1991/11/19City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991t 5:00 P.M.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle, Hunter (entered
3:15 p.m.)
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau
CONVENTION CENTER GENERAL MANAGER: Lynn Thompson
MAINTENANCE MANAGER: Bob DeSio
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Lisa Stipkovich
DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER: Arthur L. Daw
UTILITIES ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER-FINANCE/ADMIN.: Darrell L. Ament
FINANCIAL SERVICES MANAGER: Michael Bell
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 4:10 p.m. on November 15, 1991, at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Hunter called the workshop portion of the meeting of November 19, 1991,
to order at 3:08 p.m.
City Manager James Ruth. He introduced the first workshop presentation - a
status update on Betterment IV, by Mr. Lynn Thompson, General Manager,
Convention Center.
124: BETTERMENT IV, CONVENTION CENTER:
Lynn Thompson, Convention Center General Manager. The purpose of the workshop
is to report on the next expansion of the Convention Center, Betterment IV
(Hall E). Today's presentation requires no action on the part of the Council,
but is for information only. Actions required will be requested separately at
future Council meetings. Also present today are Bill Snyder, President,
Anaheim Area Visitor & Convention Bureau and Mr. Ed Snavely, General Manager of
the Anaheim Marriott and chairman of the Visitor & Convention Board of
Directors. Also present is a representative of the architectural firm of Leas
& Pomerly Associates, the architect of record on the project to answer any
detailed questions the Council might have. The illustrations which are
displayed on easels are to show the extent of the work involved in the
project. Mr. Thompson then gave a brief history of Betterment IV starting in
1986 when Betterment III was presented but which encompassed Betterment IV
improvements. Betterment IV will add another 150,000 square feet of exhibition
space to the Convention Center in an area which has already been constructed in
its raw form. He then briefed the details involved as well as the schedule
that will bring Betterment IV to fruition and eventually completion (the
schedule was also posted for Council review). The construction cost is
approximately 12.5 million dollars. With Council approval, the finance
757
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
director has already put together the financing team. He also reported on the
meetings previously held with the Board of Directors of the Sherwood Village
Homeowners Association to the south of the proposed improvements as well as the
superintendent of schools for the Anaheim Union High School District. He also
reported on future meetings planned. He then deferred to Bill Snyder.
Mayor Hunter entered the Council Chamber. (3:15 p.m.)
Bill Snyder, President, Anaheim Visitor & Convention Bureau. He briefed the
Council on the space available at the Convention Center in 1986, when
Betterment III was presented and subsequently how the Convention Center is
lacking in space to meet anticipated needs for 1993. He reported on the
largest shows held at the Convention Center, the revenues generated, and space
requirements. He emphasized that nothing but adequate space is the key to
having ~customers~ look at Anaheim as a place to hold their shows/conventions.
The City needs to keep pace with that growth in order to maintain a leadership
position and, more importantly, if they are to maintain the market.
Lynn Thompson. Financing for Betterment IV will require an additional increase
in the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) of 6/10ths of 1% which will be submitted
to the Council on December 3, 1991. Also contained in the ordinance to be
presented is an additional increase of 1.4% which will be implemented at a time
certain in the future. It has been requested by the hotel community in an
effort to provide a funding source for future additional land or other
Convention Center improvements. He reiterated the ordinance will be submitted
for the Council meeting of December 3, 1991, and on December 10, 1991, for
adoption.
Mr. Thompson, City Manager Ruth, Bill Snyder and City Attorney White then
answered questions posed by the Council. All of the major hoteliers
unanimously agreed to the proposed TOT increase of first 6/10ths for Betterment
IV and then 1.4%. The subsequent proposed increase which will raise the TOT to
2% protects against any legislative action taken by the State. The 6/10ths
will become effective February 1, 1992 and the 1.4% would not be effective
until December 31, 1993. Relative to the latter, City Attorney White explained
it is to protect against State Legislation to put it on the books. If prior to
the effective date of December 31, 1993 it is determined that either or all of
the additional increase is not needed, Council can then modify the ordinance to
reduce the amount. Further information was relayed as follows: Raising the
TOT eventually to 13% will put Anaheim in the mid-range of cities such as San
Diego, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Relative to its effect on attracting
conventions, the National Association of Exposition Managers and the American
Society of Association Executives and the International Association of Visitor
and Convention Bureaus have been adamant against those cities using TOT for
purposes other than that benefitting the industry primarily the construction of
facilities. If the TOT falls in the mid-range and is used to benefit the
industry, there will be no problem. There is a massive expansion of convention
facilities in Los Angeles, San Diego is contemplating doubling the size of
their center, and Las Vegas is under expansion as well as many other cities not
located in the west. Those cities are at 12% and higher. In a survey taken
amongst 1,000 exhibit companies, Anaheim was sixth and Chicago, Las Vegas,
Atlanta and Dallas were above Anaheim. All of those are undergoing expansion
758
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
and historically all have fallen under that same revenue source. The per
square footage cost of previous facility expansions are significantly above
what the City paid for Betterment III or what they will be paying for
Betterment IV. With the current market, there will be favorable bids.
City Attorney White then explained the variety of proposals anticipated by the
legislature when they reconvene next session to generate funds for State
revenue relating to TOT. The purpose of putting an ordinance in place would be
to attempt to grandfather Anaheim into a position where the City would not be
restricted on the use of funds from future legislation. They are trying to
anticipate as best they can to put the City in a favorable position to avoid
the down side of any new State legislation.
Council Member Ehrle. He is supportive of going to 13%, but looking at future
plans, those plans will require additional funding. He questions if they
should not go to 15% instead of 13% because he believes the State is going to
pass legislation that will have an affect and does not want to be too
conservative.
Lynn Thompson. There is a point at which clients will indicate the level is
too high.
Council Member Pickler. He notes that the proposal will be submitted to the
Council on December 3, 1991. He would like to see a range of the TOT
throughout the cities which were mentioned today and also a list of the large
shows and possibly sizes of the different facilities in the cities mentioned.
It will be good information for the Council to have when making there
decision. Mr. Thompson and Mr. Snyder then explained for Council Member Daly
the frequency of the large shows (NEPCON - Woodworking - Music Merchants and
American Heart Association), that they register their intent to come to Anaheim
assuming their needs can continue to be met, and the number of years those
large shows have been held in Anaheim.
Mayor Hunter thanked Mr. Thompson, Mr. Snyder and all involved for the
informative presentation.
City Manager Ruth introduced the second workshop presentation regarding the
Source Reduction and Recycling Element of the City of Anaheim a part of which
is the Hazardous Waste Management Plan (Household Hazardous Waste) to be
presented by Mr. Bob De$io, Maintenance Manager.
132: HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN - HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE:
Bob Desio, Maintenance Manager/Streets. In 1990, the City Council authorized
the Department of Maintenance to engage a consulting firm to prepare the Source
Recovery and Recycling Element and at that time the Household Hazardous Waste
Element which was included in the original legislation. Subsequently, the
Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHW) was taken out and put into a separate
category. A representative of International Technology Corporation (IT) the
consulting firm is present to make a presentation on the plan. Also, presented
to the Council was an executive summary of the two elements plus the law itself
(AB939) which mandated the requirement. (See Executive Summary Draft, Source
Reduction and Recycling Elements City of Anaheim and Executive Summary Draft,
759
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Household Hazardous Waste Element City of Anaheim attached to which was an
Executive Summary of Assembly Bill $939 approved by the Governor on
September 29, 1989.) Prior to the December 3, 1991 meeting when the Council
will have the public hearing on the plan, the complete plan will be submitted
so that the Council may review it in its entirety. He introduced Mr. Leonard
Allan.
Mr. R. Leonard Allen, Director of Engineering, Orange County Office of
International Technology Corporation. Mr. Allen's presentation on the Source
Reduction and Recycling Element (SRR) and the Household Hazardous Waste Element
(HHW) was supplemented by slides. It covered the information contained in the
aforementioned executive summaries. The elements were prepared to comply with
AB939, the goal being to reduce the amount of waste going into the municipal
solid waste land fills in the State and to reduce or divert 25% of that waste
in the next five years increasing to 50% in ten years. AB939 specifies in
great detail the contents of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element and
Household Waste Element (see Executive Summary on AB939). He then briefed the
Council on each of the elements as outlined in the material presented to the
Council.
