1989/04/04City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Jim Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COORDINATOR: Greg Trombley
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Janet Botula
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 3:30 p.m. on March 31, 1989 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 4:35 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; City of Anaheim vs. Anaheim Hotel Partnership, O.C.S.C.C.
No. 46-96-59; Ruiz vs. City of Anaheim et al., O.C.S.C.C. No.
45-73-87; Ruiz et al. vs. City of Anaheim et al, 46-30-57; Ruiz vs.
City of Anaheim et al., O.C.S.C.C. No. 46-53-15.
b. To discuss labor relations matters - Government Code Section
54957.6.
c. To discuss personnel matters - 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 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; The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:54 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Reverend Rohrs, Trinity United Methodist Church, gave the
invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman William Ehrle led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
263
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
119: PRESENTATION - ANAHEIM HILLS SOCCER TEAM; Team Members of the Anaheim
Hills Soccer Team were present along with their Head Coach Bob Miller and
Assistant Coaches Randy Pangborn and Jurgen Scott. Certificates were awarded
to all team members (10 years old and under) in recognition of winning the
State Cup after a 37 and 2 season during which they scored 165 goals allowing
only 22 goals. Mayor Hunter and Council Members congratulated each player and
their coaches. '
119; PRESENTATION TO SHERI PIGNONE: Sheri Pignone, long-time Member of the
Community Services Board, accepted a plaque from the Mayor and Council Members
recognizing her for her long and dedicated service on that Board.
119; PROCLAMATIONS; The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Hunter
and authorized by the City Council:
Victim Rights Week in Anaheim, April 9 15, 1989,
Imagination Celebration Days in Anaheim, April 21 30, 1989,
Afro-American Contributions Day in Anaheim, April 5, 1989,
California Cosmetology Day in Anaheim, April 5, 1989.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meetings held February 28 and March 7, 1989. Councilman Hunter seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $5,094,795.13 for the week
ending March 24, 1989 and $1,689,651.94 for the week ending March 31, 1989, in
accordance with the 1988-89 Budget, were approved.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES: The titles of the following
resolutions and ordinances on the Consent Calendar were read by the Assistant
City Manager. (Resolution Nos. 89R-94 through 89R-99, both inclusive for
adoption; Ordinance No. 5005 for adoption; Ordinance Nos. 5009 through 5011,
both inclusive, for introduction).
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR; On motion by Councilman Pickler,
seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Councilman Pickler
offered Resolution Nos. 89R-94 through 89R-99, both inclusive, for adoption;
Ordinance No. 5005 for adoption; Ordinance Nos. 5009 through 5011, both
inclusive, for introduction. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book.
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended:
264
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Frank M. DeSande for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 28, 1988.
b. Claim submitted by Richard Lilly for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 11, 1988.
c. Claim submitted by Christine Berens for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 18, 1988.
d. Claim submitted by Anaheim Land Associates and Mortage & Realty Trust
for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or
about November 13, 1988.
e. Claim submitted by Bill Wayne Waldrep for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 25, 1988.
f. Claim submitted by Holly Vartanian for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 28, 1989.
g. Claim submitted by Maria Tirado for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19, 1988.
h. Claim submitted by Sheila D. Brown for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19, 1988.
i. Claim submitted by Elizabeth Perez for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 16, 1989.
J. Claim submitted by John Guy for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about January 1, 1989.
k. Claim submitted by Richard Ashley for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 15, 1988.
1. Claim submitted by Plantation Restaurant for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 30, 1988
to January 31, 1989.
m. Claim submitted by Kirit Merchant for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19, 1988.
Application for Leave to Present Late Claim - Denied:
n. Claim submitted by John Guy for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about June 14, 1988.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting
held February 2, 1989.
265
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission
meeting held March 15, 1989.
107: Receiving and filing the Building Division Statistical Report ending
February 28, 1989.
114: Receiving and filing correspondence from Mayor Alex Giuliani, City of
Hayward, regarding the current drought and water usage issues in the State of
California.
175: Receiving and filing correspondence from the Public Utilities Commission
of the State of California regarding Application No. 89-03-023, Southern
California Edison Company, for the authority to increase its energy cost
adjustment billing factors and increase its electric revenue adjustment
billing factor, effective July 1, 1989.
A3. 175: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Three Valve
Service Vault Modifications by Spear Pipeline Construction, and authorizing
the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion.
A4. 158: Authorizing the payment of $19,500 to Dale Dufault, pursuant to
agreement on file, for modifications to his building located at 306 North
Anaheim Boulevard in conjunction with North Anaheim Boulevard Street Widening
Project (R/W 3500-9).
A5. 123: Approving an agreement with Computer Service Company Division at an
estimated cost of $42,932 per month, for traffic signal maintenance services,
and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said agreement.
A6. 123: Approving an agreement with the City of Yorba Linda to share the
cost of constructing a traffic signal at the intersection of La Palma Avenue
and Weir Canyon Road, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said
agreement. ~
106/167: Increasing revenue appropriations by $80,300 in account
no. 49-3255-E444 for FY 1988/89.
A7. 123/106: Approving additional work to State Contract 12-003204 for the
Ball Road freeway overcrossing of I-5, and authorizing funding in an amount
not to exceed $6,000 for the additional work from Project 01-799-6325-E9030 -
Northeast corner Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard.
A8. 123/170: Approving a Subdivision Agreement of Parcel Map No. 88-117 with
DMST Development. The parcel is located south of the intersection of the
private streets Martin Road and Marttnella Lane.
Ag. 123/170: Approving the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement of Tract No.
13803, subject to the approval of the covenants, conditions and restrictions.
The developers are Ronald Crowley and Sedtghe Saadat Hosseini. Tract 13803 is
located at 1500 West Broadway.
