time.
Those testifying were requested to stand by the City Clerk and asked to raise
their right hand. The oath was then given.
D1. 179~ PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 3516, WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY 542, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Pacific Electric Railway Company and Northwestern Pacific
Railroad.
COMPANY, Attn: Don Caldwell, 1200 Corporate Center, Ste. 100, Monterey
Park, CA 91754.
AGENT: Jordan-Valli Architects, Inc., Attn: Ariel L. Valli, Principal,
15375 Barranca Parkway $E-106, Irvine, CA 92718.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1703-1709 South State
College Boulevard and is approximately 5.66 acres located on the west side
of State College Boulevard and approximately 750 feet north of the ~
centerline of Katella Avenue. The request is to permit a self-storage and-
recreational vehicle storage facility with waiver of permitted location 0T
freestanding signs, minimum number of parking spaces and permitted numbe~
of caretakers' units.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3516 GRANTED, for 10 years, with opportunity for future
extensions, (PC92-52) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Waive of Council Policy No. 542 APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested
by Council Members Pickler and Daly at the meeting of May 12, 1992 and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - May 28, 1992
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 27, 1992
Posting of property- May 29, 1992
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated April 20, 1992.
APPLICANT' S
STATEMENT z
Michael Selby, 990 Highland Drive, Solana Beach, California
92075. He submitted documents to the Council, the first
showing elevation drawings of Ail Aboard Mini Storage
(driveway, RR and State College Boulevard elevations), site
plan detail and site plan including project data.
410
C£t¥ Hall~ Anaheim~ Californ£a - COUNCIL MINIFTES - JUNE 9~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Pickler. He does not know if the Council needs an extensive
presentation. He has been out to the site. His main concern is in putting
this project in the area of the "platinum triangle". His questions are to
staff. He notes this was approved for ten years with the opportunity for
future extensions. He does not have a problem with the proposed use but when
they start building in the "platinum triangle", this project will not fit in.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. With the economy as it is, activity has slowed
in terms of proposals in the "platinum triangle". That thinking was reflected
in staff's recommendation and the Planning Commission decision in imposing a
time limitation recognizing this would be an interim use. It is difficult to
say what the time schedule will be for development of the triangle. Most of
the major projects they have been working with are multiple year projects.
There is nothing proposed on the adjacent properties that they have been
actively working with or where there are eminent plans for the next few years.
Answering Council Member Daly, relative to the landscape plan, staff is happy
with it. Originally there was some interest in upgrading the landscaping
because of the potential graffiti opportunities. That was addressed in the
plan. The entrances are nicely landscaped.
-¥or Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
3hed to speak either in favor or in opposition~ there being no response he
~osed the public hearing. ~
Michael Selby. The property is owned by the railroad and is under the State---
Board of Equalization. By this venture, it will come onto the County tax -
rolls thereby generating property tax. With a ten year conditional use
permit, it is difficult to get financing. It is their opinion if there is a
higher and better land use, they are willing to work with any of their
neighbors. If anyone off Katella would want to work with them, they would see
the advantages in deferring to a higher and better use. The market place will
dictate those things. They would like to have the ten years eliminated and
let the market place dictate what will happen.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. They have had discussions in prior years with
people about the General Foods property and some of the adjacent pieces.
While nothing is eminent and there are no plans, they believe the ten year
recommendation as projected and recommended by the Planning Commission is the
most appropriate recommendation. If at the end of ten years it makes sense
for the use to go on, it could be re-extended or applied for.
Michael Selby. The City has the vehicle of condemnation to use. He
reiterated the market place will dictate what will occur. The reality i8
maybe ten years from now is probably too soon but it does affect their
financing right now. If the Council wants to match the ten year limit, they
would like to be able to revisit this matter if their financing efforts fail.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Daly, the City Council approved the
negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-111)
411
C£t¥ Hall t Anahei~t Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~ 9~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-111 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 3516 subject to City Planning Commission
conditions, but for a 15-year period. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-111: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3516.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-11! for adoptions
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-111 duly passed and adopted.