During and after the presentation, both Mr. Allen and John Roche, Director of
Maintenance answered questions posed by Council Members.
In concluding, Mr. DeSio reiterated that the final plans will be presented to
the Council at their December 3, 1991 Council Meeting.
Mayor Hunter and Council Members thanked Mr. DeSio and Mr. Allan and all others
involved for the informative presentation.
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 matters will not be considered in closed session.
760
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
By general Consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. (4:01 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. (5:25 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Mr. H. Stow, Minister, Anaheim Church of Christ, gave the
invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Bob Simpson led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PRESENTATION - RED RIBBON WEEK POSTER/ESSAY CONTEST WINNERS: Mr. Mark
Deven, Recreation Superintendent, introduced the Red Ribbon Week Poster/Essay
Contest Winners and each was presented with a certificate of recognition for
their accomplishment. He explained that the contest was part of the "Kids In
Action' program which emphasizes self-esteem and positive behavior. Over 200
posters were submitted. The following were presented with certificates by
Meredith Gardner, representing the U.S. Postal Service in Anaheim and
Chairperson of the Red Ribbon Committee:
5-7 Years Old -
Kevin Cannata
Jonathan Villalta
8-9 Years Old -
Ceaser Arroya
Nancy Lopez
Ebony Patton
Richard Oh
10-12 Years Old - Enrique Barajas
Johnny Patton
Jill Carabera
13-15 Years Old - Hector Lopez
Maribel Palcencia
Jessica Garcia
Mayor Hunter and Council Members congratulated and commended each of the
children whose posters were displayed on the Chamber wall. The posters
reflected the youngsters negative attitudes towards drugs and the positive
results saying no to drugs can bring.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Hunter
and authorized by the City Council:
Recognition of Red Ribbon Week Poster/Essay Contest Winners
Founders District Toastmasters Day in Anaheim, November 23, 1991
Motorcycle Safety Week in Anaheim, December 2-8, 1991
Betty Colston, District Governor, accepted the Founders District Toastmasters
Day proclamation.
761
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
MINUTES: Council Member Pickler moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held October 22, 1991. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,311,537.71 for the
period ending November 8, 1991 and $4,159,720.92 for the period ending
November 15, 1991, 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. (5:32 p.m.)
Mayor Hunter reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:35 p.m.)
COUNCIL REORGANIZATION - MAYOR PRO TEM: In accordance with Council Policy
No. 111, the Council shall reorganize and select a Mayor Pro Tem on the third
Tuesday of November in odd numbered years.
Mayor Hunter nominated Tom Daly; Mayor Pro Tem Ehrle seconded the nomination.
A unanimous vote was thereupon cast selecting Council Member Tom Daly as Mayor
Pro Tem from November 19, 1991, to the specified time for reorganization in
November, 1992.
Mayor Hunter, speaking to the City Attorney, also requested for Council Members
in the future, the present Council would like to have a written adopted policy
with regard to the selection of the Mayor Pro Tem. Council Member Simpson is
assigned to work with the City Attorney on this 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. 91R-314 through 91R-320, both inclusive, for
adoption and Ordinance Nos. 5272 and 5273 for adoption and Ordinance No. 5274
for introduction. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES: The titles of the following
resolutions and ordinances were read by the City Manager. (Resolution Nos.
91R-314 through 91R-320, both inclusive, for adoption and Ordinance Nos. 5272
and 5273 for adoption.)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions
and ordinances. Council Member Simpson 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 Patlyn for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about June 7, 1991.
762
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991~ 5:00 P.M.
b. Claim submitted by George Miller Construction Co., Inc. for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 9,
1991.
c. Claim submitted by Michael D. Weissman for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 13, 1991.
d. Claim submitted by Jesus Lopez Gutierrez for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 19, 1991.
e. Claim submitted by Steven L. Gallegly for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 13, 1991.
f. Claim submitted by Christopher and Rebecca Burkhardt for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 9,
1991.
g. Claim submitted by Emily Brown, a minor by Rick Brown for bodily
injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 22,
1991.
h. Claim submitted by Joseph Bosley for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 4, 1991.
i Claim submitted by CNA Insurance Companies for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 3, 1991.
j. Claim submitted by Tami King and Stewart Dunham for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 9, 1991.
k. Claim submitted by Larry Levine and Sally Levine for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 4, 1991.
1. Claim submitted by David M. McPhail for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 23, 1991.
m. Claim submitted by John C. Rich for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 26, 1991.
n. Claim submitted by Kenneth and Vicki Pomeroy for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 26,
1991.
o. Claim submitted by Velma Jane Winton for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 16, 1991.
p. Claim submitted by Robert C. Dickie, Jr. for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 13 through
September 19, 1991.
q. Claim submitted by Pacific Bell for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 16, 1991.
763
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
r. Claim submitted by Ricky Wayne Piatt for property damage and bodily
injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 2,
1991.
s. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 8, 1991.
t. Claim submitted by Richard Winder and Anita Gresham for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
October 10, 1991.
u. Claim submitted by Gregory A. Patch for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 22, 1991.
v. Claim submitted by Gregory A. Patch for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 22, 1991.
w. Claim submitted by Joseph and Nancy Magliato for indemnity for damages
which accrued on or about July 6, 1991.
A2. 114: Receiving and filing Resolution No. 5626 from the City of Arcadia,
calling for the restoration of adequate funding in the fiscal year 1991-92 and
thereafter for the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control and urging the
governor and the State Legislature to approve funding for the ABC in order to
continue ABC enforcement at least at present levels.
173: Receiving and filing correspondence from Southern California Edison,
pursuant to Section 35.13 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
Regulations under the Federal Power Act, and more particularly under
Subsection (a)(2)(ii) thereof, Edison tenders for filing a change of rates for
scheduling and dispatching services under the provisions of Edison's
Transmission Service Agreements.
114: Receiving and filing correspondence from the City of Signal Hill
regarding the adoption of their Resolution No. 91-09-4243 urging that the
State of California simplify implementation of AB 939 (Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989).
A3. 150: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Sturgeon Electric, in the amount of $34,800 for La Palma Park Security
Lighting; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of
the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving
any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
A4. 150: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Bopark Enterprises, Inc., in the amount of $690,427 which includes the base
bid, additive alternate, Item No. 3, deductive alternate, Item No. 1 and the
base bid for the water main and storm drain improvements for Boysen Park
General Development, Water Main and Storm Drain Improvements; and in the event
said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the
contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in
the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
764
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Mrs. Hope Ellis. She lives in the neighborhood that is going to be impacted
by the Boysen Park Expansion Project and has been a resident of the area for
22 years. She lives on the south side of the project. She is present as a
resident who has attended all of the meetings regarding the expansion. She
was also a member of the task force that worked and collected information from
the people who were going to be affected. The residents received a letter
dated November 12, 1991, and she understands the Council also received the
same information. For the record, if the project is awarded she is asking
that the following modifications that have been recommended are either
provided or looked at: The provision of an 8-foot block wall on the west and
south sides of the project necessitating removal of the existing 6-foot wall,
the closure of all vehicular and pedestrian traffic access from Norman Avenue
to the park area, replacement of the proposed shrub and ground cover
landscaping adjacent to the new walls with turf, trees, vines for better
surveillance and replacement of the parking lot proposed at Norman Avenue with
turf and trees and that the proposed soccer field would not be lighted for
night activities and permits would only be issued for youth sports.
Additionally, there will be no bleachers installed for spectators at the
soccer field. It is an expansion of Item A4 on the agenda where it cites the
bid alternate is the shrubs and the landscaping and the deductive alternative
would be the parking lot on the west side. She wanted these modifications to
be on the record.
Mayor Hunter asked to hear from staff.