266
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
AIO. 152/155/131: RESOLUTION NO. $9R-94; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY ENGINEER
TO EXECUTE APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING UNDER S.B. 140 FOR HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS.
All. 123: Approving an agreement with County of Orange Arterial Highway
Financing Program (A.H.F.P.) for projects 1235 and 1236 (from 300 feet east of
Douglass Road to the Santa Ana River bridge).
144/131~ RESOLUTION NO. 89R-95: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM DECLARING A PORTION OF KATELLA AVENUE TO BE A COUNTY HIGHWAY FOR A
LIMITED PERIOD. (Within the limits and duration of A.H.F.P.)
Al2. 170/142: ORDINANCE NO. 5009 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING AND AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTERS 17.04 AND 17.06 OF
TITLE 17 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO GRADING. (Adding and
amending certain sections of Chapters 17.04 and 17.06 of Title 17 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code relating to grading to require public hearing for
grading permits)
Al3, 149/142: ORDINANCE NO, 5010 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION .2390 TO SECTION 14.32.190 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF
TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING AND STOPPING.
(Adding a new subsection .2390 to Section 14.32.190 of Chapter 14.32 of Title
14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to no parking at any time on Hunter
Street, on the north and south sides, from Hancock Street to its westerly
terminus)
Al4. 149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 5005 (ADOPTION); AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 14.32.190 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING AND STOPPING OF VEHICLES. (Amending Title
14, Chapter 14.32 to provide for no parking at any time at the following
locations)
149/142: Frontera Street, north and south sides, from Kraemer Boulevard to
940' east of Kraemer.
149/142: La Palma Avenue, north and south sides, from Kraemer Boulevard to
Blue Gum Street.
149/142: Serrano Avenue, both sides, from Somerset Lane to Taylor Court.
149/142: Oak Hills Drive, both sides, from Serrano Avenue to Flint Ridge Way.
Al5. 175.123: Approving an Amendment to Orange County Water District
Annexation Agreement 87-1.
Al6. 175.123: Approving an agreement with O'Brien Partners, Inc., to act as
financial advisor to the Public Utilities Department.
267
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M. --
Al7. 170.123: Approving the assignment of interest in the Reimbursement
Agreements dated June 29, 1976, and December 7, 1976, with Texaco Anaheim
Hills, Inc., to Ruth S. Barton.
Al8. 175.123: Approving agreements with Baldwin Building Contractors for the
construction of water facilities for Oak Hills Reservoir (estimated cost
$2,200,000); Summit Reservoir (estimated cost $1,350,000); Primary Mains
(estimated cost $1,470,000); and Summit View Pump Station (total cost
$690,000).
Al9. 160: Accepting the low bid of Meyer Industries c/o Banes Associates, in
the amount of $78,408.20 for two 70-foot tubular steel poles, one 72-foot
tubular steel pole, and two 75-foot tubular steel poles, all in accordance
with bid #4684 as publicly advertised.
A20. 123/160: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with Norman Weinraub,
dba City Window Cleaners, to provide window cleaning services at two
additional locations in accordance with bid proposal #4647.
A21. 105/148/106: Approving the attendance of Community Services Board Chair
June Lowry and Boardmember Mary Hibbard at the League of California Cities
Community Services Conference, April 12-14, 1989, and appropriating $290 from
Council contingency funds to cover registration fees.
A22. 150/105/106: Accepting a $20,600 State Child Care Coordination Grant and
authorizing the City Manager to execute the acceptance statement on behalf of
the City; and appropriating the grant revenue and expenditure into Program
01-344.
A23. 123: Approving an agreement with Oliver, Stoever, Barr & Einboden to
provide eminent domain services to the City.
A24. 123: Approving an agreement with Orange County Center for Health for
rehabilitation costs and for provision of prenatal care services to low and
moderate income residents, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
said agreement on behalf of the City.
A25, 153/142: ORDINANCE NO. 5011 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANA/~EIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4965, NUNC PRO TUNC. (To add Section 1.04.155
to the code relating to titles of management positions)
A26. 158; RESOLUTION NO, 89R-96: 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.
A27. 123: Approving an agreement with Harbtcht Research and Associates, and
M.L. Media Partners, L.P. (Multivision Cable TV) in the amount of $16,362 to
conduct a cable television subscriber survey.
Assistant City Manager James Ruth, explained for Councilman Ehrle that the
City initiated the Cable Television Subscriber Survey due to concerns over
delivery of service.
268
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
Jeff Kirsch, 266 West Palais. He has concerns as well relative to the expense
of public money. He asked if the franchise had some time limit and if a
public hearing was required for extension or renewal of the franchise or if
there would be less cost alternative.
Mayor Hunter recalled that approximately 3 weeks ago, the City's cable
franchisee, Multivision, presented the City with a check for $563,000 as their
annual franchise fee. He feels conducting a survey to find out what
subscribers either like or do not like about the service is a positive thing.
Kristine Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer. The survey being
conducted is a joint venture between Multivision and the City. The amount for
the survey is $16,000 and is being split evenly - 50% by Multivtston and 50%
by the City or approximately or approximately $8,000 each. She feels the
survey results will be very beneficial. Relative to the term of the
franchise, it is for 15 years and more than 5 years is remaining; Councilwoman
Kaywood also noted that required public hearings were held at the time the
franchise was awarded.
A28 128: RESOLUTION NO. 89R-97: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
SPECIAL TAX BONDS OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.
