1992/07/28City Hallr An_aheimr Californla - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5=00 P.M.
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
SENIOR REAL PROPERTY AGENT= Richard Santo
PLANNING DIRECTOR= Joel Fick
REDEVELOPMENT/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER: Richard Bruckner
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 1:30 p.m. on July 24, 1992, at the Civic Center 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 its authorized representative
regarding labor relations matters - Government Code Section
54957.6.
c. To consider and take possible action upon personnel matters
pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.
d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1).
e. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as
are orally announced by the City Attorney, City Manager or City
Council prior to such recess unless the motion to recess
indicates any of the matterg will not be congidered in clo~ed
session.
By general Consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. (3:02 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.
(5:20 p.m.).
INVOCATION: Captain Orta, Salvation Army, gave the invocation.
FLAG SALUTE= Council Member Irv Pickler led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
516
City Hallt Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28t 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
119: PRESENTATION - EXCELLENCE IN HIRING MILITARY VETERANS:
Orange County Veterans Committee recognizing the City of Anaheim for its
excellent record in hiring Military Veterans during the year 1991.
Joanne McGurie, Assistant Manager of the Anaheim office of the California
Employment Development Department stated the Anaheim office takes great pride
in nominating Anaheim for the honor of "Employer of the Year" recognizing the
City's excellent record in hiring military veterans during 1991. She directed
her remarks to Dave Morgan, the City's Human Resources Director and Greg
Smith, Stadium General Manager noting that Anaheim Stadium has employed many
veterans over the years. The City has distinguished itself as an outstanding
employer of the year.
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Hunter and
authorized by the City Council:
Race for the Cure Day, in Anaheim, September 27, 1992.
119: DECLARATION OF WELCOME: A Declaration of Welcome was unanimously
adopted by the City Council welcoming the Alpha Phi Alpha 86th National
Convention to Anaheim, August 11-15, 1992.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,896,334.67 for the
period ending July 24, 1992, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Hunter recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency .and Housing Authority meetings. (5: 26 p.m. )
Mayor Hunter reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:30 p.m. )
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
Mr. Jeff Kirsch spoke on Item All and Mr. Phil Aguilar and Gilbert Gonzalez
spoke on Item A22 (see discussion under those items).
City Clerk Sohl announced for the Mayor that those who wished to speak on
Items Cl will be heard at the time the item is discussed.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Sharon Ericson, President AMEA. She is asking the Council if at all possible
that the discussion to take place relative to privatization be moved from
August 11, 1992 to August 18, 1992. The association would like to receive a
copy of the status report that is to be submitted by staff. If they could
then get a copy of that report in two weeks so that they would have a week to
go through it, and be able to respond at the meeting if it is considered on
August 18. On a personal note, she will also be on vacation on August 11 and
unable to attend the meeting.
Mayor Hunter first asked the City Manager if Mrs. Ericson could have a copy of
the report prior to the meeting; City Manager Ruth answered yes, if that is
the Council' s wish.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to continue the discussion regarding the
privatization study scheduled for August 11 to August 18, 1992. Council
Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
517
City Hall, A, ahe!_~, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
David Anderson. He is requesting a public hearing for changes in a CUP. He
works for Omega Marine, Inc., 1071 N. Blue Gum, Anaheim. They have been
attempting to make some changes and have had a meeting with the Planning
Department and Code Enforcement. The wording of their current CUP does not
enable them to make changes that they need to make to stay in business. He
wants a public hearing to affect changes to their CUP.
city Attorney White. There is 'an application procedure through the Planning
Department that can be followed if there are conditions that the applicant
requests to be amended and public hearings are scheduled through that route.
David Anderson. He has met with the Planning Department and was informed that
the CUP was grandfathered in and no changes are possible.
Council Member Ehrle. He does not believe that is true. He spoke to someone
representing Mr. Anderson and told that person to have Mr. Anderson come
forward to have the situation clarified. The proper procedure is to go
through Planning as Mr. White said. He (Ehrle) feels the door is never shut.
City Attorney White. His understanding is that the use Mr. Anderson desires
is one that is not currently permitted in the Canyon Industrial Area by
Conditional Use Permit. If the Council would like to refer the matter to Joel
Fick, the Planning Director and his staff they would be happy to work with
Mr. Anderson and if the matter cannot be resolved at least get the information
back to the Council so that they are aware of the issue.
CITY .MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR~ On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Simpson, the following items were approved
in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished
each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member
Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 92R-161 through 92R-164, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS= The title of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 92R-161 through 92R-164, both
inclusive, for adoption. )
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Al. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Mother Colony House Advisory
Board meeti'ng held May 11, 1992.
105= Receiving and filing minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting held
June 4, 1992.
156= Receiving and filing the Anaheim Police Department Crime and Clearance
Analysis report for the month of June, 1992.
A2. 169= Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Ail American Asphalt, in the amount of $120,999.31 for Magnolia Avenue Street
Improvement (Crescent Avenue to Lincoln Avenue), and in the event said iow
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.
518
City Hallr A~__ahe!m_t California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28r 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
A3. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with Nathan
Rubaloff, dba Nate's Palms, to extend the lease from June 30, 1994 to June 30,
2002, to operate a tree nursery on 3.0 acres of City-owned property located on
the west side of Ninth Street, approximately 134 feet north of Laster Street
(CP-63); and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said LeaSe.
A4. 151= Approving an Encroachment License Agreement with Orange County
Water District for a water monitoring well located within Willow Park.