Jack Kudron, Parks Superintendent. The items that Mrs. Ellis listed are the
ones agreed to with the community. After award of bid, if Council so chooses,
they will go into negotiation with the contractor regarding those changes.
A5. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 5274 - (INTRODUCTION}: Adding Section 14.32.135 to
Chapter 14.32 of Title 14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to a
fifteen-minute parking limitation.
A6. 172: Authorizing the installation of speed humps on Avenida Margarita
and approving the design thereof.
A7. 179: Approving the Termination Statement for the Agreement Regarding
Parking for Inn At The Park Hotel (Variance No. 3566).
AS. 150: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Hondo Company, Inc., in the amount of $77,279.20 which includes the base bid
and additive alternates 2, 3, 4 and 5; and in the event said low bidder fails
to comply with the terms of the award, award the contract to the second low
bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and
second low bidders.
A9. 150: Awarding the contract for Central City Beautification to the lowest
and best responsible bidder, Steiny & Company, Inc., in the amount of
$156,939.40; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms
of the award, award the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving
any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
765
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Daly he would like to know the exact location of the work.
Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. It is part of
the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and is just north of the
redevelopment area, north of Cypress between Adele and Cypress - Philadelphia
and Emily Streets. They are starting to do a beautification program that will
be complementary to the landscaping program in the redevelopment area. Through
Block Grant, they determined they should start in this area and move throughout
the whole Central City area.
Council Member Daly. The request is to spend additional money for taller trees
and he wants to know if it is because the trees will be visible from the
Redevelopment project or the rationale; Lisa Stipkovich. She believes 20 feet
would be too close to electric wires, but Mr. Kudron could answer the
question.
Jack Kudron, Park Superintendent. There was some miscommunication on the
height of the trees. They are using cocus palms to keep the historic feeling
of the neighborhood. When Engineering put the specs together, they asked for
20-foot tall trees, i.e., 20-foot trunk height. When the bids came in, they
were 20 feet total. Thus, the palm trees would have only a 10 or 12-foot trunk
height which could create safety or liability problems. They need at least 20
feet minimum trunk height. There are some wires nearby but the trees are not
going to be planted in places where the wires will be impacted.
Approving Contract Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $62,947.50 in favor of
Steiny & Company, Inc., subject to approval of recommendation no. 1 and Steiny
& Company, Inc., successfully entering into a contract and meeting all
insurance requirements.
AiO. 167: Accepting the completion of the construction of the Northeast
Signal Modification Project by Signal Maintenance Inc., and authorizing the
Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.
All. 101: Accepting the completion of the construction of Anaheim Stadium
Parking Lot Relighting Project by Mel Smith Electric Inc., and authorizing the
Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.
Al2. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-314: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AN;rHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 83R-45, CONCERNING ABANDONF~ENT OF AN
EASEMENT.
Al3. 123: Authorizing the Mayor to execute Supplement No. 047 to Local Agency
- ~ate A~ement No. 125055 for Arterial Financin~ Project funds for the
Tustin Avenue Seismic Retrofit Project at the Santa Ana River.
Al4. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-315: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. i TO THE FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR AGENCY, ADMITTING THE NEWLY-INCORPORATED CITY OF LAKE FOREST AS A
PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT.
766
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Al5. 106: Authorizing amendment to the 1991-92 Resource Allocation Plan to
increase revenues in account no. 83-3314 and expenditures in account no. 83-213
by $2,168,139 each, in order to meet the one-year leasing schedule proposed to
HUD. (Voucher and Certificate Programs for very-low income residents.)
Al6. 160: Accepting the bid of Clippinger Chevrolet, Covina in the amount of
$27,496.29 (plus applicable tax) for one 15,000 GVW flatbed truck with lift
gate, in accordance with Bid #4989.
Al7. 160: Accepting the low bid of Inland Empire GMC, Riverside, in the
amount of $38,369 (plus applicable tax) for one 26,000 GVW flatbed dump truck,
in accordance with Bid #4990.
A18. 160: Accepting the bid of Kuhlman Electric, in the amount of $49,800 for
twenty-five KVA single-phase subsurface switched transformers, in accordance
with Bid #4980.
Al9. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the two
months ended August 31, 1991.
A20. 160: Accepting low bids and authorizing execution of contracts for
landscape maintenance for a period of two years beginning January 1992, with
options to extend for three additional one-year terms, in accordance with Bid
#4985:
Artistic Maintenance, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $90,344.47 per year for
the first two years, for services identified as List
Mariposa Horticultural Enterprises, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $126,984
per year for the first two years, for landscaping services identified as List
A21. 123: Approving the Software License and Maintenance Agreement with
American Management Systems, Inc., (AMS) for licensing, installing and
implementing the fully-integrated financial application software package 'LOCAL
GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL SYSTEM (LGFS)#, in an amount not to exceed $923,480, plus
applicable tax.
Authorizing the Data Processing Director to enter into agreements with American
Management Systems, Inc., (AMS) for annual software maintenance services in
accordance with the terms of the Software License and Maintenance Agreement.
A22. 123: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into agreements with
Martha E. Herrera and Arturo Navarette Perez for rental of apartments at the
Audre Plaza Neighborhood Center.
106: Appropriating the anticipated $5,100 in revenues to Program 288 -
Jeffrey-Lynne.
A23. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-316: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN.
767
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
A24. 106: Approving amendment to the fiscal year 1991/92 Resource Allocation
Plan by allocating $50,485 from the Community Development Block Grant
Contingency Fund, No. 25-215-6798 to the City Attorney's Office Criminal
Prosecution Section Account No. 01-125-4101 to fund prosecution of violations
in the Community Development Block Grant target area.
A25. 124: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-317: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN LEASE
FINANCING DOCUMENTS, APPROVING THE FORM AND AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION OF A
PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT, IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFERING AND SALE OF
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION RELATING THERETO, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO. (Betterment III refunding).
(Resolution approves the following: Site and Facility Lease; Lease Agreement;
Trust Agreement; Escrow Deposit and Trust Agreement; Purchase Agreement; and
Official Statement; in connection with $70.5 Million for the purpose of
refunding the Community Center Authority Lease Revenue Bonds, Series E.)
A26. 123: Approving the Second Amendment to Agreement with Don Poff, Anaheim
Hills golf professional, to adjust the basis for the sharing of driving range
revenue to a maximum of $40,000 annually.
A27. 123: Approving an Agreement with the North Orange County Community
College District, in the amount of $60,806 for the period of July 1, 1991
through June 30, 1992, for remediation services to welfare recipients who are
deficient in basic skills, and authorizing the JTP Manager to execute said
agreement.
106: Amending the Resource Allocation Plan to increase revenue and
expenditures in the amount of $18,949 Program No. 393.
Council Member Ehrle abstained on this item.
A28. 123: Approving a Composite Development Agreement for Mead-Adelanto and
Mead-Phoenix Transmission Projects and related resolutions and ordinances, as
recommended by the Public Utilities Board at their meeting of October 21, 1991.
Council Member Ehrle. He asked for confirmation of the total indebtedness of
the Utilities.
Darrell Ament, Assistant General Manager Utilities asked Mike Bell to speak to
that issue.
Mike Bell, Financial Services Manager. He brought the numbers with him this
evening rather than speaking from the top of his head as he did at the last
meeting. The direct debt of the Electric Utility is approximately 328 million
dollars for the principal - the total direct debt of the Electric Utility. At
the last meeting, the Council asked the indirect debt through agencies such as
the SCPPA and the Intermountain Power Agency reported as approximately 860
million dollars. That was the number he relayed at the time. He confirmed
that, with the subject project, it will be adding 37 million dollars to the
860 million direct and indirect debt.
768
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Mr. Bell further explained for Council Member Ehrle the indirect amount is
essentially what they are paying for purchased power expenditures. Those
become operating costs of the Utilities and are not included on the balance
sheet as a direct debt of the Utility. They are a portion of the operating
cost to provide power to the system.
Council Member Ehrle. He asked for confirmation if the average resident (rate
payer) is paying approximately 20% below Edison and commercial approximately
13%.
