Loading...
1990/10/16City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5=30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITY MANAGER: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY CLERK: PARKS SUPERINTENDENT: PLANNING DIRECTOR: ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: BENEFITS & INFORMATION MANAGER: Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter None James Ruth Jack White Leonora N. Sohl Jack Kudron Joel Fick Greg Hastings Chris Chase A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 4:00 p.m. on October 12, 1990 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 4:00 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 meet with its Negotiator regarding the possible lease or sale of land located at 1566 South Douglass Road, Anaheim California, to Ogden Financial Services Inc. or other entity for a multipurpose sports and entertainment arena. e. To meet with its negotiator regarding the possible purchase of land located at 400 Freedman Way from Melodyland Church, Inc. f. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant to government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1). 1005 38 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1990~ 5:30 P.M. g. 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. AFTER RECESS: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (6:28 p.m.) INVOCATION: A Moment of Silence was observed in lieu of the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman William D. Ehrle led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PRESENTATION - GOVERNOR'S TRANSPORTATION AWARD FOR 1990: The City's Traffic Engineer, Paul Singer, announced that the City of Anaheim is the recipient of a prestigious award by the Governor of the State of California for innovative transportation projects for a public agency. The award was established in 1988 and it is the highest of its kind. The person mainly responsible for the City receiving this award was former City Employee, Martine Micozzi, Transportation Systems Specialist, who developed an outstanding Ride-Share Program. The award honors the work the City has done and is doing in the area of transportation. Mayor Hunter and the Council were especially pleased that the City had received the award and commended Mr. Singer, his Department and Martine Micozzi. He asked that the plaque be given to her. He explained that Ms. Micozzi had been granted a full scholarship to attend UCLA where she is continuing her studies but would be welcomed back to the City in the future. 119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Hunter and authorized by the City Council: Buckle-up for Life Challenge, November 1, 1990 through 1991, Special Olympics Day, Friday, November 2, 1990, World Food Day in Anaheim, October 16, 1990, and Orange County Hunger Week, October 14 - 20, 1990. Police Chief Molloy accepted the Buckle-up for Life proclamation; Mike Konopa accepted the World Food Day proclamation. 119: DECLARATION OF WELCOME AND SUPPORT: A Declaration of Welcome and Support was unanimously adopted by the City Council welcoming and supporting the upcoming Professional and Amateur Duathlon Event in Anaheim, November 4, 1990. This is the First Annual Ironman/Anaheim Memorial Hospital Duathlon with the proceeds benefitting the Foundation For Sharing. 1006 35 City Hall, Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. 119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition and Congratulations was unanimously adopted by the City Council recognizing and congratulating the Guidance Center Sanitarium for 25 years of Service to the Orange County Community. 119: DECLARATION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Declaration of Congratulations was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Keith Corzine, District Manager and Cinda Raymond, Assistant Manager of the Automobile Club of Southern California on its 90th Anniversary. Mayor Hunter and Council Members personally congratulated the Clubs representatives for the long-standing and excellent service provided to Southern California motorists by their organization. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held August 14 and September 18, 1990. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $5,317,964.71, in accordance with the 1990-91, budgets were approved. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Manager. (Resolution No. 90R-383) Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive reading of the Resolution. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 90R-383 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Al. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission meeting held September 19, 1990. A2. 124: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Anaheim Convention center Katella Avenue Readerboard Refurbishing by Federal Sign Division of Federal Signal Corporation, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to filed said Notice of Completion. A3. 167: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Traffic Signal Improvements at various locations by DBX, Inc., and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion. A4. 164: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Gilbert - Cerritos Storm Drain Improvement by S.A. Healy Company and Associates, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion. 1007 36 City Hallt Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. A5. 169= Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Shepard Street, Carpenter Avenue and Fountain Way Street Improvements by R. J. Noble Company, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion. A6. 169: Awarding a contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder, Nobest, Inc., in the amount of $104,462.60 for Lincoln Median Islands Improvements. This item was continued to November 6, 1990 for further evaluation at the request of staff. AT. 175: Approving Contract Change Order No. 1, in the amount of $36,720 for Meter Vault Rehabilitation for the Western Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvement (Contractor is Atlas Allied, Inc.). A8. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 13705 and Subdivision Agreement with Ching Chu Kao Lee, William Lin and Catharina Lin, and Henry Yu and Wen-An Yu; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreement. Said tract is located at the southwest corner of Ninth Street and Wakefield Avenue. A9. 170= Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 13716 and Subdivision Agreement with Hill Williams Development Corporation; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Subdivision Agreement. Said tract is located on the east side of Fairmont Boulevard, south of Santa Aha Canyon Road. Al0. 123: Approving a First Renewal Agreement with Computer Services Company Division, and authorizing the Mayor to sign said amendment to agreement. All. 123: Approving the Annual Rent Adjustment Agreement with Willdan and Associates for an increase of $.06 per square foot for office space at 290 South Anaheim Boulevard for the Field Engineering Division. Al2. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for one month ended, July 31, 1990, as presented by the Director of Finance. Al3. 109: Approving the inclusion of additional Gas Tax Revenues in the amounts of $600,000 and $100,000 and Expenditures in the amounts of $540,000, $60,000 and $100,000 into the FY 1990/91 Resource Allocation Plan (appropriation of Propositions 111 and 108 Gas Tax Monies). A14. 153: Accepting CIGNA Dental Health as a replacement provider for the CIGNA Health Plan Dental component, effective December 1, 1990, and authorizing the Human Resources Director to sign all required documents on behalf of the City. A15. 153: Accepting and depositing $1,340 into revenue object account no. 01-3199 and concurrently appropriating $1,340 into expenditure account no. 01-146-6348 (League of Cities reimbursement for work performed on an annual benefits survey). 1008 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. A16. This item was pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. (See end of Consent Calendar.) A17. 153: Approving the 1991 Health and Welfare Plan rates and authorizing the Human Resources Director to sign all required renewal documents on behalf of the City. Al8. 123: Approving agreements with Anthony and Langford, Willdan and Associates, and Harris and Associates, in an amount not to exceed $10,000 per project (or $100,000 per fiscal year) for master consultant services for programs undertaken by the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department. Al9. 185: Determining that on the basis of the evidence submitted by Presley of Southern California (the property owner of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan 87-1 development area), that Presley of Southern California has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of Development Agreement No. 88-02 for the 1989 - 90 period under review. A20. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 90R-383: 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. A21. 123: Approving a First Amended and Restated Negotiation Agreement with Redevelopment Agency, the City of Anaheim and Sanderson J. Ray Development in connection with Shorb Wells site, located at the northwest corner of Weir Canyon Road and La Palma Avenue. Said amendment increases the proposed purchase price of the property from $3 million to $3.4 million; requires a payment of $125,000 to extend the negotiation period through January 31, 1991, and requires $125,000 for the option of extending negotiations from January 31, 1991 through April 30, 1991. A22. 123: Approving an Agreement with M. Arthur Gensler Jr. Associates, Inc., dba Gensler and Associates Architects, in the amount of $47,000 to conduct a space planning study of the Anaheim Civic Center for a comprehensive space needs assessment. A23. 156: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Police Department Crime and Clearance Analysis report for the month of September, 1990. A24. 123: Approving an agreement with M. A. Mortenson Co. for preconstruction services for the Anaheim Multipurpose Sports Arena. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 90R-383: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 90R-383 duly passed and adopted. 1009 34 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. The motions on the consent calendar were all carried. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. A16. 153= CANCELLATION OF HUMANA HEALTH PLAN AND FAMILY HEALTH PLAN (FHP} PROGRAM AS CITY OF ANAHEIM HEALTH PLAN PROVIDERS - EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1991: Submitted was report dated October 16, 1990 from the Human Resources Director, Dave Morgan, recommending the subject and also waiving the pre-existing condition exclusion for employees and retirees who elect coverage under the Employee Medical Plan Options I and II during the 1991 open enrollment period. City Manager James Ruth announced that representatives of FHP requested to speak. Guy Shields, representing FHP Management. FHP is concerned about the recommendation to eliminate their program as a benefits option for City of Anaheim employees. He then briefed the Council on the services FHP has provided to the Anaheim community for 13 years as well as to the 170 employee members covered by their plan. FHP is a local health care organization and one of the most stable financially and fiscally responsible health care organizations in the country. The plan continues to offer a host of new products which does fly in the face of consolidation of health care carriers. They also have historically delivered good stability in their rate increases and rate history and over the last five years have maintained a 5.6% average rate increase with the City. FHP has much to offer and are very interested in the continuation of their relationship with the City. He is recommending that the decision to not offer FHP for the coming year be reconsidered and that the rationale be shared with FHP management so that they would have an opportunity to respond. They are also requesting that a report be made to the Council of those deliberations. Councilman Pickler asked if there would be a problem in continuing the matter until the meeting of November 6, 1990. George Mendoza, President, Health Council/City of Anaheim. For the Health Council, the issue is not the providers the Health Council has recommended be dropped, but instead relates to the ultimate credibility of the Health Council itself. The Health Council, a Labor-Management Committee established by Memorandums of Understanding and authorized by the City Council, has the responsibility for over 2,000 employees to ensure adequate medical care at the lowest cost. The Health Council has to actively pursue cost containment and one of the avenues is consolidation of Health Plans offered. The choice was not an easy one. The Council knew it was going to impact a number of people including members of the Health Council. It was a prudent decision and part of a five-year ongoing process. He feels the Health Council was even remiss at this time in not dropping possibly more plans and making it a one-time impact. The Health Council stands by its decision. The vote was 100% from all units represented on the Health Council. 1010 City Hallf Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5~30 P.M. Chris Chase, Benefits Manager. Relative to the question of timing, it is critical. Open enrollment begins on November 1, 1990 and the Human Resources Department is in the process of putting together benefit communication materials for all employees which will need to be disseminated in the next week. Dropping Humana and FHP will leave the City with seven plans to choose from. Councilman Pickler asked if the plan was carried for another year, would cost figures be affected. Chris Chase. The recommendation is not on the basis of cost but a result of a process the Health Council has gone through for five years trying to position the City so that the City can make decisions that are strategic in the near future. It is clear to everyone on the Health Council that in order to control the service delivery systems, there must be consolidation in order to end up eventually with only one or two health plans for the City's employees. And that way, the City can gain greater leverage with the providers and will be able to get better quality of service. Councilman Pickler. Since the costs will not change perhaps they can work with the employees to find out their feelings. George Mendoza. If the recommendation is overturned or postponed, it will weaken the Health Council in the work it was created to do. He reiterated all of the bargaining units and those representing management agreed 100% which is a difficult thing to achieve. A lot of people in the plan have already been notified and some of those who had genuine concerns have called but no where near the approximate 178 who are in the FHP Program. Of those in the program, those expressing concerns represent 10% or 15%. A judgement should not be made on the number in the plan but on the big picture. Answering Councilwoman Kaywood, he explained that there has not been 100% agreement on the Health Council on issues of this magnitude. It has taken a long time to get to this point and it is the direction in which the Health Council needs to go. Councilman Ehrle. A lot of people are affected by the recommendation. He had two different discussions with the Human Resources Director on the matter. He (Ehrle) is personally affected relative to Humana but he realizes there is going to have to be a change and he will support the decision of the Health Council. ~ouncilman Daly. FHP is an Anaheim based group and have enjoyed a great reputation. He asked if they have been given notification that there was the possibility of a cancellation and then given an opportunity to rectify the problem. Chris Chase. He answered no. The recommendation is not based on service or cost issues. The judgement made by the Health Council was the need to consolidate plans. FHP is in direct competition with Kaiser which is the City's major HMO. The decision of the Health Council was based solely on that issue. The Health Council came to the conclusion. It was not recommended by staff but a result of discussions going on during the September 20, 1990 meeting. There was no opportunity to inform anyone. 1011 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5=30 P.M. Councilman Daly. Based on that even understanding the timing problems, he personally supports a continuance solely because FHP did not appear to have adequate notice. It is an Anaheim based business and deserves the courtesy of a consultation before a contract is dropped. Councilwoman Kaywood. There is a real time element problem. She does not believe they can interfere with that without upsetting everyone. George Mendoza. The opportunity for any carrier is there to bring in any new plan. They met with FHP today and it was made clear the direction the City is going and that anytime they are welcome back to fit into that program. However, the ongoing consolidation is going to happen. Jeff Hale, FHP. They are of the opinion that all the information about FHP was not available to the Health Council when they made their decision. FHP feels cost containment and consolidation is important. They believe they do fit and are asking for an opportunity to meet with the City Council to provide information to the Health Council so they can make a decision based on complete information. MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to authorize the cancellation of the Humana Health Plan and the Family Health Program (FHP) as health plan providers to the City, effective January 1, 1991, and waiving the pre-existing condition exclusion for employees and retirees who elect coverage under the Employee Medical Plan Options I and II during the 1991 open enrollment period. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Members Daly and Pickler voted no. MOTION CARRIED. 105: UNSCHEDULED VACANCY - REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Declaring an unscheduled vacancy on the Community Redevelopment Commission, due to the resignation of Donna Berry whose term expires June 30, 1994. MOTION: Councilman Daly moved to declare an unscheduled vacancy on the Community Redevelopment Commission for the term of Donna Berry, whose term expires June 30, 1994, and authorizing the City Clerk to post a notice of unscheduled vacancy. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood asked that a certificate be prepared to be presented to Mrs. Berry for her service on the Commission. 178: APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE TO THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT: The appointment is to fill the current vacancy of Joseph Truxaw. This matter was continued from the meeting of October 2, 1990 to this date. Councilman Ehrle nominated Bob Kazarian who has demonstrated his desire to serve. Mr. Kazarian is also a member of the City's Public Utilities Board and, therefore, someone who can carry over into a regional board as well. Councilman Daly. He had previously asked for a continuance on the appointment because there was a relatively late submittal and two outstanding individuals had applied. He agrees with Councilman Ehrle regarding the opportunity to have a member of the Public Utilities Board serve at the regional level and there 1012 29 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1990, 5:30 P.M. could not be a better person than Bob Kazarian. He seconded the nomination. MOTION= On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Pickler, nominations were closed. Mr. Kazarlan was thereupon appointed to serve as the City's representative on the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Water District by the following vote= AYES: NOES: ABSENT~ COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS= Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Kaywood None None 155: PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 273 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-1: AGENT: Presley of Southern California Attn: Kevin A. Sharrar, 19 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION/REQUEST: Subject property consists of approximately 6.0 acres generally bounded by The Highlands Development Areas 9 and 10, north of Serrano Avenue and further described as The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan Park Site (Specific Plan Document Exhibit ll-A) of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1). The petitioner requests an amendment to The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific plan under authority of Code Section 18.70.030.040 to provide for the expansion of the park site to include approximately one additional acre of usable park area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Amendment No. 2 to The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan No. 87-1 DENIED. Resolution offered to approve modified hill failed to carry (3 yes votes and 4 no votes). Resolution denyingrequest for amendment was adopted (4 yes votes and 3 no votes) (PC90-234). HEARING SET ON: This an informational item on today's agenda under ~he items from ~he Planning Commission meeting of September 24, 1990. A letter of appeal was submitted by the City's Parks Department and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin October 4, 1990. Posting of property October 3, 1990. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 5, 1990. STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated September 24, 1990 and subsequent informational report dated October 10, 1990 from Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation & Community Services. 1013 30 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. Jack Kudron, Parks Superintendent. The request is to amend The Highlands Specific Plan in order to allow removal of the hill adjacent to the 5-acre park site at Canyon Rim and Serrano. Some basic reasons for their request to overturn the Planning Commission's decision are - there is a definite need for more flat, active parkland in the hill and canyon area, there is a definite community interest to remove the hill for additional park acreage, it is the Department's opinion that a larger park is in the best long-term interest of the community and its needs. He briefed the Council on the meeting process that took place and what occurred at each of the meetings including the formation of a task force which in turn held two meetings. The task force ended its deliberations with a vote of seven Homeowner Associations in favor, one Homeowner Association opposed and one Homeowner's Association in favor of the modified hill. Mr. Kudron then supplemented his presentation with a series of slides which showed views of the site from different directions. He then briefed the design alternatives from the graphics presented which were Conceptual Sections A, B, C and D. He also clarified that this would be a neighborhood park and not a community park. It would primarily be used for practice and not league play or matches. In concluding, Mr. Kudron stated that there are some people who are opposed to the expansion of the park to six acres. Those people believe that the aesthetic vistas in the area will be reduced and have also expressed that too many hills have been graded flat and they would prefer not to lose another hill. A larger park will bring more activity and possibly more noise to surrounding residents and the Santa Ana winds will be more severe by removing the hill. The Parks Department believes that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages and are recommending that the Council consider the revision of the Specific Plan to allow the park to be expanded to six acres. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN FAVOR: Cindy Herms stated she is a homeowner who resides in The Highlands abutting the park and who would be most affected in terms of living right next to the park. She reiterated some of the information given by Mr. Kudron relative to the meetings that took place and the vote of the Homeowner's Associations. They were subsequently surprised when the request to remove the hill was denied by the Planing Commission after seven Neighborhood Associations, the clear majority and representatives of the neighborhood had impartially decided what would be best. The overriding desire is for removal. They are extremely concerned about liability. They are not budgeted for accidents occurring on the hill. They refuse to take on that responsibility. She then briefed the Council on the results of an impartial survey 1014 City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. taken of Lake Summit and the questions involved which she felt showed that the President of the Homeowner's Association is not exactly representing the stands of his association in opposing the expansion. At the conclusion of her presentation, she stated that no one likes to see removal of hills but this is an 18-foot high manufactured mound. Removal will be a small step in remedying the lack of park acreage in the area. Sherry Flynn, 1042 Mount Vale Court. They are being forced to keep something they do not want - maintenance and upkeeping on an eyesore that does not enhance the community. Approving the expansion will turn a negative into a positive. They are trying to get one more acre of flat, usable and much needed park space at a premium price and in turn-key condition. Seven out of nine homeowners' associations agree that the community would be served by adding more park space. Only one conclusion can be drawn and that is to allow the developer to take the hill down and let the 5-acre park become a 6-acre park. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION: Jason R. Fishfein, 970 Jay Circle. He took issue with statements made by the Parks Representative in saying that the majority wanted the hill removed. He feels those in opposition do not face the park including those of Serrano west of Canyon Rim. The new people who bought in The Highlands consider the hill an attractive nuisance. Most of their homes are on hills. As far as them not knowing about the hill, he came to the area 11 years ago amd all the area where The Highlands is developed was supposed to De reserved in open space. He questioned whether they really need a large park. There are 5-acres of park now and many other parks as well as the junior and senior high school fields available to Anaheim Hills. It will not benefit the City of Anaheim. He questions whether it would be desirable to increase the entrance and exit from the park. His house is right on the canyon facing the hill. It is beautiful - it blocks the light from Serrano and dust and it might even block a fire as it did in 1982. He does not see any advantage in expanding the park and he heard no justification for doing so. He is on the Board of Directors of the Stonegate Homeowner's Association and he has received no calls regarding wanting the hill removed. Councilwoman Kaywood. She asked if the hill were to remain, is Mr. Fishfein's Association willing to be part of the maintenance and pay for it. Mr. Fishfein answered absolutely. They are paying for things all over Anaheim that they are not benefitting from. 1015 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. Chuck McBurney, 932 Ridgecrest Circle. He is present to lodge his protest with what the Parks Department wants to do with the last view shed in Anaheim Hills. Speaking as a former Planning Commissioner, the Commissioners were assured that the hills would remain. The developer brought in the final grading plan and the hills were removed. The Planning Commission asked that the hill that was placed and supposed to remain there be reconstructed and moved to the east which was done. As far as the homeowners are concerned, this is the only topographical relief they have in that area and one of the last view sites they have as well. None of the slides showed where a person lives and looks at the hill. They do not feel this is a major environmental issue but for the people who live there it is the only thing left to look at. He urged the Council to keep their hill. In concluding, he stated a Mr. Bill Butz asked him to represent him as the President of the Lake Summit Homeowner's Association to re-remind the Council that the association is vehemently opposed to the removal of the hill. Councilwoman Kaywood. She asked if the Homeowner's Association was prepared to continue the maintenance and up-keep of the hill. Chuck McBurney. He cannot speak for the homeowners but personally he would be willing to keep the hill and maintain it. Patricia Simon, 1016 South Hillcrest. She is apprehensive about the plans. They are taking on the appearance of a working park where groups play at certain times which will take up a large amount of time and local people will not have a chance to use the park. If groups are going to play at the park, her grandchildren will not have an opportunity to use it. She is also concerned with park lighting at night. Sally Smith, 7370 East Kite, in the Stonegate tract. She does not face the park but has lived there for 11 years. She is aware of what the General Plan called for in 1977 and is also aware of the fact that the area was totally rezoned. The homeowners who would like to see a high activity park were not present and did not know the intention of a General Plan. This is supposed to be a neighborhood park. She attended all of the meetings and volunteered to be on the task force but representatives were selectively chosen from various homeowner association boards. They were never asked by the person who represents the Stonegate homeowners how they felt - that the hill should not be removed. The opinion of whoever was on the task force from Stonegate is that of themselves. One of the things that must not be overlooked is the environmental impact that this small park, with very high activity planned for it, will have on Deer Canyon. At present the hill does provide some buffering for sound as well as aesthetics. The park is now five acres and 1016 25 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5=30 P.M. SUMMATION: asking for one more acre to add an overlay for a soccer field will require more parking, generate more traffic and more liability because the school will have more cars coming in using the overrun to park. Every square inch of the park is programmed and will be used by organized groups and none for allowing children to run free, fly a kite, read a book, etc. She agrees that they need a neighborhood park but what is planned does not seem to be related to just the neighborhood. The hill should not be removed. Jack Kudron. Since this is a neighborhood park, the Parks Department does not light athletic fields. Lighting would be low level security lighting and the type of fixture that directs the light down. The Department feels there is a high demand for the acreage and for this one extra acre just based on the residential impact of The Highlands. The mention of the community park site which is four minutes away by car, The Summit park site, it is a 16-acre community park site with lighted ball fields, a community center and will also serve The Summit development for its neighborhood park uses. Relative to Deer Canyon and the possible impact, the canyon is located north of the subject site by some distance and it is at a much different level. There will not be any noise or site impact from the Canyon Rim site into Deer Canyon. The designs presented tonight were as a result of community input. Their design people did the best job they could to accommodate all of the needs expressed. There will be a demand for soccer and baseball practice but there will be plenty of time for passive uses of the park. The extra acre will provide more passive space and not just more active space. He also confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that the Parks and Recreation Commission unanimously supported the removal of the hill. Councilman Pickler. He feels it is necessary to remove the hill. It is necessary to have places for children to play in the hills area. Every acre of land that can be used to keep the youngsters engaged in activities and keep them off the streets is important. Councilman Daly. There is an overwhelming expression of support for additional park space at the site. There is a shortage of ball fields in the area. This is the best thing to do. Councilwoman Kaywood. There is a liability problem with the hill at the present time and there is a need for flat space. It will not be used for ball fields 24-hours a day. There will be an opportunity for passive use. There is a very large area in Deer Canyon. She is counting 1017 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. on that remaining a passive park. The best way to fight drug abuse is prevention. Children have to be occupied in a positive manner. Mayor Hunter. He hears there are not enough "muscle" parks in the area. There are many leagues in the hills and they need a place to practice The public hearing was closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 273 FOR THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS WAS CERTIFIED JUNE 23, 1987 BY THE CITY COUNCIL - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the City Council finds that EIR No. 273 is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the development of the park site including the additional one acre without any supplemental information. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE: The title of the following resolution and ordinance was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 90R-384 for adoption; and Ordinance No. 5182 for introduction) Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution and ordinance. Councilman Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 90R-384 for adoption, amending Specific Plan No. 87-1 adopted, pursuant to Resolution No. 87R-253. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 90R-384: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-1 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 87R-245. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 90R-384 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5182 for introduction. ORDINANCE NO. 5182: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SUBSECTION .120 TO SECTION 18.70.020 OF CHAPTER 18.70 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (SP87-1) 1018 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 4081, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11: OWNER: Jas Partnership 1990 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1990 South Anaheim Boulevard. The property is approximately 1.1 acres located at the northeast corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Stanford Court. Waiver of required structural setback and permitted signage to construct a 296 square-foot freestanding sign with an electric message board. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4081 denied (ZA90-93). HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal dated September 27, 1990 was submitted by the owner, James Shab, Global Cellular, and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin October 5, 1990. Posting of property October 3, 1990. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 5, 1990. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Zoning Administrator dated September 6, 1990. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: James Shab, 1990 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim. He is not asking for a larger sign but a setback allowing the sign to be visible. He had submitted two photographs - one when the building was constructed and completed in 1987. At that time the sign did not have the obstruction of the trees coming from the south. Going north on I-5, the freeway trees block the current reader board sign. His intention is to ask for a setback of 25 feet as opposed to 50 feet which would put the larger sign that is permitted in a visible spot. He has not talked to the property owner who owns the trees but would not like to ask him to remove the trees. He believes the trees are there because they are a requirement for aesthetic purposes but they block the view of his current sign. The height requirement where the sign is currently is at a minimal height. He would like to have the larger sign with the setback limited to 25 feet instead of 50 feet. Councilman Daly. He asked staff what Caltrans plans were for the area and whether those plans would impact the sign. It seems to him that the setback requirements in that area have something to do with future road improvements. Joel Fick, Planning Director. His recollection is that the anticipated take and the most likely 1019 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5=30 P.M. alternative does occur on the side of the freeway under discussion. James Shah. It actually goes through his building. His existing sign is going to have to be removed when Caltrans comes through and he understands that. He has discussed this will Caltrans who advised that he can expect it will be five to ten years before something actually happens. If it is ten years away and he is deprived of signage, he does not feel that is proper. He referred to the staff report findings, Item 16 relative to depriving the property owner of privileges enjoyed by other properties because of practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships. He feels he is being deprived because of the trees that are there for a purpose. Councilman Pickler. He feels the applicant has more signage than he should have. He does not have any problem as he travels down the freeway seeing the signs already in place. He is not going to approve the request giving the applicant an opportunity to move 25 feet closer. The signage is adequate and Mr. Shah is not being deprived of anything. James Shab. Two of the signs will be reduced in size by 20% that are on the building. The Pac-Tel signs should be smaller. They represent Pac-Tel. There is confusion by the general public that they are Pac-Tel. The signage on the building can be seen quite clearly. He is not present to ask for larger signage on the building that is allowed but because the sign is difficult to see blocked by the trees - the pole sign. The City allows for a 350 square-foot sign with a 50-foot setback. By setting back 50 feet they are back to the same situation. He can have a bigger sign but it is not visible. He wants to move it forward 25 feet and get the visibility he deserves. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN FAVOR: None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION: None. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood. She asked if the sign was permitted at 25 feet and subsequently 1020 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. Caltrans took the front of the building and the sign too, would that mean Caltrans or the City would have to pay amortization or could that be waived. City Attorney, Jack White. The owner would have to be paid fair market value of the sign when they took it unless the owner agreed to waive the cost. the owner would stipulate to waiving that cost, it could be imposed as a condition of approval if it is approved. If ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the City Council ratified the determination of the City Engineer that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 11, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 90R-385) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 90R-385 for adoption, denying Variance No. 4081. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 90R-385: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 4081. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 90R-385 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC REARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2973 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED): OWNER: Orkin Inc., ¢/o Thrifty Oil Co. Attn: A.W. Johnson Jr., 10000 Lakewood Blvd., Downey, CA 90240 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 304 S. Magnolia Avenue. The property is approximately 0.52 acre located at the southeast corner of Broadway and Magnolia Ave. The request is to amend conditions of approval to allow off-sale beer and wine at a gasoline service station. ACTION TAKEN BY TRE PLANNING COMMISSION: Conditional Use Permit No. 2973 denied (PC90-231) 6 yes votes, I no vote). 1021 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal dated October 15, 1990 was submitted by the owner, A. W. Johnson, Jr., and public hearing set this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin October 4, 1990. Posting of property October 4, 1990. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 4, 1990. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated September 10, 1990. City Clerk Sohl stated she received a letter request from Mr. Johnson of Thrifty Oil requesting a continuance of the public hearing to November 13, 1990. Councilwoman Kaywood. She has a problem with continuing the hearing. When the use was first approved for a gas station and mini-market, Condition No. 15 specified no sale of beer and wine. Once the project is built, they then request the beer and wine which to her is "slipping in the back door." Mayor Hunter noted that the Council generally grants a request for continuance. City Attorney White. It involves a question of denial of due process. It does not mean that the Council is going to approve the request when it comes back. It avoids the argument that the applicant was denied his day in front of the Council. Mayor Hunter asked if anyone was present opposed to a continuance; there was no response. MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to continue the public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2973 to Tuesday, November 13, 1990. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted no. MOTION CARRIED. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: William Boyer, 1603 East Elm Street. Mr. Boyer read and then submitted his letter of October 16, 1990 which expressed a concern on behalf of himself and several of his neighbors to bring to the Council's attention what they consider a dangerous and illegal situation negatively impacting public safety and the quality of life on their street. The c0neerns related to an unlicensed and what they consider unsupervised board and care home on their street at 1604 Elm Street. The specific concerns were listed in Mr. Boyer's detailed letter (made a part of the record). He is appealing to the City Council to direct appropriate staff to contact the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations in Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois, who will be conducting a hearing on the board and care facility on Thursday and Friday, October 18 and October 19, 1990. He urged the Council's assistance to help the homeowners and residents in the 1600 block of East Elm Street. 1022 19 City Hallu Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1990, 5=30 P.M. Mayor Hunter. He asked that Mr. Boyer talk with and give the information to the City Manager. James Fueger, Producer, Miss Anaheim Pageant, 700 West Orangewood, Suite C, Anaheim. Mr. Fueger read his letter previously submitted to the Council under covering letter of September 28, 1990. It explained that he is representing the Miss Anaheim Scholarship Pageant which is a part of the Miss California/Miss America Pageant system. The system annually awards over $5 million in scholarships. The Pageant is celebrating its 10th anniversary and for the first time they are coming before the Council to ask for their support financially (an annual contribution of $7,500 - Items A through E in his letter) staff support and City recognition, i.e., that the Pageant be named the "Official City Hostess." They would like 100% of their requests as listed but will accept whatever the Council grants. Earline Jones, Executive Director, Miss Anaheim Pageant. She first introduced former Miss Anaheim as well as the present Miss Anaheim, Wendy Weidler, who were present. Those in the Pageant are all volunteers and receive no financial gain. Ail money goes into scholarships for the girls who participate. Councilman Ehrle. For the years past, he assumes the Pageant has been successful in fund-raising. He questioned why they are now coming forward and making their request for assistance. Earline