AS. 175: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Westridge
Pump Station Modification by Wick Engineering, Inc., and authorizing the Mayor
to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion.
A6. 123: Approving an Agreement with RJM Design Group, Inc., in an amount
not to exceed $50,000 for landscape architectural design services, and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement.
A7. 123~ Approving an Agreement with IWA Engineers, in an amount not to
exceed $200,000 for administration, coordination, and technical support
services for the I-5 Freeway widening between State Routes 57/22 and State
Route 91; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement
on behalf of the City.
A8. 123: Approving the Park and Ride Lot Agreement No. 12-ORA-021-NO-ANA
with Caltrans, wherein the City licenses Caltrans to use a portion of the
City's parking lot at La Palma Park for purposes of a Park and Ride facility.
Ag. 123= Approving an Agreement with Harris and Associates, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed $50,000 for landscape architectural design services; and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement.
Al0. 123: Approving an Agreement with Black & Veatch, in an amount not to
exceed $1,105,080 to provide engineering services for the Lenain Filtration
Plant Modification Project.
All. 175~ Authorizing the implementation of a city-wide Dusk-to-Dawn
Security Lighting Program at a cost of $90,000, as recommended by the Public
Utilities Board at their meeting of July 16, 1992.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 w. Palais, Anaheim. He believes this is a good idea and one
he supports. Relative to the agreement, he asked if there are supplemental
agreements that require that the equipment be kept in good working order. He
did not see any information on that.
Council Member Daly. He expressed his gratitude and praise to City staff, the
Utilities Department and the Public Utilities Board for taking the initiative
to develop a security lighting program which will be expanded to ten
additional neighborhoods. He feels it iea great program.
A12. 123: Approving an Agreement with MICON, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $220,000 for the management of the specification phase of the new
Customer Information System (CIS) Project, as recommended by the Public
Utilities Board at their meeting of July 16, 1992.
Al3. 123~ Accepting the completion of, and authorizing payment to Edwin
Webber, Inc., in the amount of $5,625.52 for weed abatement work incurred
during the 1991/92 fiscal year.
519
City Ha11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MIN~rrES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
A14. 129: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-161: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM CONFIRMING THE WRITTEN REPORT OF THE FIRE CHIEF REGARDING THE
COST OF WEED ABATEMENT, AND DIRECTING THE FILING THEREOF WITH THE COUNTY OF
ORANGE. (Weed abatement - 1991/1992 - Report and property tax liens. )
A15. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-162: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, GENERAL UNIT AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (To
implement a ten-four plan work schedule for the Information Services Group
employees in the Public Utilities Department. )
A16. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-163: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, CLERICAL UNIT AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (To
implement a ten-four plan work schedule for the Conservation group employees
in the Public Utilities Department. )
A17. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-164: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-21 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATION DESIGNATED AS MIDDLE MANAGEMENT. (To allow
the possibility of upgrading the classification of Housing Coordinator,
effective July 17, 1992 through January 15, 1993. )
A18. 123: Approving an Affordable Housing Agreement with Newl~Drt Pacific
Development Corporation, Inc., for one affordable unit (out of nine units) on
property located at 3253 to 3299 West Ball Road.
A19. 123: Approving an Agreement with Susan Mogul and Eric Martin, in the
amount of $8,000 to provide artistic services at the Anaheim Arena, in
accordance with the Anaheim Arena Art Plan.
Council Member Pickler voted no on this item.
A20. 140: Amending the Resource Allocation Plan by increasing Library
revenue and expenditure appropriations in the 17 fund by $1,499, and accepting
a California Council for the Humanities grant.
A21. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with Community Services
Program, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $52,597 to continue to provide
professional counseling services to the citizens of Anaheim in specialized
areas of juvenile delinquency prevention, family crisis, child victimization,
sexual molestation, and rape trauma for the period of July 1, 1992 through
June 30, 1993.
A22. 174: Authorizing the City Manager to submit an Amendment to the Final
Statement of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Objectives and Projected
Use of Funds for the 1992-93 CDBG Program to the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development.
106: Amending the 1992/93 Resource Allocation Plan to decrease revenues and
expenditures in Program No. 25-214 by $150,000; and to increase revenues and
expenditures in Program No. 25-169 by $110,000 and Program No. 25-344 by
$40,000. (To approve the use of $150,000 in 1991-92 CDBG program income for a
Gang/Drug Coordinator and for Code Enforcement Activities. )
Pastor Phil Aguilar. He is going to introduce a friend, one Set Free is
working with. He is one of the leaders of a group called the United Gang
520
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Council. They are working in Anaheim already and the first group he has seen
that can really get the ear and attention of the gang members.
Gilbert Gonzalez, United Gang Council/Orange County. They are a countywide
organization of former prisoners/former gang members. They are going to every
community and "squashing" the violence. They have staff members going
throughout every neighborhood in every City. Anaheim has about 4,000 to 5,000
gang members. His organization is reaching out to them. In the City of all
the funds allocated to youth, none are aimed at gang members, the youth,
under-employed and unemployed. They are dealing with a population politically
neglected for hundreds of years. He understands all the funding for this year
is over. They have a whole bunch of gang members that want and need jobs.
They would like the City to advise on where they can find jobs for these
people through whatever programs there might be.
Mayor Hunter. Anaheim has its own Private Industry Counsel (PIC) and are in
the process even now of hiring youth for summer jobs. They have received
Federal funds for the program. He suggested contacting Steve Swaim, the
City's Gang/Drug Coordinator as well as the Private Industry Council. He also
briefed how request for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding
works.