D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3519a WAIVER OF COD~
REQUIREMENT AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNERS: DR. R. S. Minnick and Jan W. Minnick, 12269 Skylane, Los Angeles,
CA 90049.
AGENT: Gannett Outdoor Co. Inc., Attn: L. Ronald Cipriani, 1731 Workman~
Street, Los Angeles, CA 90031. ~-
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 30 East Orangethorpe Avenue'
and is approximately 0.43 acre located at the southeast corner of -
Orangethorpe Avenue and Lemon Street. The request is to permit two
36-foot high billboards of 241 and 672 square feet each.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3519 DENIED (PC 92-62) (4 yes votes, 3 absent).
Waiver of code requirement DENIED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was
submitted by the Agent, Gannett Outdoor Co., Inc., and public hearing
scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REOUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - May 28, 1992
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 27, 1992
Posting of property- May 29, 1992
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated May 4, 1992.
APPLI CANT
STATEMENT
Charles Daggett, Gannett Outdoor Company, 1731 Workman Street. Los
Angeles. He first gave background on the activities of Gannett
Outdoor in the City. Today they are asking for approval of a CUP for
a billboard at the corner of Orangethorpe and Lemon. They believe it
is a location suitable for such a use, since it is located in a high
density commercial area. There is no residential property in the
surrounding area. It complies with all codes except for the variance
and size they are asking for on the property. He then briefed why
412
¢£t¥ !Ia11, Anahein~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIr. NI~S - 0'UNB 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
they were denied at the Planning Commission (see Planning Commission
resolution PC92-62). In concluding, he stated it was a location that
is suitable for their proposal.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak either in favor or in opposition.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION -
IN OPPOSITION ~
Barry Eaton, Chief Planner, City of Fullerton. He referred to a
letter previously sent from the Mayor of Fullerton to the Planning
Commission opposing the subject CUP; Annika Santalahti, Zoning
Administrator. She submitted copies of the letter to the Council
which were received in the Planning Department along with other
letters. Mr. Eaton continued that they were not aware the item was on
the agenda until 4:30 p.m. today. The area is all commercial but it
is their prime redevelopment area, number one. There is extremely
heavy traffic on Lemon Street so much so their Redevelopment Agency
has spent money in Anaheim on the Anaheim side of Lemon Street in
order to widen Lemon in front of this subject project. In addition,
when the Northwood Properties redevelops there will be significantly
more traffic at this intersection. They are concerned about the
visual effect on their prime redevelopment area and the distraction t~
the very heavy traffic going through the intersection. He urged the
Council to support the Planning Commission's decision and deny the
request.
Richard Carter, Brian Industrial Properties, 146 E. Orangethorpe,
Anaheim. As property owners, they protest the proposed sign. It will
be a blight to the neighborhood. They do not want it to be approved
and all of the people they have talked to do not want it either.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION -
IN FAVOR ~ None
S~TION BY
APPLI~ ~
Charles Daggett. Gannett Outdoor had an existing sign that was back
to back double sided on the property where the Sports Arena is being
constructed which they had to remove. They are trying to seek
relocation, not increase the use. They are merely trying to maintain
what they had.
Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Daly, seconded by Council Member Hunter, the City Council denied the
negative declaration status of the proposal and that there is evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION
CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-112)
413
C£t¥ Hall t AnaheL~ Cal£fornia - COUNCIL MI~S - JUIqE 9t 1992 - 5:00
Council Member Daly moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Daly offered Resolution No. 92R-112 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 3519. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-112.' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3519.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-112 for adoptions
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS= Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS = None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-112 duly passed and adopted.
Before concluding, Council Member Pickler stated that the location of
billboards is important. He has nothing against billboards. He felt at one
time they should demand a CUP for any billboard that comes before the City.