Mike Bell. The average system wide is approximately 14% - residential is
approximately 20%, commercial and industrial, depending upon the level, ranges
anywhere from 15% to 5% below Edison. The average homeowner bill is
approximately $45 a month.
Council Member Ehrle surmised then that an almost billion dollar investment
results in a $45 a month bill with rates 13% to 20% below Southern California
Edison.
Mike Bell. What is involved covers over a 30 year period and expensive capital
investments. In the Utility business, the largest and most expensive component
is meeting power supply costs. Those come over an extended period of time and
they do not come cheaply. Over the last 5 to 10 years, the rate relationships
with other Utilities have improved dramatically. Through power supply
projects, Anaheim has been able to keep rates lower than other communities.
175: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-318: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY, OF CERTAIN AGREEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO THE MEAD-PHEONIX PROJECT AND
THE MEAD-ADELANTO PROJECT.
175: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-319: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS, ADOPTING CERTAIN MITIGATION MEASURES,
CONCLUDING BENEFITS OUTWEIGH UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND
GRANTING PROJECT APPROVAL, ALL WITH RESPECT TO MEAD-ADELANTO PROJECT.
175: ORDINANCE NO. 5272 - (ADOPTION}: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING ENTERING INTO OF TWO SEPARATE TRANSMISSION SERVICE CONTRACTS.
175: ORDINANCE NO. 5273 - (ADOPTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC POWER
AUTHORITY TO FINANCE COSTS OF THE MEAD-PHOENIX PROJECT AND THE MEAD-ADELANTO
PROJECT.
At the conclusion of the Consent Calendar, Council Member Ehrle voted no on
this item.
A29. 103: RESOLUTION NO. 320: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM RESTATING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 91R-313 APPROVING AND ORDERING
THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS
ANNEXATION NO. 280 - THE GYPSUM CANYON ANNEXATION.
769
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 91~-314 through 91R-320 with the exoe~tion
of Resolution No. 91R-318 and 91R-319 on which Council M-mher Ehrle voted no.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 91R-314 through 91R-320, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance Nos. 5272 and 5273:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
Ehrle
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 5272 and 5273 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CARRIED.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
A30. 105: RESIGNATION FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD: Submitted was
letter received November 14, 1991, from Vance H. Ready, resigning from the
Community Services Board.
Council Member Simpson moved to accept the resignation of Vance H. Ready,
Community Services Board for the term expiring June 30, 1995 with regret and
authorizing the City Clerk to post a notice of unscheduled vacancy. Council
Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS B1 - Bll FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 4, 1991,
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS NOVEMBER 26, 1991:
Bi. 155: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 280 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED),
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO PACIFICENTER ANAHEIM, SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-3):
OWNERS: CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORP., 1065 Pacificenter Dr., ~200,
Anaheim, CA 92806.
AGENT: PHILLIP R. SCHWARTZE (The PRS GROUP) 27132-B Paseo Espada,
~1222, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675.
LOCATION: PACIFICENTERANAHEIM. Property is approximately 26 acres
located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Tustin Avenue.
Petitioner requests amendment to Pacificenter Anaheim Specific Plan
(SP88-3) to permit additional service-related commercial and office
uses in the Specific Plan Area and to amend the Master Sign Program.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Amendment No. 2 to Pacificenter Anaheim Specific Plan (SP88-3)
APPROVED, IN PART. Uses APPROVED (PC91-171) (3 yes votes, i no vote,
1 absent, and 2 conflicts of interest); Pole sign DENIED (PC91-172) (3
yes votes, 1 no vote, i absent, and 2 conflicts of interest); and fast
food restaurant sign DENIED (PC91-173) (4 yes votes, i absent, and 2
conflict of interest).
Approved previously certified EIR NO. 280.
770
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
This item was set for a public hearing before the City Council on December 3,
1991.
B2.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4134, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11:
OWNER: CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT, 1065 PacifiCenter Drive, ~200, Anaheim,
CA 92806.
LOCATION: Santa Fe PacifiCenter. Property is approximately 26 acres
located at the southwest corner of La Palma and Tustin Avenue.
Waiver of maximum number of freestanding signs and minimum distance
between freestanding signs to construct a 91-square foot monument
sign.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4134 DENIED (PC91-174) (3 yes votes, 1 absent, 1
abstained, and 2 conflicts of interest).
B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3460 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Mr. John Hsu, K.O.K. Investments, 2654 W. La Palma Ave.,
Anaheim, CA 92806.
AGENT: Lu Architects and Associates, 8862 Garden Grove Blvd., CA
92644.
LOCATION: 2658 West La Palma Ave. Property is approximately 1.9
acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue and approximately
420 feet west of the centerline of Magnolia Avenue.
To permit a 4-unit, 3,200 square-foot, expansion to an existing
commercial retail center.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3460 GRANTED, subject to landscaping planter being extended to
the street right of way, and a hedge, similar to the existing one,
being planted; and relocation of the easterly driveway, westerly 55
feet (PC91-175) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4147 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: RONALD AND DOROTHY FIELD, P.O. Box 8, Anaheim, CA 92805.
AGENT: HOWARD PARSELL CO., Attn: Julia Carroll, 4854 Main Street,
Yorba Linda, CA 92686.
LOCATION: 125 East Ellsworth Avenue. Property is approximately 0.13
acre located at the northwest corner of Ellsworth Avenue and Claudina
Street.
Waiver of (A) maximum structural height (DELETED), (B) minimum
structural setback (GRANTED) , (C) minimum yard requirement (DELETED),
(D) minimum dimension of garage parking spaces (DELETED) and (E)
minimum recreational/leisure area (DELETED) to construct a second
dwelling unit in conjunction with an existing single-family residence.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4147 GRANTED, IN PART, waivers (A), (C), (D) and (E)
deleted (PC91-176) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved negative Declaration.
B5. 155: AMENDMENT TO THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN (87-1) AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: THE PRESLEY COMPANIES, Attn: Steven K. Riggs, 19 Corporate
Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660.
771
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
LOCATION: Development Area 11 of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills
Specific Plan (SP87-1).
Petitioner requests an amendment to Ordinance No. 4860 in order to
amend Development Area 11 Zoning and Development Standards to permit
the development of a 162-unit condominium complex.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Amendment to The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (87-1)
APPROVED, subject to a reduction of 72 units to the overall
entitlement (PC91-177) (6 yes votes, i absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
This item was set for a public hearing before the City Council on December 3,
1991.
B6.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4152 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: ANDREW HOMES, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., ~900, Newport Beach, CA
92660.
LOCATION: 3238 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 0.9 acres
located on the south side of Ball Road and approximately 530 feet east
of the centerline of Oakhaven Drive.
Waiver of setback adjacent to single-family residential zone and; or
design of tandem parking spaces to construct a carport.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4152 GRANTED (PC91-178) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3466 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: MAX WILLS, 3838 San Pablo Drive, Fullerton, CA 92635.
LOCATION: 1204 West Center Street. Property is approximately 0.38
acres located at the southwest corner of Center Street and Walnut
Street.
To permit a 2-story, 13-unit, senior citizen's apartment complex.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3466 GRANTED (PC91-179) (4 yes votes, 2 no votes, and 1
absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Members
Pickler and Daly, and therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later
date.
BB.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4148 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: JASON Y. KHAMLY, 1842 W. Lincoln Ave., Ste. "F", Anaheim, CA
92801.
LOCATION: 2010 W. Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 0.39
acres located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and approximately
522 feet east of the centerline of Empire Street.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish 1,828 square
feet of medical office use within an existing 5,850 square foot
commercial retail center.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4148 GRANTED (PC91-180) (6 yes votes, I absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
772
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
B9. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-08, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3467 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNERS: WIHOK PATANARAPELERS, 431 N. State College Blvd., Anaheim, CA
92806.
AGENT: ALBERTO VAZQUEZ, 11725 Oklahoma Ave., Hollydale, CA 90280.
LOCATION: 431 North State College Boulevard. Property is an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.31
acres located on the west side of State College Boulevard and
approximately 140 feet south of the centerline of Sycamore Street.