Ray Torres, a member of the Private Industry Counsel who is in the Chamber
audience stated he believes there are still summer jobs available through the_
Federal program and by calling Marge Pritchard, the Jobs Training Program
Manager, she will have a better answer since she is coordinating the program.
Richard Bruckner, Community Development. The funding was sufficient to fund
approximately 500 youth jobs through the summer. He will talk to Mr. Gonzalez
about that now.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 92R-161 throuqh 92R-164, both inclusive, for
adoption;
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS .- None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 92R-161 through 92R-164, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CAKRIED.
A23. 148: ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 2, 3 AND 13 - ALTERNATE
REPRESENTATIVE...'.
Council Member Ehrle moved to designate Council Member Irv Pickler as the
City's Alternate Representative to the Orange County Sanitation Districts 2,
3, and 13. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A24. 148: VOTING DELEGATES - LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE -
1992:
Council Member Daly moved to designate Council Member Pickler as the Voting
Delegate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference to be held in
Los Angeles on October 10, 1992, through October 13, 1992. Council Member
Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
521
City Hall, ~-aheim, California - COUNCIL MINIFTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Pickler moved to designate Council Member Simpson as the
Alternate Voting Delegate for the League of California Cities Annual
Conference to be held in Los Angeles on October 10, 1992, through October 13,
1992. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS B1 - B3 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF JULY 9, 1992 - DECISION
DATE ~ JULY 15 , 1992,_ INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JULY 30 ~ 1992 ~
B1. 179: CONDITIONAL_ USE PERMIT NO. 3525 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Scott Burnham, 770 The City Drive, #215, Orange, CA 92668.
LOCATION: 430 South Anaheim Hills Road, Suite B. Property is
approximately 7.0 acres located at the northeast corner of Anaheim
Hills Road and Nohl Ranch Road (El Cerrito Restaurant).
To permit the on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine within
an existing restaurant.
ACTION TAK~__N BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3525 APPROVED (ZA92-30).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B2. 179: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0069:
OWNER: Fujita Corporation USA, P.O. Box 1607, Santa Monica, CA
90406.
AGENTS: Performance Contracting, Inc., 1740 W. Katella Avenue, Suite
F, Orange CA 92667.
Richard ~nderson, 128 S. Glassell Avenue, Orange, CA 92666.
LOCATION: 1270 Hancock Street. Property is approximately 2.25 acres
located on the east side of Hancock Street and approximately 632 feet
north of the cents, line of La Palma Avenue.
To construct approximately 15,565 square feet of office area within
an existing 49,200 square foot industrial building with waiver of
minimum number of required parking spaces (138 spaces required; 124
proposed).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ~JDMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Adjustment No. 69 GRANTED (ZA92-31).
B3. 179: ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 92-02:
OWNER: Ruth Stabile, 7543 Calle Durango, Anaheim, CA 92808.
LOCATION: 7543 East Calls Durango. Property is approximately 6,600
square feet located on the north side of Calls Durango, and
approximately 85 feet west of the cents,line of Avenida Rio Bravo.
To l~ermit a large family day care facility involving up to twelve
(1~)
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR=
Administrative Use Permit No. 92-02 APPROVED (ZA92-32).
END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS.
ITeM B4 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION (JOINT WORKSHOP WITH THE COMMUNITY
I~__~DEV~=X)PMENT COMMISSION) MEETING - JULY 20, 1992
INFORMAT!ON ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JULY 30 , 1992 ~
B4. 170: YES. TING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NOS. 14192 AND 14193, REOUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME:
Requested by: Kelley Renezeder, The Baldwin Company, 16811 Hale
Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714.
522
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe£m~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MI~S - JULY 28~ 19~2 - 5:00 P.M.
Property is a portion of Development Area 104 of The Summit of
Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP88-2).
Petitioner requests a one-year extension of time.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved request for a one-year extension of time on Vesting
Tentative Tract Map Nos. 14192 and 14193 (to expire March 26, 1993).
B5.- B8. 179: ORDINANCE NOS. 5321 THROUGH 5324 FOR ADOPTION:
Ordinance No. 5321 for adoption, amending Subsection .060 and adding
Subsection .065 of Section 18.61.030 of Chapter 18.61 of Title 18 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning. (Code amendment pertaining to the
accessory retail sale of tile, floor coverings and window coverings for
parcels zoned ML which are on State College Boulevard between Ball Road and
Katella Avenue. ); Ordinance No. 5322 for adoption, amending Subsections
18.84.030.040, 18.84.030.053 and 18.84.030.060 of Section 18.84.030 of Chapter
18.84 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Specimen Tree
removal; Ordinance No. 5323 for adoption, amending Subsection 18.96.033.040 of
Section 18.96.033 of Chapter 18.96 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
relating to minimum recreational-leisure area for deck-type housing projects;
and Ordinance No. 5324 for adoption, amendment to Specific Plan 90-01 (Anaheim
Hills Festival).
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES: The titles of the following ordinances were
read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance Nos. 5321 through 5324, both inclusive,
for adoption. )
Council Member Daly moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances.
Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Daly offered Ordinance Nos. 5321 through 5324, both inclusive,
for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 532%~. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION
.060 AND ADDING SUBSECTION .065 OF SECTION 18.61.030 OF CHAPTER 18.61 OF TITLE
18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (Code amendment
pertaining to the accessory retail sale of tile, floor coverings and window
coverings for parcels zoned ML which are on State College Boulevard between
Ball Road and Katella Avenue.)