Jones. When they started, they were always behind a year in scholarship money. At this time, they do not have the money to pay the reigning girls. On March 27, 1991 when they hold the Pageant they are obligated that very night to pay their scholarships. They need the money to start up on because they do not have the money to start. Mayor Hunter. The Pageant is doing an excellent ]ob, but it is diff_sult to come before the City Council and ask for public funds. He feels an effort needs to be made in the fund-raising area with community leaders and other people, perhaps the Council, to get private enterprise involved rather than government. A much more concentrated effort must be made. There is a staff recommendation before the Council to deny the request. He reiterated, efforts must be made with the private sector since the program is very worthwhile. He is not if favor of, nor does he believe it is appropriate, to allocate public funds to the Pageant. Councilman Pickler. The City allocates funds to the Anaheim Hills event and to Cinco De Mayo. The Miss Anaheim Pageant represents Anaheim and they are having a problem in their ability to raise funds. The Council should show that Anaheim is behind a program that has been in existence for a long time. There is nothing that gets Anaheim more in the public eye. Somehow he feels the Council could appropriate a few dollars to the Pageant. Councilman Ehrle. Although the Council and City has the highest respect for 1023 2O City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16. 1990, 5:30 P.M. Earline Jones and everyone associated with the Pageant, he agrees with the Mayor that the use of public funds for a celebrity-type contest would be inappropriate. Money would be better spent in other critical areas. No one works harder than Earline Jones and her group. Perhaps as a Council or individually they have to assist to get other people involved to make the effort successful. Earline Jones. The Pageant feels Miss Anaheim should be recognized as the Official City Hostess. If she were to be made the official hostess, it would be easier. The City of Orange gives $1,300 to their pageant. If they are designated the official City Hostess, it would be easy to raise funds through the private sector. Mayor Hunter. The Council cannot take any action this evening. Perhaps the matter could be set on a future agenda to discuss making the Miss Anaheim Pageant the official one, then the pageant could work to get funds from the private sector - not public funds. He would commit to going out to the private sector letting the private sector know that the group officially represents the City and they need financial assistance. Councilman Pickler agreed that the Council should perhaps agendize the matter for discussion. Councilwoman Kaywood. The staff report recommended against the request. If approved it would open the City up to a stream of similar requests. There was even a problem initially when the Miss Anaheim Pageant started where the existing Miss USA Pageant expressed concern bringing in another pageant. She feels the City could be liable if there is an official designation. There are also budget constraints from the Federal Government to the County down to the City. The City does not have the means to raise the funds. It is improper to allocate government funds. Originally, Miss Anaheim was under the Chamber of Commerce. She does not understand why the Pageant needs an official designation to get help. Private enterprise should be donating to and supporting the pageant. That is where it belongs. MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved that the Council agendize the matter for the sole purpose of designating the Miss Anaheim Pageant as the "Official City Hostess" but not for considering the allocation of public funds and that the discussion be scheduled for the November 13, 1990 Council meeting. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood asked for a staff report relative to possible liability for the City. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED. Sharon Erickson, President - Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (AREA). She is speaking as President of AMEA and a citizen of Anaheim. Her remarks are 1024 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. not directed to Council Members Daly and Ehrle since they are not involved in the forthcoming election. Certain individuals on the Council seem to feel it is necessary to publicly attack associations and unions of the City. Newspapers have called her and other associations wanting to know what candidates they have contributed money to and what promises those candidates have made. No candidate has ever made a promise to her Association nor any other she knows of. She then relayed the amounts AMEA and S~IU had and will further contribute to Councilman Hunter's campaign and to Bob Simpson, candidate for Council. She also gave reasons why the Association endorses Fred Hunter for Mayor and City Council. She expressed her concern over hearing anyone attacking unions and associations in the City and she cited an example. She then relayed the expertise provided by members of AMEA as City employees and the dangers employees in certain positions face daily. She also plauded the City's firefighters in their critical and dangerous role and expressed further concern over inflated salary figures given in a specific instance by certain Council Members. She relayed the extensive community services provided by the Firefighter's Association. In concluding, she noted that all Anaheim employees have an ID card that shows they are registered disaster services workers meaning that they must leave their families and first come to the aid of the citizens of Anaheim in times of emergency. 179: ITEMS B1 - B5 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 - INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS OCTOBER 16, 1990: B1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 273 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED), AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-1: AGENT: PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Attn: Kevin A. Sharrar, 19 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: Subject property consists of approximately 6.0 acres qenerally bounded by The Hiqhlands Development Areas 9 and 10, north of Serrano Avenue and further described as The Hiqhland at Anaheim Mills Specific Plan Park Site (Specific Plan Document Exhibit il-A) of The Hiqhlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1). Petitioner requests an amendment to The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan under authority of Code Section 18.70.030.040 to provide for the expansion of the park site to include approximately one (1) additional acre of usable park area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Amendment No. 2 to The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan No. 87-1 DENIED. Resolution offered to approved modified hill failed to carry (3 yes votes and 4 no votes). Resolution denying request for amendment was adopted (4 yes votes and 3 no votes) (PC90-234). This item was appealed by the Parks Department and set for a public hearing today's date 10/16/90 - see Item D1. B2. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3338 AND NEGATIV~ DECLARATION: 1025 18 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. OWNER: BHIKHUBHAI PATEL, 6732 Westminster Blvd., Westminster, CA 92683 LOCATION: 280 N. Wilshire Avenue. Property is approximately 0.74 acres located on the north side of Wilshire Avenue and located approximately 925 feet southeasterly of the centerline of Loara Street. To permit a rest home for the elderly with waiver of minimum structural setback. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3338 GRANTED (PC90-235) subject to certain stipulations as follows: Limited to 49 residents; 75% of residents to be 62 years old or older; landscape plan to be submitted and approved by Planning Department staff; existing mature trees to remain; and visiting hours be held from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. (7 yes votes). Waiver of code requirement GRANTED. Approved Negative Declaration. Councilman Daly abstained from any action on the matter even though an informational item since he lives within 300 feet of the subject project. Councilman Hunter recalled that the Council already held a public hearing on the subject property when a motel was proposed. He asked for confirmation on what was being requested at this time. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. The proposal this time is for a rest home. This was the second attempt by the developer to create this type of facility. The issues that came up at the first hearing were where there was a denial were brought back and were satisfied according to what the Planning Commission was looking for. B3. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3337 AND NEGATIV~ DECLARATION: OWNER: BILLY OGANESOFF, 9333 Partada Dr., Whittier, CA 90603 LOCATION: 4600 East La Palma Ave. Property is approximately 0.58 acre located on the south side of La Palma Avenue and approximately 510 feet east of the centerline of Lakeview Ave. To permit an auto repair facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3337 GRANTED (PC90-236) (7 yes votes). Granted waiver of parking spaces. Approved Negative Declaration. B4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3339 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, 3800 W. Alameda, $2000,Burbank,CA 91505 I026 City Hallt Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. AGENT: GREER 7 COMPANY, 2323 W. Simon, $127, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 400 N. Lakeview Ave. Property is approximately 0.59 acre located at the northeast corner of Lakeview Ave. and McKinnon Drive. To permit a 1,419 square foot mini-market in conjunction with an existing service station. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO 3339 GRANTED (PC90-237) subject to parking plan being approved by City Traffic Engineer and submitted to Planning Department. (6 yes votes, I no vote.) Approved Negative Declaration. BS. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, VARIANCE NO. 3189 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: FRANK SANTANGELO, 666 N. Tustin Ave., Orange, CA 92667 LOCATION: 900 North West Street. Property is approximately 0.46 acre located on the east side of West Street and located approximately 710 feet north of the centerline of North Street. To permit a 2-lot subdivision and construct two single-family structures with waivers of required lot frontage, minimum lot area, minimum lot width and required sideyard setback (not previously advertised). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 3189 GRANTED (PC90-238) (7 yes votes). Negative Declaration previously approved. End of the September 24, 1990 Planning Commission Items. 179: ITEMS B6 - B8 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 1990 - DECISION DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1990 - INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS OCTOBER 26~ 1990: VARIANCE NO. 4064~ CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT~ CLASS 5: OWNER: BRUCE ASHWELL, 22000 Laurelwood Road, Santa Clara, CA 95050. AGENT: DON WALZ - CALIFORNIA EXTRUSION CO., 1240 N. Van Buren, Ste. 103, Anaheim, CA 92807. LOCATION: 1070 North Grove Street. Property is approximately 1.41 acres located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Grove Street. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish an approximately 2,925 square foot outdoor storage area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4064 GRANTED (ZA90-101). B7. VARIANCE NO. 4087m CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTm CLASS 11: OWNER: RAUL O. RANGLE, P.O. Box 4468, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT:- ENVIRONMENT CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC., P.O. Box 5, Glendora, CA 91740. 1027 16 City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. LOCATION: 3883 East Eaqle Drive. Property is approximately 0.84 acre located at the northwest corner of Hawk Circle and Eagle Drive. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to establish an enclosed storage area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4087 GRANTED, with added conditions (ZA90-102). B8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0055, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5: OWNER: LOCATION: 312 and 324 Rosebud Court. Property is approximately 20.7 feet on the radius of the cul-de-sac of Rosebud Court approximately 235 feet northerly of the centerline of Canyon Vista Drive. Petitioner requests waiver of minimum lot frontage width of flag lots to establish a 18.76 foot wide flag lot within a previously approved residential subdivision (Tract 12987). ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Adjustment No. 0055 APPROVED (ZA90-103). End of the Zoning Administrator Items. 179: ITEMS B9 - B17 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 1990 - INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS OCTOBER 30, 1990 - NOTE: APPEAL PERIOD FOR TRACTS EXPIRES OCTOBER 18, 1990. B9. VARIANCE NO. 4063, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14391 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: ESTATE OF HELEN FUGUAY, C/O ARTHUR W. GRAY/DORIS SMITH, 914 West Lincoln, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: ANDREW HOMES, INC., Attn: Maryam Nawor, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., 9th Floor, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 3238 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 1.1 acres located on the south side of Ball Road and approximately 530 feet east of the centerline of Oakhaven Drive Waiver of minimum building site area per unit to establish a 14-unit condominium complex. ACTION TAY~EN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4063 GRANTED (PC90-234) (7 yes votes). Tentative Tract Map No. 14391 APPROVED. NOTE: Appeal period for Tentative Tract Map No. 14391 expires October 18, 1990. Approved Negative Declaration. B10. WAIVER OF' CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3344 AND NEGATIVR DECLARATION: OWNER: CALIFORNIA DRIVE-IN THEATRES INC., Attn: Lee Olsen, 120 N. Roberteon Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048 LOCAT-ION: 1520 North Lemon Street. Property is approximately 24.9 acres located at the southeast corner of Lemon Street and Durst Street. 1028 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. To permit an outdoor swap meet with waivers of minimum landscaped setback and maximum fence height. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3344 GRANTED, IN PART, for 5 years (PC90-235) (denied minimum landscape setback) (7 yes votes). Approved Negative Declaration. Bll. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3346 AND NEGATIV~ DECLARATION: OWNER: TIMOTHY J. O'NEAL, 1014 N. Parker, Orange, CA 92667 AGENT: JEFFREY A. DAHL, 318 21st. Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 and Pacific Property Ventures, 75 Castich Lake, Campbell, CA 92667 LOCATION: 1420 N. Lemon Street. Property is approximately 1.12 acres located at the northeast corner of Lemon St. and the Riverside (91) freeway onramp. To permit an automobile sales lot with waiver of minimum structural setback from the 91 freeway. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: WITHDRAWN by the Applicant. B12. VARIANCE NO. 4084 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: SILVER & LE BOUEF, 1229 N. Olive St., Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: ROBERT GALLUCCI, 8311 Westminster Ave., #240, Westminster, CA 92683 LOCATION: 1229 N. Olive Street. Property is approximately 1.55 acres located at the southwest corner of Commercial Street and Olive Street. Waiver of improvement of right-of-way to construct a 1,170 sq. ft. addition to an existing industrial building. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4084 GRANTED (PC90-236) (4 yes votes, 3 no votes). Approved Negative Declaration. B13. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3340 AND NEGATIVE. DECLARATION: OWNER: DHANSUKHLAL RATANJEEN, 2960 W. Lincoln, ~C, Anaheim, CA 92801 AC~NT~ K-C & AS~OeIAT~g, 300 g. Third St., Alhambra, CA 91801 LOCATION: 2865 West Lincoln Ave. Property is approximately 0.54 acre located north side of Lincoln Ave. and approximately 225 feet east of the centerline of Bel Air Street. To permit a 46-room motel with waivers of maximum structural height, required setback, permitted location of freestanding signs and maximum height of freestanding signs. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3340 DENIED (PC90-237) (7 yes votes). Waiver of code requirement DENIED. Denied Negative Declaration. 1029 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. B14. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3341 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: FRANK GONZALES, 1336 E. Chapman Ave., Orange, CA 92666 AGENT: RYAN GONZALES, 153 S. Cypress, Orange, CA 92660 LOCATION: 1133 N. Tustin Ave. Property is approximately 0.75 acre located at the northwest corner of Melville Way and Tustin Avenue. To permit an automobile body repair and paint facility with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3341 APPROVED (PC90-238) (7 yes votes). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED. Approved Negative Declaration. B15. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3343 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION.: OWNER: NAKANO/LSBD ANAHEIM PROPERTIES, 901 W. Civic Center Drive, Ste. 300, Santa Ana, CA 92703 AGENT: DON HERTEL, w/SBD Group, INC., 901 W. Civic Center Drive, Ste. 300, Santa Ana, CA 92703 LOCATION: 505 S. Villa Real Drive. Property is approximately 2.6 acres located at the southwest corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Villa Real Drive. To permit a 5,290 sq. ft. gourmet market with take-out prepared food with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3343 APPROVED (PC90-239) (7 yes votes). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED. Approved Negative Declaration. B16. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14406 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: D.M.P. PARTNERSHIP, 1524 Victoria Way, Placentia, CA 92676 AGENT: MASSOUD MONSHIZADEH, 1524 Victoria Way, Placentia, CA 92676 LOCATION: 1575 West Katella Ave. Property is approximately 2.21 acres on north side of Katella Avenue 314 feet east of Carnelian Street. To establish a RM-2400, 40-unit condominium complex. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: No action taken by the Planning Commission. for clarification of Ordinance. Referred to City Council This item will require a public hearing before the Council and a hearing date will be set. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEM: 1030 City Mall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. B17. REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF THE CENTRAL ANAHEIM NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY REGARDING POTENTIAL DOWNZONING TO THE RS-5000 ZONE. End of the Planning Commission Items from October 8, 1990. 179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2324 - DELETION OR AMENDMENT OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL PERTAINING TO SIGNAGE: REQUESTED BY:William A. Torresala, Pan Pacific Hotel 1701 South West Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1701 S. West Street (north of the centerline of Katella Avenue. The petitioner requests deletion or amendment to a condition of approval pertaining to signage. The Planning Commission recommended denial of deletion or amendment to a condition of approval pertaining to signage. This item was on the Council agenda of July 24, 1990 as an informational item and subsequently set for a public hearing since the request was to amend original conditions of approval. A public hearing was scheduled and continued from the meeting of August 28, 1990 to September 18, 1990 at the request of the applicant. At the Council meeting of September 18, 1990, the City Council denied Conditional Use Permit No. 2324. The petitioner or a representative was not present at that hearing. Request for a rehearing was submitted by William A. Torresala. City Clerk Sohl announced that the agent on this matter was to have requested a continuance but nothing was received in writing. Mayor Hunter asked if the petitioner or anyone was present on the item; theze was no response. MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to deny the request for a rehearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2324, relative to deletion or amendment of a condition of approval pertaining to signage. Councilman Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 179: AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 9OR-317 NUNC PRO TUNC: Amending Resolution NO. 90R-317, nunc pro tunc, in connection with the amendment to certain conditions of approval in Conditional Use Permit No. 3269. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 90R-386) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 90R-386 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 1031 12 City Hallt Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16r 1990r 5:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 90R-386: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 90R-317, NUNC PRO TUNC. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 90R-386 duly passed and adopted. 114: REQUEST FOR APOLOGY - CHARGES BROUGHT BEFORE THE ORANGE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Councilman Daly. This is the first public meeting since the Orange County District Attorney concluded that the charges that two Members of the Council brought against other members had no basis in fact. He thereupon asked Council Members Ehrle and Hunter, in a spirit of conciliation, to extend an apology for their deed in order to close the books on the subject. Mayor Hunter. He spoke at length with the District Attorney who investigated the charges and what he said was that there was insufficient evidence to go forward but he did say that in his belief there was enough evidence to at least bring the investigation to the District Attorney's Office. Councilman Daly. He repeated his request for an apology. What they did was serious. It was an attempt to smear and that is what occurred. He also feels smeared and resents it. The District Attorney spent five or six months on the matter and concluded there was no wrong doing. He believes the two Council Members owe an apology to the citizens of Anaheim for their actions. Councilman Ehrle. He does not believe so. He was in the meetings and privy to everything that took place. In his mind and conscience what he did was appropriate and he will not back down at this time. If Councilman Daly wants to censure him, that is fine. He also would welcome Councilman Daly going to the District Attorneys' Office, listening to what others said, have the press go with him and listen to the tapes. In his opinion, there was no question of wrong doing. Further, to prosecute under the provisions of the Brown Act, there has to be conclusive evidence. The District Attorney could not find conclusive evidence but there was sufficient grounds to bring forth the charges. Councilman Daly. He feels that the two Council Members deserve censure but a censure does not accomplish anything. He is concerned over the amount of taxpayers money spent on the investigation all for what he considered a political smear, not for good and productive purposes. Councilman Ehrle. The investigation concluded that two or three charges were brought forward that were out of the jurisdiction of the District Attorney or grand jury such as age discrimination and areas of the Code of Ethics that the Council agreed upon. That code is "toothless". He has been advised by the City Attorney that if the Code of Ethics were adopted by ordinance and there were violations, it would be a misdemeanor. He would, therefore, like to agendize for public discussion the Council's Code of ~thics to revise it and make it a misdemeanor if violated. 1032 39 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1990, 5:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood. She feels it is entirely in order to censure both Mayor Hunter and Councilman Ehrle at this time. She called for a censure. There was no second. Councilman Daly. He asked the City Attorney what the action of a censure actually entails. City Attorney White. It would be in the form of a motion. What it is is a public criticism. It does not have a legal affect as far as being an enforceable action against anyone which results in anything other than a public display of criticism by those voting in favor. Councilman Daly. His ~ goal is to put the issue to bed. A censure does not accomplish anything. No action was taken by the Council. 114: CLARIFICATION ON CITY ISSUES: Councilman Pickler stated in the last few days, Mayor Hunter has broached certain issues, one being that the City has "locked in" a professional hockey team and another that he (Hunter) would add 50 additional policemen to the police force. He (Pickler) wanted to know the cost of such an expansion of the Police Department. He asked the City Manager to clarify those issues. City Manager, James Ruth. He first answered that for over a year, the Ogden Corporation, through Neal Papiano had been in secret negotiations with several franchises, both NBA and Hockey. The teams they are negotiating with ha~ebeen kept very secret for obvious reasons and he (Ruth) is not privileged to know a lot of background about that, but he does know that the negotiations are ongoing. He does not know of a hockey team that is "locked in" but Ogden Corporation has indicated they are close. Mayor Hunter. He feels that a better time for debate on the issues would be at the forthcoming candidate debates. The Council meeting is not the forum to get into such a debate. Fifty police officers would cost approximately $4 million, not including the ancillary services. City Manager Ruth. He clarified that was a fairly accurate figure depending on whether they are at entry or journeyman level. Probably $4.5 million would include the upgrading of sergeants because a ratio of 1 to 5 is needed. He confirmed for Councilman Pickler that he is continuing to work with the Chief of Police to determine the Department's needs. ADJOURNMENT: By general consent the Council adjourned to Friday, October 26, 1990 at 12 noon in the Council Chamber for an adjourned regular meeting. MOTION CARRIED. (9:00 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 1033