There are certain areas on the freeway where he feels they are appropriate.
They ought to give the people the opportunity. He had talked to the City
Attorney some time ago with reference to preparing an ordinance with the idea~
that anyone who wants to come in for a billboard has to go through the CUP
process, whether in the areas they are allowed now, or on the freeway.
City Attorney Jack White. Two or three years ago, they went through a process
where they looked at that. The Council ended up not adopting an ordinance to
allow freeway oriented billboards. The matter came up again with a request
from a private billboard company and was discussed by the Council. The
request was subsequently withdrawn. He believes that was about two or three
months ago. If the question is, is he working on anything right now, he is
not doing so.
Council Member Pickler. What he wants to do is open it up to anyone who wants
to apply whether within the City limits, freeway or any place they want to put
a billboard, that they have a right to apply with the City to do so. The main
thing is they would all have to go through the CUP process. He wants the same
procedure for freeway billboards as well.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The code was modified so that all
billboards currently are required to have a CUP but freeway billboards and
billboards in the S~r Corridor plus residential zones are specifically
prohibited by code.
City Attorney White. What Council Member Pickler is suggesting and if a
majority of the Council wishes, is to instruct him (White) to draft an
ordinance to bring back to the Council that would expand the location of
billboards to permit freeway oriented billboards in the commercial industrial
zones, in addition to those already permitted by CUP.
Council Member Simpson stated he would support that; Council Member Ehrle
stated he would support it only in a freeway industrial area. As he recalls
his comments three years ago, he was hoping they could start to reduce the
number of inner-city billboards. A citizen committee was formed at the time
and looked at all billboards in town, how many there were, cost, etc. If the
City is generating more income today on billboards than four years ago he
414
C£t¥ Hall~ Anaheim, Cal£fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5=00 P.M.
would like to know how much money would be involved. He is interested in a
CUP for billboards along the freeway in an industrial area especially if it
could be shown to generate revenue for the City.
City Attorney White. That issue was visited once previously. They will be
able to generate a certain amount of revenue through licensing, but not be
able to impose extremely high fees. An idea came about twelve years ago that
the City impose fees in the neighborhood of $50,000. He does not believe they
can find legally they can generate that kind of money, but any new use allowed
that has to be licensed, they will be able to impose a license fee that is
something less than that large magnitude. It cannot be confiscatory or out of
keeping with fees imposed on non-first amendment activities. Outdoor
advertising has been held to be a First Amendment protected activity.
Council Member Ehrle. What he is looking for is a report back on what
revenues have been generated on billboards already existing in the City.
Council Member Daly. So that he is clear, Council Member Pickler is asking
the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance that will expand the allowable uses
.dr billboards on freeways where they are not allowed right now.
~ncil Member Pickler. He is talking about freeway billboards, but not in
.~enic zones or residential areas. The City Attorney will come back with the~
ordinance and the Council can go from there.
Council Member Daly asked if there are three Council Members that support -
that. It was determined that Council Members Pickler, Ehrle and Simpson were
in support.
D3. 134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 329 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
INITIATED BY: City of Anaheim, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim CA
92803.
LOCATION: Anaheim Boulevard between La Palma Avenue and Lemon Street.
A City-initiated amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan
deleting a segment of Anaheim Boulevard designated a Primary Arterial
Highway, between La Palma Avenue and Lemon Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GPA NO. 329 GRANTED (PC92-64) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item (No. B1) on today's agenda.
PUBLIC NOTICE REOUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - May 28, 1992
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 27, 1992
Posting of property - May 29, 1992
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated May 18, 1992.
Greg McCafferty, Assistant Planner. This is a City initiated amendment to the
circulation element of the General Plan deleting a portion of Anaheim
Boulevard between La Palma and Lemon. The City Traffic Engineering staff
indicated this is necessary to improve traffic safety and to eliminate an odd
angle intersection.
415
C£t¥ Hall, AnaheLm, Cal.£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~g 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak. Since there was no response; he closed the public hearing.