ORDINANCE NO. 5322: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTIONS
1~,~4,0~0,040~ 1~,~4,0~0,0~3 AND 18.84,030,060 OF SECTION 18.84.030 OF CHAPTER
18.84 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SPECIMEN TREE
REMOVAL.
ORDINANCE NO. 5323: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION
18.96.033.040 OF SECTION 18.96.033 OF CHAPTER 18.96 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MINIMUM RECREATIONAL-LEISURE AREA FOR DECK-TYPE
HOUSING PROJECTS .
ORDINANCE NO. 5324: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 5110 RELATING TO SPECIFIC
PLAN 90-01 (ANAHEIM HILLS FESTIVAL) .
523
C£t¥ Hall, Anahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~ULY 28, 1992 - 5500
Roll Call Vote on Ord£nance Nos. 5321 throuqh 5324, both £nclus£ve, for
adopt ion 5,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 5321 through 5324, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
ITEMS B9 - B12 FROM THE P~ING COI~4ISSION MEETING OF ~LY 27, 1999
INFO~TION ONLY - APPE~ PERIOD ENDS AUGUST 6, 199~
B9. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-20, VARIANCE NO. 4181, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 14641, SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 92-02, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION~.
OWNER: M.Y. Pelanconi Estate, C/O Bernardo M. Yorba, Executor, 300
S. Harbor Blvd., Ste. 912, Anaheim, CA 92805.
AGENT: Morgan Development, Inc., Attn: Max Morgan, President, 20341
Levine Avenue, Ste. D-3, Santa Ana Heights, CA 92707.
LOCATION: 5540 East Santa Ana Canyon Road. Property is
approximately 12.38 acres located on the south side of Santa Ana
Canyon Road and also having frontage on the north side of Avenida
Margarita and approximately 1,211 feet east of the centerline of
royal Oak Road.
For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 (SC) to RS-5000 (SC).
For waiver of required lot frontage and required location and
orientation of buildings to establish a 36-1ot RS-5000 (SC) and RS-A-
43,000 (SC) single-family residential subdivision (including the
construction of 34 single-family residences).
To remove 51 specimen trees.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14641 DENIED (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1
absent).
Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Reclassification No. 91-92-20 DENIED (5 yes votes, i no vote, and 1
absent).
Variance No. 4181 DENIED (4 yes votes, 2 no votes, and I absent).
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 92-02 DENIED (5 yes votes, 1
absent).
NOTE: R91-92-20, V4181, and STR92-02 have a 22-day appeal period
which expires Augus~ 18, 199Z, and will appear on ~ha~ ¢0uncil
agenda.
B10. 1795 VARIANCE NO. 3961 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 13991 - REQUEST FOR
AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
REQUESTED BY: Michael P. Gubbins
LOCATION: 1261-1271 North Allwood Circle.
Petitioner requests a one-year extension of time to comply with
conditions of approval for Variance 3961 and Tentative Tract Map No.
13991 (waiver of required lot frontage to establish a 10-lot, RS-5000
(SC) single-family residential subdivision) to expire on August 14,
1993.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Request for extension of time on Variance No. 3961 and Tentative
Tract Map No. 13991 APPROVED (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
524
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28t 1992 - 5~00 P.M.
NOTE...'.. Variance No. 3961 has a 22-day appeal period.
Bll. 170: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NOS. 12686 AND 12687 - REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME:
REQUESTED BY: A1 Uman (Presley Company).
LOCATION: A portion of Development Area 5 of the Highlands at
Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1).
Petitioner requests a one-year extension of time on a portion of
Development Area 5 of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific plan
( SP87-1).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Request for extension of time on Tentative Tract Map Nos. 12686 and
12687 APPROVED (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
B12. 170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13926 - REQUEST FOR A RETROACTIVE TIME
EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: REQUESTED BY: Robert Mickelson
LOCATION: Property is located at the southerly terminus of Londerry
Lane.
Petitioner requests a one-year retroactive time extension for
Tentative Tract No. 13926 (to establish a 5-lot subdivision) to
comply with conditions of approval, to expire July 30, 1993.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Retroactive time extension for Tentative Tract No. 13926 APPROVED (6
yes votes, 1 absent).
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
Cl. 127: RESOLUTION RELATING TO BALLOT MEASURES - NOVEMBER 3, 1992t GENERAL
MUNICIPAL ELECTION:
To consider approval of a resolution relating to ballot measures for the
November 3, 1992, election.
Submitted was report dated July 22, 1992, from the City Attorney attached to
which was the proposed resolution containing the eight ballot measures which
were previously discussed by the Council and tentatively approved to be placed
on the November 3, 1992 ballot.
city Attorney White. He has prepared a resolution for Council consideration
relating to eight different ballot measures that the Council previously
¢0nsidered and has given ~entative approval for placement on the November 3t
1992, General Municipal Election Ballot.
CITY COUNCIL TERM LIMITS: Relative to proposed Measure 1, City Council term
limits, he (White) has by mail given each of the Councilmembers four
additional options for consideration relating to implementing the term limit
provision of incumbents based upon the discussion held last week (see minutes
of July 21, 1992).