For a change from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential, Agricultural) zone to
the CL (Commercial, Limited) or a less intense zone.
To permit the commercial use of a residential structure with waiver of
interior setback abutting residential zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 91-92-08 GRANTED (PC91-181) (6 yes votes, 1
absent).
Waiver of code requirement GRANTED.
CUP NO. 3467 GRANTED (PC91-182).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Bi0. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3468 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, 2219 Orange Ave., ANAHEIM, CA 92804.
AGENT: ROBERT DOBERNECK, 143 S. Gain Street, Anaheim, CA 92804.
LOCATION: 2219 West Orange Avenue. Property is approximately 2.36
acres located on the north side of Orange Avenue and located
approximately 200 feet west of the centerline of Brookhurst Street.
To permit a child day care center in conjunction with an existing
church.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3468 GRANTED (PC91-183) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Bll. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2029 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREY.
APPROVED):
OWNER: LOWERY COMPANY, P.O. Box 2276, Anaheim, CA 92814
LOCATION: 619 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.6
acre located at the southwest corner of Wilhelmina Street and Anaheim
Boulevard.
Petitioner requests amendment to conditions of approval pertaining to
parking area lighting.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 2029 GRANTED (PC91-184) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved (Prey. Approved) Negative Declaration.
End of the Planning Commission Items from November 4, 1991.
B12. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5269 FOR ADOPTION:
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was read
by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5269)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
773
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5269 for adoption, amending
Section 18.96.040 of Chapter 18.96 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
relating to required elevators in deck-type housing apartment developments.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5269: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION
18.96.040 OF CHAPTER 18.96 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO REQUIRED ELEVATORS IN DECK-TYPE HOUSING APARTMENT DEVELOPMENTS. (Continued
introduction from the meeting of October 8, 1991, Item B9.) (Introduced at the
meeting of October 22, 1991, item B13. Amended first reading November 5, 1991,
item B7.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly ande Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5269 duly passed and adopted.
AN ITEM FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, DECISION DATE: NOVEMBER 7r 1991,
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS NOVEMBER 22, 1991:
B13.
179: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 63, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5:
REQUESTED BY: SEES COLOR TEXTILES, INC., 1335 Knollwood Circle,
Anaheim, CA 92801.
LOCATION: 1335 Knollwood Circle.
Petitioner requests waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (52
required; 48 proposed) to construct a 795 sq. ft. office addition to
an existing 20,982 sq. ft. industrial building.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Adjustment No. 63 GRANTED (ZA91-42).
B14. 155: HEARING - SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) HOUSING POLICY AND A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
Approving the SRO Housing Policy and Negative Declaration in connection with
the policy.
Mayor Hunter opened the hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak.
James Antinon, Member, Unitarian Church of Orange County, 1120 W. Santa Aha
Street. The Unitarian Church has been working with the Planning Department for
about a year concerning the construction of an SRO and expansion of their
church. He expressed concern relative to provisions of the SRO Housing Policy,
especially that the facility had to be located within 1,000 feet of a bus stop
which will preclude the church from building an SRO since the closest their
facility will be to a bus stop is 1,500 feet.
Mayor Hunter explained that Council action will be establishing guidelines for
SRO's and not specifics of plans that may be submitted. When plans are
submitted, they will go through the process of first the Planning Commission
and subsequently the City Council, if necessary, where a waiver can be
774
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
requested relative to issues such as the one mentioned by Antinon. He
reiterated these are guidelines for new future SRO's. One has already been
approved and it is the first in Orange County.
Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development confirmed that
they were meant to be guidelines. Ail SRO's will have to go through the CUP
process. They will be reviewed independently and brought to the Planning
Commission and City Council who will make the final decision on requested
waivers.
There being no further persons who wished to speak; Mayor Hunter closed the
hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Simpson, 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.
Council Member Pickler moved to approve the Single Room Occupancy Housing
Policy excepting out section B, General Provisions, item 16d, and Section XII,
item 6 of exhibit I (Management Plan) regarding no local government agency
financial assistance to meet minimum affordability requirements as recommended
in memorandum dated November 7, 1991, from the Housing Development Manager.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Lloyd Lowry, 2504 Hilda Place, Anaheim. He is disturbed over the provision
that the Council approved in the recent amendment to the City Manager's
contract regarding buyout (severance pay). In his opinion, it is a waste of
taxpayer's money. He is asking that the Council reverse their decision on the
buyout. He is also concerned with the debt that the Utilities Department has
and is incurring.
Jim Townsend, Chairman, Telephone Taxpayers Committee. He has nothing against
the City Manager but he is concerned with the Council voting to accept the City
Manager's contract with what he considers additional perks while not providing
funds to keep other community programs intact.
Harvey Lopez. He expressed concern over the recently approved contract with
the City Manager as well as other issues in the community that need to be
resolved such as the gang problem.
Jack Schaeffer, 211 S. Beach Blvd., Space 21, Anaheim. He is present on behalf
of ACT and as of president of the Mobile Home Owners Association, APAC. He
agrees with the previous speakers relative to the severance package given to
the City Manager while at the same time the City Manager sent resumes out to
other cities. Mr. Ruth should be held accountable for his actions.
775
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Ehrle. City Manager Ruth has given the Council some
clarification which was helpful but he (Ehrle) still feels the severance
provision was wrong. He voted against it. Six months is more than
sufficient. He has spoken to the City Attorney. What is in place is a legally
binding contract and the Council cannot rescind its previous action. It can
only be done by a way of Mr. Ruth if he would be willing to renegotiate the
agreement on his own.
City Attorney White. The City Manager's employment is a contract and general
contract principals apply. It was approved and signed by both parties and has
been delivered to both parties and, therefore, it is legally binding at this
time. It could not be unilaterally rescinded by either party but by mutual
consent.
Council Member Ehrle. He urged Mr. Ruth to give some consideration to doing so
in light of what Council has asked management to do in terms of not taking
merit increases. The City Council also took a small salary cut which was a
gesture to help the budget situation. As long as Mr. Ruth is doing the job he
is doing, there is no reason why he needs twelve months severance. He urged
him (Ruth) to reconsider the matter.
Council Member Daly. The City employs all of its people in a market place
called Southern California. He has carefully examined the market place in
Orange County and major cities in Southern California and believes the package
is a sound one. He invited Council Member Ehrle to take a look at Santa Ana
and other nearby cities for comparison. It is only fair to provide some
context for employment decisions.
Council Member Ehrle. He would agree but with the exception that the Council
keeps stressing the need to keep moving more towards privatization and running
the City like the private sector. In his opinion, very few companies give
their chief executive officers a year's severance, a car and other allowances.
Looking at municipalities, Council Member Daly is correct but at some point it
has to stop whoever the City Manager may be. The City Manager works at the
pleasure of the Council. The amendment is tieing any future Council to an
obligation by making a decision based upon economics.
Council Member Pickler. It is his feeling, because it is an election year,
Council Member Ehrle is having his compatriots starting off by keying into an
issue he (Ehrle) wants to bring forward as well as the Utilities issue. Even
before he was a Council Member, Council Member Ehrle was attacking the then
Public Utilities General Manager Gordon Hoyt. Anaheim's Utilities have been
the best run in the country ultimately providing lower utility rates. He
(Ehrle) voted no on the Utility proposal today which the Public Utilities Board
and staff have shown will be saving four million dollars a year and Council
Member Ehrle was calling for a vote of the public at the last meeting.
Relative to the City Manager's contract, Council Member Ehrle discussed the
matter with Mr. Ruth and there were no problems. Mr. Ruth has done an
excellent job. As Council Member Daly stated, other cities do the same thing
and anyone working for Anaheim has the right to make the salary he makes
because he earns it. He reiterated, because it is an election year, it is
being made a political issue.
776
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
D1. 158: PUBLIC HEARING - THE ACQUISITION OF A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN
PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY TOGETHER WITH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, REQUIRED FOR ROAD
AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES (R/W 4774):
LOCATION: 2501-2525 East Ball Road at the northeast corner of Ball
Road and Sunkist Street.