1989-1 (SYCAMORE CANYON), APPROVING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF A FISCAL
AGENT AGREEMENT AND APPROVING OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS. (Community
Facilities District No. 1989-1 Sycamore Canyon)
128; RESOLUTION NO, 89R-98; A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL
TAX BONDS OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-2
(THE HIGHLANDS), APPROVING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF A FISCAL AGENT
AGREEMENT AND APPROVING OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS. (Community
Facilities District No. 1989-2 The Highlands)
A29. 152/158/182: RESOLUTION NO. 89R-99: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO ACCEPT
DEEDS OF TRUST AND CONSENT TO ACCEPT DEEDS OF TRUSTS AND CONSENT TO THEIR
RECORDATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 89R-94 through 89R-99 (with the exception of
Resolution No. 89R-98):
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 89R-94 through 89R-99, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 89R-98:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
coUNcIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter
None
Kaywood
None
269
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-98 duly passed and adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5005:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5005 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CARRIED.
105; APPOINTMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Appointment
from the list of candidates to fill the unscheduled vacancies on the Community
Redevelopment Commission left by Robert Doty (term ending June 30, 1991) and
Earl Rhoads (term ending June 30, 1991). This matter was continued from the
meeting of March 21, 1989, to this date.
MOTION: Councilman Ehrle moved to continue the subject appointments to
Tuesday, April 11, 1989. Councilman Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: ITEMS BI - B6 FROM THE PLANNING GOMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 13, 1989
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 4, 1989:
Bi. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 288, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 88-89-27,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 3106 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO, 88-05:
OWNER: CALIFORNIA DRIVE-IN THEATRES, 120 North Robertson,
Los Angeles, CA 90048
AGENT: IDM CORPORATION, 5150 East Pacific Coast Highway, Long Beach,
CA 90804
LOCATION; 291 North State College Boulevard, City of Orange, (Orange
Drive-In Theatre)
For a c~ange in zone from ML to CO. To permit and govern the
construction of one (1) 18-story, 391,667 square-foot commercial
office building and a 2,843 space, 6-level parking structure (City of
Anaheim) in conjunction with two (2) 10-story, 250,000 square-foot
commercial office buildings and two (2) 18-story, 321,667 square-foot
commercial office buildings in the City of Orange (IDM Business
Center).
Reclassification No. 88-89-27 GRANTED by the Planning Commission,
PC89-70.
CUP NO. 3106 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-71.
Recommended approval of Development Agreement No. 88-05 by the
Planning Commission, PC89-72.
Planning Commission recommends certification of EIR NO. 288 with
Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Review by City Council requested by the Planning Commission. A
public hearing will be held on April 25, 1989 at 3:00 P.M.
270
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
B2, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 252, RECLASSIFICATION NO, 88-89-41, VARIANCE
NO, 3909 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNERS: WILLIAM YOCHEM AND LORENE YOCHEM, 2810 Randy Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 92806
AGENT: MOHLER CORPORATION, 874 N. Batavia Street, Orange, CA 92668
LOCATION: 502 South Rio Vista Street
For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 or a less intense
zone. Petitioner requests amendment to the the Land Use Element of
the General Plan proposing a redesignation from the current Low
Density Residential designation to the Medium Density Residential
designation with waivers of (a) maximum structural height and (b)
minimum structural setback to construct an 8-unit apartment building.
Recommended approval of GPA NO. 252 by the Planning Commission,
PC89-73.
Reclassification No. 88-89-41 GRANTED by the Planning Commission,
PC89-74.
Variance No. 3909 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-75.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Review by City Council requested by the Planning Commission. A
public hearing will be held on May 2, 1989 at 6:00 P.M.
B3
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 88-89-31, VARIANCE NO. 3895 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:'
OWNERS: RAYMOND L. PHILLIPS, 9292 N. Batavia Street, Orange, CA 92665
AGENT: MAGDY HANNA, 4400 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 680, Newport Beach,
CA 92660
LOCATION: 3629 & 3633 W. Savanna Street
For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 or a less intense
zone. To construct a 3-story, 20-unit apartment complex with waivers
of (a) maximum structural height and (b) maximum site coverage.
Reclassification No. 88-89-31 GRANTED by the Planning Commission,
PC89-76.
Variance No. 3895 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-77.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4.
VARIANCE NO, 3904 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNERS: ARNT G. QUIST, TRUSTEE OF THE QUIST INCORPORATED RETIREMENT
TRUST, 2957 Catalpa Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGENT: FRANK KURIAKOS, 12001 Euclid Street, Garden Grove, CA 92640
LOCATION; 300 South Anaheim Boulevard
To construct a 2,707 square-foot enclosed restaurant with waiver of
minimum number of required parking spaces.
Variance No. 3904 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-78.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council
Members Kaywood and Ehrle, and therefore, a public hearing will be set at a
later date.
271
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
B5, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3127 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION;
OWNER: SIERRA PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT FUND III, 3 Corporate Plaza, Suite
100, Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGENT: EAST HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH, ATTN: Tim Gillette, 4835 School
Street, Yorba Ltnda, CA 92686
LOCATION; 140 South Chaparral Court
To permit a church facility within an existing office building with
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
CUP NO. 3127 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-79.
Waiver of Code Requirement GRANTED by the Planning Commission.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B6. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3126 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
OWNERS: LEONARD N. GILLILAND JR., AND LAUREEN A. GILLILAND,
WILLIAM C. AND CYNTHIA LYNN TAORMINA, 912 N. Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92802
AGENT: DAVID L. WALL, P.O. Box 2276, Anaheim, CA 92814
LOCATION: 910, 912 and 916 North Anaheim Boulevard
To construct a 3,300 square-foot building for automotive repair with
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
CUP NO. 3126 GRANTED by the Planning Commission, PC89-80.
Waiver of Code Requirement GRANTED by the Planning Commisson.
Approved Negative Declaration.
The Planning Commission's decision was appealed by the applicant and,
therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
179; ITEM B7 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1989
INFORMATION ONLY~- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 6, 1989:
B7.
TRACT NO. 12994 - (SYCAMORE CANYON); OWNER: WOODCREST DEVELOPMENT, INC.
Petitioner requests waiver of certain requirements of Title 17, the
hillside grading ordinance, relating to Tract No. 12994 (Sycamore
Canyon).