MOTION.: Council Member Ehrle, based on the information provided, moved that
City Council term limits be placed on the November 3, 1992 ballot
incorporating Option No. 4 as follows: "Includes years of Council service by
incumbents prior to November, 1992 toward two term limit on Council but would
allow any incumbent to run for Mayor in 1994 and, if elected, would allow
person to run again for Mayor in 1998." Council Member Simpson seconded the
motion.
525
City Ha11~ Anaheim~ Californi& - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5=00 P.M.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Hunter asked the City Attorney to explain how
Option No. 4 would work concluding that by incorporating the language and
Option No. 4, it would put everyone on equal footing - all Council Members
would be eligible to run for Mayor in 1994 and, if successful and elected,
could run again in 1998.
Council Member Pickler. He would prefer Option No. 2: "Excludes years of
Council service by incumbents prior to November, 1992 toward the two term
limit." He does not believe in term limits. The people should have the right
to vote for whoever they want.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to speak on term
limits~ there was no response.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion to place term limits on the
ballot incorporating Option No. 4. Council Member Pickler voted no. MOTION
CARRIED.
UTILITY REVENUE TRANSFER LIMITS:.. City Attorney White. This would change the
Charter from 4% to 8% on gross revenues earned by the Utilities during the
preceding fiscal year to be paid into the General Fund during any subsequent
:iscal year.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to speak.
Dick Clark, Rockwell International, residence 5545 Via Perla, Yorba Linda.
The Budget Commission, although it did not take a formal vote, has strong
feelings that the City should not take more transfer from Utility revenues
into the General Fund. The City formed a partnership of the Utilities
Department and Community Development to attract and retain businesses in the
City. This will do just the opposite.
Council Member Pickler interjected and asked if Mr. Clark was speaking on
behalf of the Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Clark stated he was speaking on behalf
of Rockwell, one of the City's largest employers. He continued that there is
no possible way to transfer 4% more out of the Utilities Gross Revenue and not
have a rate increase of nearly the same amount in Utility bills. Electricity
and water are 25% of the occupancy cost at their facility. They must keep it
down in order to stay in business in Anaheim. Their plants in other States
(Georgia, Iowa and Texas) all have lower electricity costs than Anaheim. Most
of the manufacturing is done out of State. He urged that they do not force
them to take engineering and marketing there as well. They also have higher
taxes, health care benefit costs and environmental costs than the other three
states. If it is to continue to increase along with Util£ties faster than
other parts of the Country, it is clear that a business decision will be made
to relocate to a lower cost area. The City must continue to live within its
means. It is Just another tax added to Utility bills used to support local
government.
Ray Torres, President, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. He is representing the
Chamber. Before coming to the meeting, the leadership of the Chamber was
polled to determine what the position would be for the Chamber. Sixty-seven
percent (67%) of the Chamber leadership surveyed responded by saying they are
opposed to the proposed ballot measure amending the Utility Revenue Transfer
Limits. Some additional comments - he would like to pay a compliment to the
management of the Public Utilities Department. They are doing an outstanding
job with a consciencous effort and are forward looking in providing a service
to businesses in the City. They are providing a service that is sorely needed
526
City Hall, Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28t 1992 - 5z00 P.M.
to retain businesses - a more efficient use of power in their businesses thus
reducing operating expenses. It is a powerful tool that can also be used to
attract businesses to the City. Lower power costs give a competitive
advantage to attract businesses and for economic development. Electric power
rates are now about 4% less than Southern California Edison (SCE). If the
transfer is increased 4%, then rates go up 4% and the competitive advantage is
gone. The Anaheim Chamber and the businesses it represents ask the City
Council and urges the City Council to find other ways than raising or
transferring or moving the transfer limits of the Utilities.
Council Member Ehrle. If there is an increase of 4% in the rate transfer,
that does not mean there is going to be a rate increase of 4%. It is a
misleading statement.
Ray Torres. He contends they are attempting to move money from a very well
managed department into another area. He questions how much cost savings and
productivity gains that department can have without passing along to the
consumer the additional costs in terms of rates.
Frank Feldhaus, 1879 Lullaby Lane, Anaheim. He believes that the proposed
resolution is written rather loosely and is misleading, particularly Measure 2
- defining Utility Revenue Transfer limits. It should be separated from the
other measures. He gave his suggested wording for the measure. The language
should also include a continuing statement - "if the measure is approved, only
after adequate needs for public safety personnel to insure the health, welfare
and comfort of our. citizens have been made will the remainder of the
additional $9,000,000 in new found General Fund Revenues become discretionary
to the City Council." The formulas and the criteria for adequate needs is to
be determined by the City Manager. The only way he could support the measure
is if he first knows where the $9,000,000 additional is targeted to be spent.
There is no certainty that the Utility will not raise its rate to some extent
to offset the impact. He does not call it a hidden tax. He prefers to
perceive that operating surplus as a return on his investment in the Utility.
If he can transfer that to the General Fund and use the money to provide for
his safety and welfare, that has to be the best use of his money. He wants
the assurance for himself and the citizens that the additional millions will
be used for those purposes.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to place Measure 2, the Utility Revenue
Transfer Limit Measure on the November 3, 1992, General Municipal Election
Ballot. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
¢~t¥ Attorney White ¢on£~rme~ that the meesures ere ~11 meent to be seper~te
items on the ballot. They will appear as separate votes.
City Attorney White. Measures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the so called technical
amendments - the "housekeeping" matters previously recommended for the ballot
by the 1989 Charter Review Committee. He then briefed each of the measures.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to speak on any of the five items; there
was no response.