Finding and determining the public interest and necessity for
acquiring and authorizing the condemnation of a portion of that
certain parcel of real property, together with existing improvements,
required for road and public utility purposes located at 2501 - 2525
East Ball Road (northeast corner of Ball Road and Sunkist Street),
(R/W 4774).
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - November 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 15, 1991
Submitted was report dated November 7, 1991 from the Public Works Director and
City Engineer recommending adoption of the proposed resolution and authorizing
the law firm of Oliver, Stover, Barr and Vose, Special Counsel for the City of
Anaheim and the City Attorney to proceed with said condemnation action.
PI2~NNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 7, 1991.
Art Daw, Deputy City Engineer. A portion of the property at the northeast
corner of Ball Road and Sunkist is needed for the widening of Ball Road
necessitated to comply with mitigation measures of the Arena project to provide
dual left turns from westbound Ball Road to southbound Sunkist. An appraisal
has been made of the property and an offer made to the property owner. The
owner has been non-responsive to the offer. The project is getting close to
being bid out and it is essential that the right-of-way be acquired in order to
proceed. Staff recommends proceeding with condemnation of the necessary
right-of-way.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished
to speak. There was no response and the public hearing was subsequently
closed.
EN~VIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - EIR NO. 299: On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Hunter, the City Council finds that on
December 27, 1989, it has previously certified EIR No. 299 making certain
findings in connection therewith and adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and that there are no additional impacts in connection with the
subject action. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read
by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 91R-321)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
777
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 91R-321 for adoption, finding and
determining the public interest and necessity for acquiring and authorizing the
condemnation of certain real property (Waters-R/W 4774) as recommended in
memorandum dated November 7, 1991. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-321: 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 (Waters - RW 4774).
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 91R-321 duly passed and adopted.
D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 3458 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: JOSEPH DiRUGGIERO and EMANUELA DiRUGGIERO, 22010 S. Wilmington
Ave., Ste. 200, Carson, CA 90745.
AGENT: KARL and FRANCESKA HONIGMANN, P.O. Box 2352, Anaheim, CA
92814.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 2230 West Colchester
Drive and is approximately 0.85 acre located at the southeast corner
of Colchester Drive and Colony Street.
The request is to permit the retention and expansion of a cabaret with
on-premise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages with waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3458 DENIED (PC91-156) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Waiver of code requirement DENIED.
Denied Negative Declaration
HEARING SET ON:
A letter of appeal was submitted by Rick Blake, Attorney, on behalf of the
agents, Karl and Franceska Honigmann and public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - November 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 6, 1991
Posting of property November 8, 1991
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated October 7, 1991
Mayor Hunter noting the large number of people in the Chamber audience asked
how many were present on the subject item. Approximately 50 people were
present. The Mayor thereupon asked if possible that a spokesperson speak for
those in favor and those in opposition although all who wished were welcome to
speak. (Those present in favor when asked to raise their hands were numbered
approximately 20 and those in opposition that could be determined approximately
10.)
778
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
The Mayor then asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
Rick Blake, Rick Blake and Associates, Attorney, 2700 N. Main Street, Santa
Ana. The Planning Commission by its actions seems to have voted to deny
retention as well as modification or expansion of the existing business. The
business has been operating at the same location since 1961 under Variance
No. 1323 granted January 16, 1961. The present action is as a result of a
business operator attempting to remodel the premises. The business presently
occupies two units looking to expand into a third. The owner cut a hole in the
adjacent wall and during that process a building inspector came by and
indicated that the owner could not do so without appropriate permits and
license. The owner was then cited by the Building Department for various
infractions and violations. The City Attorney's Office indicated they were
going to shut the business down unless proper permits were filed. Under
protest, the owner filed for a conditional use permit, the intent of which was
to expand the existing facility adding additional square footage to include a
kitchen and an upgrade of the sale of beer and wine to include distilled
spirits. The Planning Commission denied the expansion and the retention of the
existing use. He questioned on what authority the Planning Commission can deny
retention of the existing use which would require a public hearing with due
notice to the operators.
Mr. Blake then gave a history of the business which has been operating as a
beer bar since 1961 and more recent history wherein the business was granted
entertainment permits. He emphasized that the expansion is appropriate at this
time and it is solely for the purpose of enlarging the premises to accommodate
a larger kitchen and open up the patron seating area. There is also a request
that the parking requirement be waived because there is not quite enough
parking under City codes. A traffic and parking study was submitted to the
City and the staff report initially indicated that it met the parking standard
and there would be no adverse impact. The operation will not and has not
interfered with residents of the community. There is some concern that there
is a lot of crime in the area; however, it does not relate directly to the
business operated by the applicants. Statistics by the Police Department show
that over a two-year period there were 12 to 14 incidences attributable to the
premises most occurring on the outside. In concluding, he stated it is
necessary to have a clarification as to what the decision of the Planning
Commission meant relating to retention and as it relates to denial of a CUP
since two separate issues are involved.
city Attorney Jack White. With regard to the issue the City Council is looking
at tonight, there is a 1961 variance approved by the City to authorize the sale
of beer in conjunction with a restaurant. Tonight the Council is not
addressing the issue of whether or not the existing variance should be
revoked. There is an existing variance to allow sale of beer in a restaurant.
His understanding is there may not be a restaurant there anymore but that is
not the issue the Council needs to address. What they are looking at tonight
is the application to expand the existing premises and to authorize sale and
consumption on premises of what is commonly called hard alcoholic beverages
over and above the beer approved in 1961. That is the issue, not the issue
whether or not the use be terminated because that is not properly noticed and
is not before the Council tonight. It may come before the Council at a
779
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
different date but that is not what the hearing is about this evening.
Mayor Hunter. The Council then is only concerned with the expansion of the
existing cabaret and the sale and consumption of hard liquor.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Karl Honigmann. He and his wife are the owners of the business
which they purchased in May, 1985. At that time, they purchased
a neighborhood beer bar with no kitchen facilities. In February
1986, they came before the City Council to apply for an
entertainment license allowing bar maids that danced on a dancing
platform or stage and received authorization from the City
Council to have that type of entertainment. They have been
operating since that time with that entertainment and with little
to no problems with the Police Department, Zoning or Code
Enforcement. He was in the process of expanding the business and
as Mr. Blake stated, he removed one side of the adjoining wall to
get a good feel for what type of wall he was working with.
Subsequently, he applied for the necessary permits to do a new
face lift to the front of the building and to be allowed to
expand the business into the additional 800 square foot suite,
the majority to be used for kitchen facilities and office space
with 200 square feet to be used for patrons. Mr. Honigmann
proceeded to explain other issues he felt relevant referring to
various municipal codes and Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC)
rules.
Mayor Hunter interjected and asked that Mr. Honigmann address the issues before
the Council tonight as explained and reiterated by the City Attorney - the
expansion of the business and the sale of hard alcohol.
Karl Honigmann. He feels it is necessary for his operation and all taverns and
beer bars to be able to serve some type of meals and food to those consuming
alcoholic beverages. He has tried to bring food into the premises and the
Orange County Health Department has asked him to remove all type of food
processing. He can only have packaged foods that can be put into a microwave
or crock pot. It is important for his business to be able to offer food. The
other portion deals with the consumption of hard alcohol. It is something
already in the area and it has been in the strip center before. He has had no
complaints from any of the residents around the business with regard to the
expansion. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, he walked a petition
within the 300 foot radius. He knocked on all doors and got about 50% to
answer. Eighty-six people living in the immediate area of the bar signed the
petition stating no complaints about expanding the business. He received 129
signatures of Anaheim residents stating no objections to expansion of the
existing business. There is a resident present who lives directly behind the
bar to testify that they run a clean operation with no noise being generated
from the business. Within the same strip center there is Alcoholic's Anonymous
with a lot of people who are alcoholics and drug users who create some
disturbance. Their doors are wide open. There are also a lot of Harley
Davison motorcycles which generate a lot of noise. They have lived up to their
commitment running an establishment free of drugs and crime. He is asking the
Council to allow the expansion and the sale of hard alcohol.