Tract No. 12994 APPROVED by the Planning Commission. This Tract was
set for a public hearing before the City Council on April 18, 1989.
End of the Planning Commission Items.
B8,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 2888 - EXTENSION OF TIME:
REQUESTED BY: LA_RUE FREY, INC., 12171 Country Lane, Santa Aha, CA
92705
LOCATION; 441 Fairmont Boulevard. The request is for an extension
of time to expire April 21, 1990 to comply with conditions of
approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2888, which permits a church
272
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
on RS-HS-22,000 zoned property, as recommended in memorandum dated
March 10, 1989 from the Planning Department.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time
on Conditional Use Permit No. 2888, to expire April 21, 1989. Councilman
Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 5006 - ADOPTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone property
under Reclassification No. 88-89-33 located at 625 North Valley Street from
the RS-A-43,000 zone to the RM-1200 zone
WAIVER OF READING ORDINANCE; The title of the following ordinance was read
by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5006)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5006 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5006: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Pickler and Kaywood
Daly and Hunter
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5006 duly passed and adopted.
179/142; ORDINANCE NO. 5007 CHURCHES AS CONDITIONAL USE IN CANYON
INDUSTRIAL AREA:~ Amending Subsection .614 of Section 18.61.050.600 of Chapter
18.61 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to churches as
conditional uses in the Canyon Industrial Area. (See minutes of March 7, 1989
where the request of Pastor Michael Taylor of the Community Christian Church
to amend the ordinance was discussed).
UAIVER 0F READINC - 0RDINANCR: The title of the following ordinance was read
by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5007)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5007 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5007: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION
.614 OF SECTION 18.61.060.600 OF CHAPTER 18.61 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
273
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4. 1989. 5:30 P.M.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated when the discussion
originally took place which eventually allowed churches to locate in the
industrial area for not more than 3 years, it was definitely with the
understanding that it was to provide churches with the start they needed so
that they could eventually find a permanent location. Allowing the
possibility of a 9-year stay in the canyon industrial area will turn into a
permanent use because the cost of land will continue to escalate and the
churches will continue to request an additional 9 years and so on. This area
is part of Redevelopment and is an area set aside for job-producing uses. She
is extremely concerned that interim use by churches will become permanent.
Mayor Hunter. He disagrees. The ordinance as proposed will now allow a
3-year time limit with the possibility of an extension for three additional
years with a 9-year maximum. The churches want to establish their
congregation so that they can eventually build a church building not to become
housed in an industrial building forever. It is not their goal or purpose.
Councilman Pickler. He has the same concerns as Councilwoman Kaywood but in
looking at the canyon industrial area, there are presently many vacancies. He
would like to have a periodic report back from staff perhaps every 2 years on
the status of occupancies in the canyon industrial area. If the City reaches
a point where the land is needed for strictly industrial uses, this will
affect his decision on whether or not a church would get a 3-year renewal if
they requested; Councilwoman Kaywood expressed an additional concern that if
an industrialist was looking to locate in that area, he will not do so if a
church is located there.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing ordinance.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL-MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter
Kaywood
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5007 duly passed and adopted.
179' ORDINANCE NO. 5008' Amending Title 18 to rezone property under
Reclassification No. 87-88-24 located at 1925 West Lincoln Avenue from the GL
zone to the RM-1200 zone.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCE; The title of the following ordinance was read
by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5008)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5008 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
274
127
CitH Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO, 5008: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney Jack White, explained for Councilwoman
Kaywood that the proposed ordinance only approves the reclassification to
RM-1200. To the extent they require further permits to construct a
restaurant, this action does not approve a restaurant but specifically only
the zoning for the property.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing ordinance.
Roll Call Vote on:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter
Daly and Kaywood
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5008 duly passed and adopted.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST'
Sally Horton, 56 North Claudina. On behalf of ANA (Anaheim Neighborhood
Association) she would like to invite the Council to attend their, "call me
crazy renovator's house tours" on April 22 and 23, 1989 from 10:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. They have subtitled it a celebration of neighborhood preservation.
It is their intent with the tour in celebration to present downtown as a
viable and quality place to live, work and shop. The best way to do so is to
open their neighborhoods to the community. She gave a further explanation of
the activities involved and in concluding emphasized that ANA hopes the
Council will attend.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 West Palais. He referred to the pilot trash recycling
program approved by the Council at their meeting of March 21, 1989. It is a
worthy program but he is concerned as a taxpayer over the rate increase to
residents and if the levying of a fee on all residents is funding the
contractor to the tune of $2.5 million for equipment, which besides recycling
will improve his efficiency. He wonders if the effort will truly increase
recycling or merely redirect existing recycling efforts. He hopes these
points are evaluated by Council and staff as the program progresses.
Councilman Pickler. That is why the private program is a one year program.
These and many other questions are those that staff will have the answers for
at the end of the one year period.
128: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - MELLO-ROOS COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
NO, 1989-3 THE SUMMIT; At the Council meeting of February 20, 1989, the
Council determined a policy on the establishment of a Mello-Roos District for
the three new Ranch developments in East Anaheim Hills declaring their intent
to establish a Community Facilities District, authorizing the levy of special
taxes pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, and
declaring the intention to incur bonded indebtedness of the three proposed
Community Facilities Districts. A public hearing was subsequently scheduled
for February 7, 1989 on the subject district.
275
128
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
The request was granted and public hearing continued to February 21 March 7
and March 21, 1989 (see minutes those dates). At the March 21, 1989 meeting,
the Council approved the facilities to be included in the District and
continued the public hearing to this date for submittal of appropriate
documents to be acted upon at this time.
STAFF INPUT: See staff report dated March 30, 1989, recommending first that
any additional public testimony be taken with respect to Community Facilities
District 1989-3, closing the public hearing and taking certain necessary
actions with regard to formation of the District.