City Attorney White then confirmed for the Mayor that the measures that will
be on the ballot will not require a two-thirds vote by the electorate but only
a simple majority.
527
City Hallr Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
MOTION.:.. Council Member Pickler moved to place Measures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 on
the November 3, 1992 General Municipal Election Ballot. Council Member
Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney White. The last of the eight measures is an advisory measure
that the City Council previously gave tentative approval to - whether the City
Council should adopt an ordinance limiting the amount of campaign
contributions a candidate may receive for any election cycle from a single
source to $1,000 per election cycle - in the case of four-year terms, $1,000
for a four-year term, or candidates who are unsuccessful and wish to run every
two years could raise $1,000 for each election within a two-year span. This
advisory measure would get public input and not necessarily go into effect
unless the Council adopted an ordinance putting it in place. It does not
require a Charter Amendment and will give flexibility in the future to the
extent that court decisions and the law changes on the ability of cities to
regulate in this area. Rather than an initiative measure that could not be
amended without another vote, this would allow the Council to make changes to
continue to conform with the latest court decisions in the area of campaign
limitations.
?~ayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to speak on Measure No. 8~ there was no -esponse.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to place Measure No. 8 on the November 3,
1992 General Municipal Election Ballot. Council Member Daly seconded the
motion. Council Member Pickler voted no. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney White. It is now appropriate to consider adoption of the
resolution that would set the election on these eight measures with Measure
No. 1 being amended. The language on the ballot would remain the same but the
measure and the change to the Charter would be amended to conform to the
Council motion incorporating Option No. 4 which would allow incumbent
Councilmembers to run for the office of Mayor in 1994 and, if elected in 1994,
to rerun in 1998.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-165)
Council Member Simpson moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Simpson offered Resolution No. 92R-165 for adoption, ordering
measure to the electors of said City at the General Municipal Election to be
held in said City on November 3, 1992, incorporating Option No. 4 under
Measure i relating to term limits. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-16..5:. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
CITY CHARTER AND AN ADVISORY MEASURE TO THE ELECTORS OF SAID CITY AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON NOVEMBER 3, 1992.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Daly stated there is the possibility
of a petition requiring them to put on the ballot a district election system.
He asked the City Clerk when her deadline is for deciding whether it goes on
the ballot or not. He asked the status of the petition effort.
528
City Hall~ Hnaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
City Clerk Leonora Sohl. If the petitions were submitted to her office at
8~00 o'clock tomorrow morning, all that needs to be accomplished prior to it
going to the ballot by August 7 could not be accomplished. The Registrar of
Voters could not accommodate the petition initiative in that time frame. The
Elections Code provides certain periods of time for things to happen and those
are not within her control. The petition signatures have to be verified by
the Registrar of Voters and the City Clerk will subsequently bring the matter
before the Council at a Council meeting. The Council then has the option of
placing the item on the ballot, or adopting an ordinance. There is also a
provision that allows Council Members if they wish to have a financial impact
report prepared. Thirty (30) days are allowed for the completion of that
report.' There are a number of time factors which would make it impossible.
Council Member Daly. They have until August 7, 1992 to add items to the
ballot and he feels they should reserve the right to do so. The resolution
tonight can be voted on, but there may be the opportunity to place additional
measures on the ballot and he wants that in the record.
City Clerk Sohl. It is possible to place additional measures on the ballot up
to that date in a separate resolution.
City Attorney White confirmed for Council Member Ehrle that it would require
the Council to meet prior to August 7. There is nothing on the Agenda tonight
related to District Elections, but the Council has between now and August 7 to
meet and to adopt the necessary resolution that would place any additional
items on the ballot. In order to prepare those, he would need some direction
on what the Council would like and at least three or four days to prepare the
language and bring it back. Right now the Council is not scheduled to meet
next Tuesday. The Council could change that and meet for the limited purpose
of discussing additional ballot items including district elections if the
Council so desires. They could determine to meet or meet at an adjourned
meeting between now and August 7. The Mayor could also call a meeting or
three Council Members could call a meeting at anytime with proper notice.
Mayor Hunter. He was going to talk to the proponents of the petition
initiative and afterwards ascertain whether he should call a special meeting.
Council Member Pickler. He has a problem with that because he believes there
should be a full Council if there is to be a discussion putting something on
the ballot especially something as delicate as districts. If the proponents
are able to get the signatures, the matter will get on the ballot. They
should not circumvent the process and place something on the ballot to
alleviate the problem that they may hav~ to h01~
Council Member Ehrle. He disagrees only because they have discussed the issue
and it was agendized at two other meetings with a substantial amount of input
before a full Council. If they did meet next Tuesday, it would be for
purposes of making a final decision of placing the issue on the ballot. Even
though Council Member Simpson may not be present, there have been times when
the Council has made decisions without a full Council. He is not saying it
would be put on the ballot, but he is willing to discuss it one more time -
talk to the people circulating the petitions to see what kind of Community
input they can get. He is not opposed to public input on the issue.
Mayor Hunter. Next Tuesday, the Council is not going to have a Council
meeting. If the only issue is to discuss districts, he for one thought people
were gathering signatures. He has no idea of how that program is progressing
and is not prepared to have another special meeting just on the issue of
529
City' Hallt Anaheimt Cal£fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - JIfY 28~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
districting. If somebody wants to bring a motion, he will entertain that.