780
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION -
IN FAVOR: Nedra Morrow, employee of the business, Barbary Coast and
resident of Anaheim. She lives three blocks away. The only
trouble she sees is with Alcoholic's Anonymous. Barbary Coast
does not allow loitering in the parking lot. The business is
drug free. There are a number of girls who work there who have
children. There have been no complaints or fights. The business
deserves to expand.
A.J. Mesingo, 5061 W. Minerva, Anaheim. After the first of the
year, there are going to be layoffs by the large employers in
Anaheim whereas the proposed expansion of the subject business
will assist in saving/creating jobs.
Chon Alercon, 723 S. Philadelphia Street, Anaheim. His business
is around the corner from Barbary Coast. He has been patronizing
the bar for about 23 years. He has been there when drugs were
prevalent and stayed out until the Honigmanns took over. They
run a legitimate business which provides good times for patrons.
Bunny Monteferara, 1540 W. Ball Road, Anaheim. He is the doorman
at Barbary Coast. He patrols the outside. There are a lot of
things happening in the area that are not the fault of Barbary
Coast. The business should be allowed to expand. If not, his job
is in jeopardy.
Cecelia Gomez, 1430 Mountain Way, Tustin. She worked at Barbary
Coast for 3 1/2 years before she was fired last July. As long as
she was working there she saw nothing illegal take place. They
deserve to expand.
Glen Campbell, 2648 W. Ball Road, Anaheim. He is a patron of the
bar which is one of the cleanlest, most respectable
establishments he has been in especially compared to the other
establishments in the area.
Laura Pelotta. She lives in Los Angeles and drives 30 miles to
her job at Barbary Coast. She needs to work. She also goes to
school. This is the cleanlest and best run establishment she has
worked in. She urged approval of the expansion.
Paul Helms, 9562 Vancouver, Anaheim. He has been a customer of
Barbary Coast for the past 3 years. He is a truck driver by
trade. It is advantageous for him to have a place to go within
walking distance of his residence where he can have an alcoholic
beverage and something to eat and then walk home. The expansion
should be allowed.
Erica Lemar, B.A. in Education. At Barbary Coast, she works four
days a week. It is one of the few places where she can make a
decent living and continue her education. She is an Anaheim
resident. There is a bullet hole in the apartment above her.
781
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
There is far less violence in the Barbary Coast. The business
should be allowed to expand.
James Riker, 2116 W. Crone. He lives about 300 yards from the
bar where he has lived for 25 years. He has grown up in the area
and did not know the bar was there until February. He has never
heard gun shots in the area. He urged that they keep the
business going - give the girls jobs - let the business expand.
Steve McCune, resident of Riverside, Program Analyst. He has
been patronizing the bar for a couple of months. He is not in
the habit of stopping at any establishment where he does not feel
comfortable. It is a bar and nothing more. There is nothing he
can say that should prevent the business from expanding.
Claudine Gilley, 2239 W. Vancouver, Anaheim. She is speaking in
favor of the expansion. She has never gone to the bar so she
does not know what goes on inside, but she has never heard any
noise from the business.
Tom Salez. He lives in Stanton and is the other doorman at
Barbary Coast where he has worked for over 1 1/2 years. It is a
quiet bar. They are just trying to expand and make it better for
the employees. The owner is just trying to build up his economy
and do something for himself. It is a nice bar.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION -
IN OPPOSITION:
John Moses, 9881 Marian Avenue, Anaheim. He has no problem with
bars, but this particular area between Ball Road and Broadway on
Brookhurst has the highest concentration of bars. He moved in on
December 31, 1990 not knowing what was going. There are biker
motorcycles which start from Thursday through Sunday evening,
police helicopters, etc. He hopes the Council makes their
decision based on what occurred at the Planning Commission
hearing. His concern is for the neighborhood. He grew up in the
neighborhood, went to Anaheim schools and is a business owner.
In this area, they hear gun shots and see more and more
graffiti. There is a concentration of alcohol in the area and it
is attracting some people they do not want in the neighborhood.
The neighborhood is being run down and unsightly. If the
business is allowed to expand, it will mean more people to be
served alcohol. The Council has to look at the overall big
picture. If they are a good business, they will still be there,
but an expansion will be a mistake for the future.
James Johnson, 500 Archer, Anaheim. He purchased in the area in
1954 and in the past three to five years there has been an
increase of activities along Archer which he believes is a spill
over from Brookhurst. From Broadway to Cerritos on Brookhurst,
the area is saturated with places that offer alcoholic
beverages. It has been reported it is a quiet establishment
782
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
based on serving beer and wine. However, he suspects there is a
different kind of behavior that comes from drinking harder
alcohol. He is oppcsed to expanding the hard liquor
opportunities in that area because he does not like what he has
seen transpire in the area.
Patricia Daniel, 9882 Marian Avenue, Anaheim. She appeared
before the Council when they allowed the Ritz Bar to expand. At
that time, the Ritz declared they were opening a restaurant and
the Council agreed to let them do so under specific conditions.
In finality, there is no restaurant and she believes there was
never intended to be. The owner of the subject business has
stated he wants to increase the bar by approximately 200 square
feet which is the size of a bedroom. She does not see how he is
going to employee many more people or add to the employment rate
in Orange County by this small addition. As an Analogy, in this
area of Anaheim from Broadway to Ball Road, somebody planted a
(cancer) in their midst which is eating away at the lovely
neighborhood, lowering property values and frightening
residents. She then relayed incidents to justify her concern.
The Council is allowing bars to increase by size which is
deteriorating the neighborhood. The residents look to the
Council to protect their neighborhoods and not to entertain
people. She asked that they not betray the neighborhood again.
Mo Mohana. He represents the owners of the New Horizon senior
citizen complex and is a resident of Anaheim at 3333 W. Ball
Road. They respect other people's businesses and do not want to
infringe against the rights of any individual or entity but when
the lack of control jeopardizes the well being and rights of
others, it behooves the Council to take a stand when they see
that neither the bar or the City are able to constitute or
enforce laws and rules for the patrons of the bar to abide by.
As a result, they have no recourse but to oppose the expansion.
He invited one of the residents to speak and presented a petition
signed by 72 residents of the project. (Petition was submitted
to the Council and made a part of the record.)
P.G. Shr0¥er, 835 Bro0khurst, Anaheim. There is noise coming
from the direction of Barbary Coast although he does not know
from which establishment. There are many activities going on and
they would not like to see matters get worse because it is bad
enough at this time. The residents would like some relief and he
believes he is speaking for almost 100% of the residents of the
senior citizens complex. Liberty ends when there is infringement
on the rights of others. He urged the Council to give them the
relief they are seeking.
Gary Huneycutt, 418 S. Gain, Anaheim. He shops in the area of
the Barbary Coast and it is from personal experience he is
speaking. He then relayed an incident that occurred when he was
at the center. He is certain the people in Barbary Coast are
783
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
fine people and the owners are trying to run a good business.
They could only control what is within there own premises. The
people who create problems outside of the business give a bad
image and are causing a problem within the community, the gun
shots, screams, etc. Within their community and within a short
distance are 30 plus establishments that serve beer, wine and
alcohol. Speaking on behalf of the Orange Avenue Homeowners
Association, they do not want to see the same thing happening in
their area of Anaheim where because of the number of such
establishments in one area, people can keep going from bar to bar
as in other U.S. cities. They do not want to further deteriorate
the quality of life in the area by expanding such businesses or
granting hard liquor licenses. If the business continues to
expand, the opportunity is there that will bring a further
deterioration of the community.
SUMMATION BY
APPLICANT:
Rick Blake. The issues that need to be addressed are the
expansion and the addition of hard alcohol. The kitchen will
allow more food sales and food is an important factor relating to
sobriety. The square footage for public patronage is not
significant and parking is not a problem. He then submitted two
petitions, the first signed by the neighbors residing immediately
adjoining the property and the second from Anaheim area residents
approving the addition of distilled spirits and upgrading of the
business. The applicant will have a more significant investment
to protect which can only be good for the City and help the
community as a whole.