Council Member Pickler asked if there was any opposition to the proposed
General Plan Amendment; Mr. McCafferty answered no and City Clerk Sohl stated
that she had received no letters of opposition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler, the City Council approved
the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-113)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-113 for adoption, approving
General Plan Amendment No. 329. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-113: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 329.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-1!3 for adoption~
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-113 duly passed and adopted.
D4. 107: PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIAL PERMIT - R~LOCATION OF TWELVE B~SIDENTIA?.
STRUCTURES IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA:
Approving the request of the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency for a special
permit to move twelve one-story residential structures in Redevelopment
Project Alpha as follows:
FROM:
913 E. Broadway
919 E. Broadway
1003 E. Broadway
1013 E. Broadway
125 S. Rose
1021 E. Broadway
206 S. Rose
1017 E. Broadway
111S. Bush
202 S. Rose
125 S. Bush
901-03 E. Broadway
TO:
616 E. Broadway
223 s. Atchison
219 S. Atchison
215 S. Atchison
209 S. Atchison
125 S. Atchison
121 S. Atchison
117 S. Atchison
111 S. Atchison
112 S. Kroeger
123 S. Melrose
115 S. Melrose
416
City Ball t Anaheim. Californ£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~ 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - May 28, 1992
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 27, 1992
Posting of property- May 29, 1992
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report dated May 19, 1992 from the Planning Department - Building
Division recommending approval of the special permit request.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. This request addresses twelve homes in the
downtown area. Redevelopment Agency staff has been working with the
community. These twelve homes do have the highest ranking in terms of
historical value and will be compatible in terms of placements on the lots and
compatibility with the neighborhoods. Staff is recommending approval.
Mayor Hunter asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak on this item.
Phil Knypstra, Gelid Street, Anaheim. It is going to cost about $121,000 to
move the houses. He does not know if the Council has had an opportunity to
-Jew these houses but they do not seem to be unique to him, but tear down
~.terial. Perhaps he does not understand the intricacies of the Redevelopment
9cess but these are still taxpayer dollars. He suggested that the Council
...rive by and look at these houses. ~
Richard Bruckner, Redevelopment/Economic Development Manager. He explained ~'
the process on how the houses were chosen to be moved and rehabilitated notin~
that these were the highest ranked. The sites where they will be moved to are
all vacant. Early, the Agency approved Neighborhood Area IV Plan which would
provide for relocation of these houses in compatible settings to finish off
that neighborhood. Although they look quite modest and in some cases in
disrepair, there is a fine future for the homes.
Council Member Daly. He asked if Mr. Kynpstra has any other questions about
the underlying economics of how these neighborhood restorations work, he could
spend some time with staff to get the details. Some of the decisions have not
yet been made. The actual decision as to who will restore and rehabilitate
the houses has not been made; Mr. Bruckner confirmed that was correct. It
will definitely come back before the Agency.
Mayor Hunter. He confirmed they established this historical district many
years ago and these houses are bringing it to fruition.
There being no further persons who wish to speak, Mayor Hunter closed the
pub 1 ic hearing.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved that the mitigated negative declaration
previously approved by the Planning Commission April 20, 1992 in connection
with Variance No. 4177, Reclassification No. 91-92-16 is sufficient for the
house moving project. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-114)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
417
City Hall, An&helm, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1992 - 5:00 P.H.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-114 for adoption, approving a
Special Permit to move twelve (12) residential structures in Redevelopment
Project Alpha in the City of Anaheim as recommended in memorandum dated
May 19, 1992 from the Planning Department/Building Division. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-114: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING A SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE TWELVE (12) RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES
IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-114 for adoption..
AYES .-
NOES .-
ABSENT .-
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-114 duly passed and adopted.
ADJOURNMENT.' By General Consent the Council adjourned to Tuesday, June 16,
1992 at 1.-00 p.m. (8:20 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
418