(There was no motion. )
Council Member Daly. He feels they should leave open the option of meeting
one more time before August 7, 1992. He would like a status report on the
success or failure of the petition gathering effort. If they miss the
deadline of August 7 and they later on qualify their ballot measure, it will
cost $100,000 for a special election. This is a $100,000 decision.
Council Member Pickler. The burden is on them. He is not ready to put the
issue on the ballot. Perhaps they can hold it over until the next election.
Discussion followed between Council Members with input from the City Attorney
relative to the possibility of holding a Council Meeting on or before August 7
and the procedure to be followed to do so. The City Attorney stated that
tonight because of the Council's previous action at the beginning of the year
in indicating they did not wish to meet next Tuesday, that unless there is a
motion adopted by the Council tonight, an agenda will not be prepared for next
Tuesday. That is not to say that the Mayor or three members of the Council
could not call a special meeting at any time on notice between now and
~ugust 7, 1992, to discuss this or any other item. He then emphasized after
~urther discussion that whatever the Council would want on the agenda would be
on the agenda. In order to properly review all of the staff items that are
normally placed on the agenda, it is a very complex process. No items have
been scheduled to be presented on the agenda but if the Council scheduled a
meeting, whatever items they wanted on the agenda would be there.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution:
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-165 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-165 duly passed and adopted.
C2. 127: SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS ON CITY MEASURES:
Setting priorities for filing written arguments regarding City measures and
directing the City Attorney to prepare impartial analyses.
City Clerk Sohl. In the voter information booklet, there is generally an
imDartial analysis by the City Attorney. The Council has to direct the Clerk
to forward these to the City Attorney to prepare that analysis. Also, if
there are one, two or any Council Members who wish to reserve the right to
write an argument in favor or against any measure, they may do so. They also
do not have to designate anyone to write arguments. There is an order in
which the Clerk can choose the argument but the City Council comes first. The
City Clerk makes the determination which argument will go in the ballot
pamphlet if there is more than one argument for and/or against. If the
Council does not designate and more than one argument is received, there is an
hierarchy in the elections code.
Mayor Hunter asked the City Clerk to put him down as a proponent of term
limits and campaign spending limitations for writing arguments.
City Clerk Sohl. Upon questioning, she explained that up to five people can
sign an argument for or against a measure. Term limits is number one and the
530
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
Mayor has indicated he wishes to write the arguments in favor and also
campaign spending limitations.
Council Members Daly and Ehrle asked that they be designated on both measures
as well.
City Clerk Sohl. Answering Council Member Daly, if Council says that the
Mayor is going to write the argument in favor and the Mayor wishes to allow
other Council Members to sign along with him, the election's code allows up to
five people to sign. If they wish to designate all five Council Members
tonight they could do so. If they designate no-one and one or two submit an
argument in favor, between the two, they would have to decide which they
wished to use and they could co-author the argument. The primary purpose for
putting that in a resolution is to alert the public that that particular
argument in favor or against is going to be written by the Council.
The City Clerk continued that the deadline for filing arguments is August 10,
1992 at 5=00 p.m. It is her understanding that at this time the Council
wishes to designate on Measure 1 and Measure 8, Mayor Hunter and Council
Members Daly and Ehrle to write the argument in favor; Mayor Hunter stated
there will be one argument signed by all three.
The City Clerk then explained for Council Member Pickler that anyone else can
write an argument in opposition. If he (Pickler) is opposed, he may wish to
designate himself the author on both Measures i and 8; City Attorney White
also answered questions posed by Council Member Pickler on whether or not if
he indicates he wishes to write the arguments in opposition (both Measures 1
and 2) he can subsequently withdraw from doing so. Mr. White further
explained that he would have to check the Elections Code, but it stands to
reason if Council Member Pickler was designated and for whatever reason did
not submit an argument, that should not disable the public from doing so.
It was determined that Mayor Hunter and Council Members Ehrle and Daly would
write the arguments in favor of Measure 1 and Measure 8 and Council Member
Pickler would write the arguments in opposition to both those measures.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-166)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-166 for adoption, setting
priorities for filing written arguments regarding City measures and directing
the City Attorney to prepare impartial analyses. Refer to Resolution Book.
RW. SOLUTION NO. 92R-166: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING CITY
MEASURES AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE IMPARTIAL ANALYSES.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 92R-166 for adoption=
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT .-
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 92R-166 duly passed and adopted.
531
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
RECESS:. By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (6:42 p.m. )
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order all Council Members being
present. (6:50 p.m.)
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. 121: PUBLIC HEARING - ACQUISITION OF A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF
R~An PROPERTY REOUI~__D FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES - R/W 6000-10 -
(CHANDULAL K. PATEL AND GEETA C. PATEL}:
LOCATION: 2130 South State College Boulevard (east side of State
College Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue).
Finding and determining the public interest and necessity for
acquiring and authorizing the condemnation of a portion of that
certain parcel of real property required for road and public utility
purposes - State College/Orangewood Critical Intersection Street
Widening Project (R/W 6000-10).
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY=
Publication in Ana. heim Bulletin - July 16, 1992
Submitted was report dated July 17, 1992 from the Director of Public Works and
City Engineer recommending that they proceed with condemnation of the subject
property. ·
Richard Santo, Senior Real Property Agent. There have been a number of
meetings with the City's consultant, City staff and Mr. Patel. Staff is
recommending that they proceed with the condemnation action.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak; there being no response he closed the public hearing.