Greg Trombley, Project Manager, Mello-Roos.
At the Council meeting of March 21, 1989, Council determined the
projects to be included within Community Facilities District
1989-3. During the interim, staff has prepared the necessary
documentation which is being presented to the Council today.
Mayor Hunter first asked if anyone wished to speak; there being no response,
he closed the public hearing.
WAIVER OF READING RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 89R-100)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-100 for adoption, approving the
formation of Community Facilities District No. 1989-3 (The Summit),
authorizing the levy of a special tax within the district, preliminarily
establishing an appropriations limit for the district and submitting levy of
the special tax and the establishment of the appropriations limit to the
qualified electors of the district. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-100: A RESOLUTION OF FORMATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 1989-3 (THE SUMMIT), AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN
THE DISTRICT, PRELIMINARY ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE
DISTRICT AND SUBMITTING LEVY OF THE SPECIAL TAX AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE DISTRICT. (Community
Facilities District No. 1989-3 The Summit)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-100 duly passed and adopted.
WAIVER OF READING RESOLUTIONS; The titles of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 89R-101 and 89R-102)
276
125
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-101 for adoption, determining the
necessity to incur bonded indebtedness within Community Facilities District
No. 1989-3 (The Summit) and submitting proposition to the qualified electors
of the district; and Resolution No. 89R-102 for adoption, calling a special
election - The Summit.
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-101: A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY TO INCUR
BONDED INDEBTEDNESS WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-3 (THE
SUMMIT AND SUBMITTING PROPOSITION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE DISTRICT.
(Community Facilities District No. 1989-3 The Summit)
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-102: A RESOLUTION CALLING SPECIAL ELECTION.
Facilities District No. 1989-3 - The Summit)
(Community
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 89R-101 and 89R-102 duly passed and adopted.
City Clerk Sohl, having received the ballots cast by landowners in the Special
Landowner Election, then opened the ballots (2) and announced that the
following votes were cast:
307 votes cast - YES
285 votes cast - YES
The Canvass and Statement of Result of Election - The Summit (1989-3):
592 votes cast - 592 YES votes.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-103)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-103 for adoption, declaring
results of special election and directing recording of Notice of Special Tax
Authorization - Sycamore Canyon. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-103; A RESOLUTION DECLARING RESULTS OF SPECIAL ELECTION
AND DIRECTING RECORDING OF NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX AUTHORIZATION. (Community
Facilities District No. 1989-3 - The Summit)
Roll Call Vote:
277
126
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-103 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5012 for introduction.
ORDINANCE NO, 5012: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-3 (THE
SUMMIT).
City Attorney White noted that another resolution listed in the staff report
dated March 30, 1989 was left off the agenda, authorizing the issuance of
special tax bonds of the City of Anaheim for Community Facilities District
No. 1989-3 (The Summit), approvin§ and directing the execution of a Fiscal
Agent Agreement and approving other related documents and actions (see Page
Nos. 2 and 3 of the report).
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-104)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-104 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-104: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL TAX
BONDS OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-3 (THE
SUMMIT), APPROVING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF A FISCAL AGENT AGREEMENT AND
APPROVING OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-104 duly passed and adopted.
Mr. Trombley then clarified for Councilwoman Kaywood that the City tax rate
recommended is 1.36 %.
134; PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO, 251 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
INITIATED BY: City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92805
278
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The subject study area is approximately 4.79 acres bounded
on the west by Vine Street, on the north by alley south of Broadway, on the
east by alley west of Rose Street, and on the south by alley north of Santa
Ana Street. The request is to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element
of the General Plan proposing redesignation from Medium Density Residential to
Low-Medium Density Residential.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: General Plan Amendment No. 251, Exhibit A, was
approved by the Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-29; approved EIR
Negative Declaration.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 23, 1989.
Posting of property March 23, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 24, 1989.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989.
Sally Horton, 226 North Claudina.
She is in favor of the proposed General Plan Amendment and the
downzoning that will result but wanted to know why it was
recommended and how they can get the City to recommend more such
amendments.
Janet Botula, Associate Planner.
On December 19, 1988, the Planning Commission considered several
variances to waive minimum building site areas per dwelling unit
and maximum coverage to construct 2-story 4 unit affordable
apartment projects on South Bush Street. Although the
neighborhood residents spoke in opposition and the variances
were granted, in response to the concerns expressed relative to
demsity, the Planning Commission initiated the subject General
Plan Amendment to examine the impacts of redesignating the area
from medium density to low density. She confirmed it is an
attempt to make the General Plan match the zoning.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to speak.
Patricia Meza, 325 1/2 South Bush Street.
She is representing a group of her neighbors who are all in
favor of the GPA. She urged the Council's approval which will
be helpful in their area so as not to increase the already
existing traffic and other problems they are experiencing. She
wished it had been done sooner.
COUNCIL ACTION:
There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Hunter closed the
public hearing.
279
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES ~ April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-105)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 89R-105 for adoption, approving
General Plan Amendment No. 251, Exhibit "A". Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-105: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL
PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 251, EXHIBIT "A".
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-105 duly passed and adopted.
179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING VARIANCE NO, 3859 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
Anaheim General Hospital Ltd
3320 W. Ball Road,
Anaheim, CA 92804
AGENT:
Rvadd A. Jeffrey
3350 W. Ball Road,
Anaheim, CA 92804
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 3350 W. Ball Road. The request
is to construct a 30,000 square-foot, 3-story medical office building with
waiver of minimum number of required parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Variance No. 3859 was denied by the Planning
Commission under Resolution No. PC89-07; approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
A letter of appeal was submitted by Farano and Kieviet on behalf of the owner,
Anaheim General Hospital. This matter was continued from the meeting of
March 21, 1989 where testimony was given, to this date (see minutes that date).