Ken Honigmann. He presently employees 14 people in various
roles. With the expansion and addition of the restaurant and
addition of more security, he will then have in excess of 30
employees working in his establishment. It generates a lot of
income for a lot of people. It is a quality establishment. He
will have food service, bartenders, and more girls entertaining
customers.
Mr. Honigmann then answered questions posed by Council Member
Pickler for purposes of clarification relative to the expansion.
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. (91R-322)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
784
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 91R-322 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 3458 incorporating the findings set forth in
paragraph 18 of page 6 of the October 7, 1991 staff report. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-322: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3458.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 91R-322 duly passed and adopted.
D3. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3299, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 14406 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: O. M. P. DEVELOPMENT, 1524 Victoria Way, Placentia, CA 92670
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1575 West Katella Avenue
and is approximately 2.21 acres located on the north side of Katella
Avenue and approximately 314 feet east of the centerline of Carnelian
Street.
The petitioner requests amendment to conditions of Conditional Use
Permit No. 3299 pertaining to recordation of a tentative tract map
prior to issuance of a building permit (This request also
necessitates Planning Commission review of Tentative Tract Map No.
14406.)
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3299 DENIED REQUEST to amend conditions of approval (PC91-165)
(4 yes votes, 3 absent).
No action taken on Tentative Tract Map No. 14406 due to denial of the
request to amend conditions of approval of CUP NO. 3299.
No action taken on Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
A letter of appeal was submitted by the owner, Massoud Monshizadeh, O.M.P.
Development and public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE ~LEQUI~LEMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - November 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 6, 1991
Posting of property - November 8, 1991
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated October 21, 1991.
Mayor Hunter asked first to hear from staff.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. Mr. Monshizadeh has apparently
satisfied the conditions of the conditional use permit which are required to be
satisfied before the building permit is issued. He has satisfied the
785
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
conditions of the tract map as reviewed by the Engineering Division. The only
item missing is a convenant that still needs to be signed off by the City
Attorney's Office. She understands the content of the convenant has already
been reviewed and approved but at the time it was reviewed, not all signatures
were affixed. It still has to be reviewed by the City Attorney's Office. The
City Attorney has prepared a draft condition to be inserted into the
resolution.
City Attorney Jack White. The request is to amend an existing condition of the
CUP which would allow the applicant to obtain a building permit prior to
approval and recordation of the final tract map. Historically it has been the
position of his office that it is inappropriate for the Council or Planning
Commission to entertain a condition which would allow building permits prior to
recordation of maps where a subdivision is involved for the simple reason, if
there is no guarantee that the map is going to be recorded, a building could be
constructed which violates the existing zoning code. With regard to this
particular application, it involves a condominium project. If the project were
built, it could end up being tantamount to an apartment project if there is no
tract map recorded because there is no ability to separately sell individual
units. There is a provision in state law which says if all of the conditions
of a tentative map have been satisfied, the public agency may at its discretion
issue a building permit if it believes the final map will be recorded. While
his office is still of the opinion it is not advisable to permit construction
to commence prior to the map being recorded, he has prepared a proposed
condition which would allow that to occur if the Council decided they want to
find a way to do so. It is still his recommendation not to allow that to
happen. He has copies of the condition if the Council wishes to proceed in
that direction. It has not been shared as yet with staff or the applicant.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Massoud Monshizadeh, 1524 Victoria Way, Placentia. They have
been working on the project for three years. He presented to the
City Attorney's Office the State Map Act and he has a copy for
each of the Council Members regarding issuance of permits prior
to recordation of the parcel map. Also as stated, he has
satisfied all the conditions of the tract map. In the month of
October, he has paid over $180,000 in permit fees and has paid
additional fees. He is not going to turn the project into an
apartment. He has done his share of the work and he needs to get
his permit and start construction. There is no need to be
delayed. He is requesting issuance of the building permit prior
to recordation of the map. The map itself is prepared by the
civil engineer and is ready to go. It is just the paperwork and
the time. After explaining further points and problems with his
bank, he emphasized he has satisfied all the conditions and is
requesting the building permit prior to recordation of the tract
map.
Extensive discussion followed between Council Members, staff and
Mr. Monshizadeh relative to his request. Mr. White emphasized
over the last three years, this was not the only issue on the
project. Working with the applicant in his office and other City
786
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
departments, all other issues have been resolved. The City
Attorney's Office found a way to protect the City and allowed
Mr. Monshizadeh to go forward. It has come down to this last
issue which could not be resolved at staff level. He reiterated
the risk is the project will be started and during the
construction process, if something unforeseen occurs before the
map is recorded, there will be a structure in some stage of
development which would have to be dealt with. In anticipation
of trying to find a way to solve the situation, as he explained,
he drafted a condition which will solve the problem. He then
read the proposed condition. He also explained for Council
Member Daly that the City has had the requirements since the Map
Act was implemented 35 years ago. He does not know if other
jurisdictions have made exceptions but there are probably some
that do it either way. There may be some that use the provision
in the Health and Safety code that allows discretion on the part
of the City to issue a building permit before the map is
recorded. It is not brand new from the standpoint that State law
authorizes it to happen but leaves it to the discretion of the
City.
Massoud Monshizadeh. When the matter was before the Planning
Commission, at that time he could not satisfy all the
conditions. Today he is before the Council and he has satisfied
all of the conditions. That is the big difference. The Council
has allowed this to occur before. There will be no harm to the
City.
City Attorney White then confirmed that it had been done once
before over the recommendation of staff not to do it and it was
another of Mr. Monshizadeh's projects.
Council Member Pickler stated if it is done for one developer,
then of necessity it has to be done for all or else the Council
should not allow it in any case; City Attorney White agreed.
Mayor Hunter. He asked Mr. Monshizadeh why he could not file the
tract map when it is something everybody else does.
Massoud Monshizadeh. The bank he had before did not want to sign
his tract map. Now he has a bank that will do so. The State Map
Act is about 35 or 40 years old. In 1981, the State said because
there is so much problems, it will give leeway. The City has not
adopted what the State allows.
City Attorney White. His recommendation has not changed. He
does not believe it is good policy and he would not recommend in
favor. If the Council is looking for an indication from staff
whether there should be a change in policy, he will not
affirmatively come back to the Council with a recommendation to
make that change.
787
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The Planning Department
concurs with the City Attorney. Their preference is that a
project is approved specifically as a condominium project. The
risk is probably minimum except for those things that are
unforeseen.
Massoud Monshizadeh. He then asked for a two-week continuance
and the Council will see that in two weeks the map is not going
to be recorded. Staff does not have enough time. He will
request the continuance and come back and say everything is done
but the map will not yet be recorded. He then explained personal
family problems which will necessitate him to fly overseas on
December 5, 1991.
Council Member Pickler. Mr. Monshizadeh is saying that he cannot
get his project recorded in two weeks; City Attorney White.
After he gets all the signatures of the necessary parties, it
will be agendized for the Council to approve it. It is a
ministerial act. If it meets the conditions, the City Council is
required to approve it. What he is hearing is a problem that
some of the signators are not available to sign the map and,
therefore, it is not going to take three weeks, but may take two
months and that is a personal hardship on the applicant.
Massoud Monshizadeh. That is not the problem. One bank has
signed the map and no additional signatures are required.
City Attorney White. In three or four weeks, the map should be
recorded and the Council is taking time tonight arguing over
changing a long-standing policy to save three or four weeks in
exchange for that risk having been accepted by the City.
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. 91R-323)
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. 91R-323 for adoption, denying
amendment to conditions of Conditional Use Permit No. 3299 pertaining to
recordation of the tentative tract map prior to issuance of a building permit.
Refer to Resolution Book.
788
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-323: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 3299 AS APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. PC91-41.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 91R-323 duly passed and adopted.
ADJOURNMENT: Council Member Hunter moved to adjourn, Council Member Pickler
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (8:13 p.m.)
No Council Meeting is scheduled for November 26, 1991 and the next regularly
scheduled meeting is Tuesday, December 3, 1991.
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
789