City Attorney White. Both the resolutions and the motion can be offered and
the resolution will require a 4/Sths vote. The environmental impact report
was previously certified.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-167)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member ~im~s0n
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 92R-167 for adoption, finding
and determining the public interest and necessity for acquiring and
authorizing the condemnation of certain real property. (R/W 6000-10 Patel).
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-167: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
ACQUIRING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY.
(R/W 6000-10 Patel).
532
C£t¥ Ra11, Az~_aheim, Ca].£forn£a - CO%DICIL MI~$ - .JULY 28, ].992 - 5:00 P.x.
Roll Call Vo~e on Resolu~£on No. 92R-167 for adop~£on~,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-167 duly passed and adopted.
MOTION:. Council Member Pickler moved to authorize the law firm of Oliver,
Bart and Vose, S~ecial Counsel for the City of Anaheim, and the City Attorney
to proceed with said condemnation action. Council Member Ehrle seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
EIR No. 285 was previously certified on August 16, 1988 regarding critical
intersection street widening.
D2. 107: _ADOPTION OF THE 1991 UNIFORM FIRE CODE:
To consider the adoption of an ordinance repealing existing Chapter
16.08 and adding new Chapter 16.08 to Title 16 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code adopting the Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition, with
certain amendments thereto.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - July 14 and July 20, 1992
Submitted was report dated July 6, 1992 from Fire Chief, Jeff Bowman
recommending adoption of the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak; there being no response he closed the public hearing.
Council Member Simpson offered Ordinance No. 5325 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 5325: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING EXISTING
CHAPTER 16.08 AND ADDING NEW CHAPTER 16.08 TO TITLE 16 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1991 EDITION, WITH CERTAIN
AMENDMENTS THERETO.
A resolution setting forth local conditions justifying more stringent
requirements regarding fire and panic safety will' appear with the subject
ordinance on the Council agenda of August 11, 1992 when the ordinance is again
presented to the Council for adoption.
D3. 134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 330r AMENDMENT TO SP87-
01 {THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS), AND DENSITY TRANSFER REQUEST NO. 92-01
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWN~ P~nl~y ~mpnn£~n, 19 C~p~rn~ Pln~n, N~wport B~a~h, CA
92660.
LOCATION: Development Areas 6, 8 and 11 of the Highlands at Anaheim
Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1).
This is a General Plan Amendment from General Commercial to Hillside
Medium Density Residential and General Commercial designations in
order to reduce the proposed commercial site from 8.0 acres to 2.2
acres and develop the remaining 5.8 acres with a 48-unit condominium
complex as an extension of Development Area 6. This is to transfer
48-units from Development Area 11 to Development Area 6 to justify
the proposed 48-unit condominium complex in Development Area 6.
533
City Hall, Anaheim_t California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5=00 P.M.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION=
GPA NO. 330 recommended for approval (PC92-81) (6 yes votes, 1
absent).
Recommended APPROVAL to Amend Specific Plan No. 87-01, Highlands at
Anaheim Hills (PC92-82)..
Density Transfer Request No. 92-01 APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON..' Public hearing set due to approval of GPA No. 330 and
amendment to Specific Plan No. 87-01.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - July 16, 1992
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 16, 1992
Posting of property - July 17, 1992
PLANNING STAFF INPUT=
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 15, 1992.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. This General Plan Amendment Specific Plan
affects the Highlands at the intersection of Serrano and Sunset Ridge Road.
'It would change the General Plan and Specific Plan for 5.2 acres of an 8 acre
commercial site and redesignated for hillside medium density for condominiums
which is compatible with the adjacent landuse. The staff report talks about
the impact of the change in detail which he then briefed.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak.
Dave Boyle, Boyle Engineering, Santa Ana. The property is owned by the
Presley Company and they requested he extend thanks for staff cooperation and
is also requesting the Council's favorable support.
There being no further comments by the public; Mayor Hunter closed the public
hearing.
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 - RESOLUTIONS: The title of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 92R-169 and 92R-170)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-169 for adoption, approving
General Plan Amendment No. 330 and Resolution No. 92R-170 for adoption,
approving amendment to Specific Plan 87-1 (the Highlands). Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 92R-169: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT
NO. 330 PERTAINING TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT.
534
City H&11, An~ahei~, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 28, 1992 - 5:00 P.M.
R~SOLUTION NO, 92~-.170~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING s;~ECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-1 FOR THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS AND
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 87R-253 ACCORDINGLY'.
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
NOES, C. ~ ~..~. ~ L MEMBERS: None
ABSENT= COUNCIL MEMBERS= None
The Mayor declared ~esolution Nos. 92R-169 and 92R-170 duly'passed and
adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. ~326' - INTRODUCTIONs Amendment to Specific Plan No. 87-1.
Mayor Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5326 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. $326= AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4861 RELATING THE SPECIFIC PLAN 87-1 ZONING (THE
:.
HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS).
City Attorney White. An additional item is the density transfer request and
because it exceeds i0~% the City Council by motion should also authorize the
density transfer which entails a 17% transfer and iS consistent with the two
resolutions and the ordinance acted upon tonight. If there is a motion to
this effect tonight, staff would not have .to bring the matter back to the
Council and it is in accordance with the Brown Act.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to authorize the density transfer of 17%
consistent with the foregoing resolutions and ordinance. Council Member
Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Council Member Hunter moved to adjourn, Council Member Ehrle
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (7:00 p.m. )
No Council meeting is scheduled at this time for Tuesday, August 4, 1992,
since no quorum is anticipated.
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
535