28O
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 9, 1989.
Posting of property March 9, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 10, 1989.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 16, 1989.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Mr. Tom Kieviet, Farano & Kteviet, 100 South Anaheim Boulevard,
representing the owners of Anaheim General Hospital for a waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces on the subject project. The
request is only for approval of the parking areas. The proposed
project will provide more than adequate parking on site. Mr.
Kieviet then gave an extensive and detailed presentation which
included an historic overview regarding the buildings presently
on the site, square footages involved and the parking situation
as it evolved over the years. With regard to the subject
request, parking studies have been prepared and reviewed by the
City Traffic Engineer. The consensus among all experts is that
there will be more than adequate parking on the property to
serve the hospital and all medical buildings. He then broached
the concerns expressed by the residents on Masters Lane working
from documentation which he presented to the Council (see
proposed parking layout which contained a site plan showing the
total parking spaces available under the existing and proposed
land use along with photographs which corresponded to the
numbered lots which photographs were taken at different times of
the day showing the spaces available at those times). He
briefed all of the information contained in the submittal. The
total demand of spaces on the hospital site would be 195 and
they are proposing 226 available for medical office use or a 31
sp~ce surplus for medical office building parking over and above
its peak demand. He then proposed conditioning the variance on
the implementation of a Parking Management Program approved by
the City Traffic Engineer. In addition, to enforce the program,
they are proposing the Condition No. 20 currently proposed in
the staff report be reworded to provide that the property owner
record a covenant that runs with the land to maintain the
Parking Management Program or else provide additional off street
parking or be subject to a $250 a day penalty if the program is
not maintained (see sheet submitted and entitled - Variance
No. 3859 Anaheim General Hospital - conditions Re: Parking
Management Program - made a part of the record).
Working from the posted site plan, Mr. Kieviet explained how and
why their parking plan would work. Relative to Masters Lane, it
is their contention that street parking on Masters Lane is
caused by the medical office building across the street and not
by the hospital or medical office buildings on site. A solution
would be to red curb the east side of the street as well as the
281
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P,M.
west side up to the residents. The distance from the
residential homes to the medical office in the hospital would
then be a disincentive. He is asking that the variance be
approved with the change to Condition No. 20 relative to
implementation of a Parking Management Program approved by the
City Traffic Engineer and that a covgnant shall be recorded that
requires the property owner to maintain a property management
program or construct a parking structure or pay $250 a day fine
if not maintained. (Also see detailed letter dated March 29,
1989 previously submitted to the Council by Thomas Kieviet which
relates to and further explains the parking issue).
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
Dr. David Hsu, owner, 3400 West Ball Road.
There has been a parking problem since they built their medical
office building on the corner of Masters Lane in 1982. In 1983
they tried to divert all doctors and secretaries to a leased
parking lot to the west of the building in a shopping center.
At that time they requested everybody to park in the shopping
center noting that cars will be towed away if parked in other
areas. Dr. Hsu then addressed the parking issues and problems
as well as the reasons why they feel that the hospital's parking
plan utilizing gates, guards and patrols will not alleviate
those problems which measures may, in fact, entice people to
park in the residential area since visitors to the hospital will
have to park at the rear of the hospital. (See Dr. Hsu's
detailed letter to the Council dated March 9, 1989 which
elaborated upon the parking issues.
Larry Greer, Principal with Greer & Company, Traffic Engineers,
2323 West Lincoln Avenue.
His firm was retained by the Anaheim General Medical Center,
owners of the building across Masters Lane represented by Dr.
Hsu who just spoke. This is basically the same plan Greer
responded to at the Planning Commission on two other occasions
with some minor changes and elaboration on the Parking
Management Program. They all agree with the applicant's
original traffic consultant that the total number of spaces is
not the issue, but how the parking spaces are distributed
relative to the accessibility to the office buildings as well as
the hospital. Mr. Greer then elaborated on the findings of his
study as well as addressing his concerns with the proposed
Parking Management Program which he feels will increase the
pressure of parking on Masters Lane and Oak Haven as well as
other street parking that will be closer than parking 1,100 feet
from the back of the hospital. There is a parking shortage in
front of the hospital. The alternatives are to put the new
282
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
office building at the rear of the hospital which will take the
demand for parking to the rear. A second alternative is to
provide a single parking deck over the front parking area on the
east side of the site. They have major concerns about the
effectiveness and enforceability of the Parking Management
Program and the availability of parking out front to serve all
or part of the office building.
Lee Four, 1209 Masters Lane.
People are parking 1/3 of the way down their street on both
sides. He is concerned about the safety of his 5-year old
daughter. Cars now turn around at the end of cul de sac which
is not a safe situation for the children living there. The
Parking Management Program sounds confusing enough to cause
everybody to continue to park on the residential streets. There
has to be a better way to keep patrons from parking on Masters
Lane. Red curbing of the street will cause problems for the
residents.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
He addressed the question of permit parking broached by
Councilman Pickler and stated that they tried to discourage
permit parking wherever possible because areas so designated are
difficult and expensive to administer. In this case there may
be other ways to address the problem and he will recommend those
as soon as all testimony is received.
Steve File, 1251 Masters Lane.
The outpatient clinic is the problem (Dr. Hsu's facility). If
the proposed building is allowed it can only make matters
worse. Employees will park on their street. He is concerned
that new buildings are built which hope to grow in the future
but with only minimum parking proposed. U-turns on the cul de
sac are a danger to safety.
Joyce Mickelow, 1240 Masters Lane (also see Mrs. Mickelow's
testimony given at the public hearing on March 21, 1989
continued to this date).
Parking is all 'the way up to her home. She does not favor red
curbing the street. People do not realize Masters Lane is a cul
de sac coming off Ball Road. There is need for a "Not a Through
Street" sign so that motorists are not led to believe they can
get through Masters Lane. She is very concerned for safety of
children who live on the street. The proposed solutions will
not help the parking situation on Masters Lane. Many patients
also are parking on the street. It does make a difference
relative to the value of their homes. The fence proposed to be
installed will cause everyone to park on Masters Lane. She also
submitted a letter from Linda and Renae Satchell, 1291 South
Masters Lane, listing several concerns about the subject
proposal especially relative to traffic impacting their street.
283
City Hall, Anaheim, California COLINCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P,M.
George Brott, 3306 West Glen Holly Drive.
He does not live on Masters Lane but he uses it since his wife
is in a wheelchair and the handicapped sections of the medical
office building are blocked off because they are being used. He
feels that the parking is unsatisfactory relative to all of the
buildings and explained from the posted site plan the problem he
encounters.
Larry Horwitz, Hart, King & Coldren, 200 East Sand Pointe,
Suite 400, Santa Aha.
He represents Anaheim General Medical Center, Dr. Hsu's
partnership (see Mr. Horwttz's letters dated March 13 and
March 16, 1989 which addressed the parking issue in detail). In
his extensive presentation, he addressed statutory requirements
and what the proposed medical office building will do to the
current situation. He pointed out that the total number of
parking spaces required by the medical office building and the
hospital is 822 and currently there are approximately 400
parking spaces in place. He then explained how that had
occurred. Under the Anaheim Municipal Code, the City Council
must find to grant a zoning variance either special
circumstances or certain facts that will deprive the hospital of
privileges enjoyed by similar properties. The proponent is
arguing that the Parking Management Program is somehow a special
circumstance. There is an easement running in favor of Dr.
Hsu's office building granted by the hospital for 124 spaces and
that is how the current situation came about. There is no
community support for the project. Mr. Pringle of Weston
Pringle, the applicant's Traffic Engineer has not testified and
there is no documentation presented to the Council supporting
any conclusion by Mr. Prtngle. There is no special
circumstance. He urged a review of the conclusion of the
Planning Commission and subsequent denial of the zoning variance.
SUMMATION BY APPLICANT:
Floyd Farano, Farano & Kteviet.
He first deferred to Mr. Wes Pringle, their Traffic Consultant.
Wes Pringle, Weston Pringle & Associates, 2651 East Chapman,
Fullerton.
The parking lot area in red on the posted site plan is to
provide parking not only for visitors to the medical office
building, but also employees. He is not saying the employees of
the medical buildings need to park to the rear. %~ose areas are
preserved not only for visitors but staff. They agree with the
total number of spaces being inadequate. The numbers Mr. Greer
referred to 283 is correct. He subtracted the 48 spaces which
are provided at 3400 Ball Road, Dr. Hsu's building. Demand was
195 which was needed on the hospital property and they dealt
with the 195 figure. Documentation is provided in the report he
submitted dated March 9, 1989 which has been on file with the
284
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
City. The operation of the lot is such that they will insure
that the "red" areas will be available for the medical office
buildings. The hospital will be reoriented making parking
convenient for visitors. The entrance will be changed to the
rear. It is a workable plan.
Floyd Farano.
He explained the studies that had been done in January which
included photographs and a video tape of those parking on
Masters Lane, the frequency of certain vehicles parking on that
street, where people utilizing Masters Lane were coming from,
etc. The conclusion was that although there is a problem on
Masters Lane, it is not being caused by the hospital. After
further addressing parking issues, he stated that the latest
offer they will make is that they will pay for the construction
of a gate across Masters Lane that will make it a private
entrance to be used only by cars of the residents. The proposed
medical office building could be built on the site as a matter
of right if they could find a way to accommodate the parking
spaces. They have tried to locate the hospital oriented spaces
into the green area and save the red area for the medical office
buildings. Mr. Pringle has testified that would be a viable
solution. Mr. Farano then submitted additional documentation
for the record and in concluding stated that all traffic experts
agree that parking is sufficient the issue is the manner in
which they are arranged. They agree that cars should not park
on Masters Lane. The hospital is not the offender but the
medical office building. They will continue to offer any
proposal to correct the problem on Masters Lane.
Paul Singer, City Traffic Engineer.
The first recommendation when dealing with the request was that
th~ new office building be located in the "green" area as shown
on the posted site plan. He was told it would not be possible
because of the architecture and operational needs of the
hospital. Based on the constraints, staff had worked long and
hard with the applicant and owners of the medical office
building. One study indicates there may be adequate parking, in
another that there will be a shortage of 68 spaces. To insure
that no shortage occurs, the red area could be decked to provide
the additional 68 spaces and staff's recommendation is that the
applicant would construct a parking deck containing at least 68
spaces. The parking on Masters Lane is a separate problem. The
proposed wall along Masters Lane separating the hospital
facility from the medical office building will cause additional
walking and encourage additional parking on Masters Lane. He
has suggested and asked Mr. Farano during the proceedings if the
applicant would be willing to construct a gate and vacate the
street from public use making it a private street. The property
owners would then have to maintain the street but would have a
gated community precluding people from the hospital or medical
285
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
office building from invading their private street thereby
removing the need for the wall and making the parking spaces on
the east side of Masters Lane shown in the red area more
accessible to the medical office building on the west side.
The basic recommendation is that a condition be included that
specifies in great detail the parking management strategy, that
the applicant be required in some manner or bind himself to
provide up to 68 parking spaces should that become necessary,
that the applicant undertake to process documentation to vacate
Masters Lane and construct a turn around plus a gated community
to preclude vehicles entering into Masters Lane and that there
be a monitoring system on a continuous basis. Under those
circumstances, the subject could be a viable project. He also
took note of the request for a "Not a Through Street" sign which
he will have installed as soon as possible.
Council Members Pickler and Ehrle were in support of Mr.
Singer's recommendation and felt that a gated community would
work well; Councilman Pickler asked Mr. Singer how long a period
of time he would recommend to determine when the additional
structure would be needed to accommodate the 68 parking spaces.
Mr. Singer answered three years following occupancy of the new
building.
City Attorney White.
He suggested that in offering a resolution of approval that it
be with a modification of condition No. 20 and further
modification as recommended by the City Traffic Engineer making
findings as required by Section 18.06.80 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code that would be contained in the resolution. As an
aside, he pointed out if the resolution is adopted with a
condition relating to the project going forward on condition
that the street is vacated and the gate installed, that will be
the subject of further proceedings under the Street Vacation Law
and will require additional public hearings. People in the area
would be informed of that and have the right to object at that
time that the street be privately maintained and the cost of
maintenance would be borne by the homeowners. They would have
the opportunity to object and if the Council finds it is not an
appropriate action at that time, that condition would not be
satisfied.
Mayor Hunter.
He knows the neighbors must have many questions relative to the
establishment of a gated community. Residents tried to do the
same in his neighborhood and found it was very difficult. If
one or two residents do not want to have a private street, the
condition will fail. It is not something that has not been done
before. He is going to support the project but if the condition
286
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
falls, the issue may be back before the Council. He wanted the
residents to know that the City will assist them with the many
questions they have or will have regarding a private street.
Traffic Engineer Singer offered his telephone number (999-5183)
and invited a call to his office where he or one of his staff
members would be happy to answer any questions from the
residents.
Councilman Daly.
He asked if the gating of the street is a condition of approval
or an option to be pursued by the neighbors and staff.
Paul Singer.
The condition obligates the applicant to pay for the cost of
gating. If the neighborhood does not want to have the gated
community, they will live with a parking problem.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT o NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-106)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 89R-106 for adoption, granting
Variance No. 3859 with a modification to Condition No. 20 as articulated and
with a further condition as recommended by the City Engineer relating to
vacation of Masters Lane, installing a gate at the applicant's expense to
preclude unauthorized vehicles entering that street and that there be a
monitoring system on a continuous basis. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-106: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3859.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-106 duly passed and adopted.
RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for ten minutes. (8:32 p.m.)
287
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
AFTER RECESS; The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (9:03 p.m.)
179; PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO, 3888 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION;
APPLICANT: OWNER:
Christopher M. Corcoran
402 S. Olive Street
Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT:
Alireza Tabesh
2030 E. 4th Street, Suite 100,
Santa Aha, CA
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 402 South Olive Street. The
request is to waive (a) maximum structural height, (b) maximum lot coverage
and (c) minimum structural setback to construct a 5-unit, 3-story, apartment
building.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Variance No. 3888 was granted by the Planning
Commission under Resolution No. PC89-27; approved EIR Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Daly and Councilman Ehrle at the meeting of February 21, 1989, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 23, 1989.
Posting of property March 23, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 24, 1989.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report~to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Mr. Jilachr, 203 East 4th Street, Santa Aha Street.
He is part owner in the project. They bought the subject
property, 5 units. It was in the proper zone when they went to
the Planning Commission and asked for four, 3 bedroom units and
one bachelor unit. The Commission suggested the project be
revised and changed to 4 units, which they did, and the project
was approved. The project is now 4 units of 2 bedrooms each and
it is still 3-stories.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator.
The project was originally submitted as a 5-unit project with
the same 3 waivers. The Commission continued the item and asked
the developer to reduce the unit count. Revised plans were
submitted. The Planning Commission approval was for 4 units but
the 3 waivers are still necessary because the "foot print" of
the building is the same.
288
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
Councilman Ehrle.
He feels the project is too big for the property and 3-stories
looking down on single-family homes is too much for him. He
feels a triplex would be more appropriate with 2-stories on one
end.
Councilman Daly.
He agrees with Councilman Ehrle's concerns. He cannot support
any of the 3 proposed waivers the height, lot coverage or
minimum structural setback. One of the setbacks is a zero
setback. Looking at the neighborhood, there are a number of
single-family dwelling units. Even if there are other 3-story
buildings, he does not think it is appropriate to have a project
of the size proposed on a lot that small. He is hoping that the
project can be redesigned keeping it to 2-stories.
Mr. Jilachr answered that it was not economically possible to do
so. Escrow just closed on the property. He would not have
purchased the property if he was not going to be allowed 5 units.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
Mitchell Caldwell, 902 West Broadway.
The City has a set of laws governing development which are
supposed to protect and provide for quality development and
quality of life. It speaks very clearly as to when and if
variances should be provided. It is not for the economic
benefit of the developer. Variances cannot continue to be
granted in order to increase the profits of developers. The
residents cannot subsidize their profits by giving away the
quality of their lives. If the developers cannot build to the
laws of the City, they should go somewhere else.
SUMMATION OR REBUTTAL BY APPLICANT:
The gentlemen who designed the project then spoke. On a lot
like this which has been zoned RM-1200 in advance, with a width
of 50 feet, they cannot design 4 units or even 3. Parking needs
to be provided on the ground floor so it would be necessary to
go to the second floor. They need to have a height variance.
The other two minor variances are to comply with code for the
tandem parkings. They checked with staff and there is no way to
avoid the variances.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
That is the point. If a project cannot be developed without a
number of variances, it is over building the parcel and it makes
it difficult for people living in the area so they no longer
enjoy the quality of life they had before. She is also
289
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
concerned with proposals for tandem parking because it does not
work.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION; On motion by Councilman
Hunter, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has constdere~ 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. 89R-107)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-107 for adoption, denying
Variance No. 3888, reversing the findings of the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-107; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 3888.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-107 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO, 88-89-29 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
Shih-Yen Chiam, Jut-Wa Chiang and Meng-Be-Lin
P.O. Box 3428,
Tustin, CA 92681
AGENT:
Paddock & Flair Architects
17780 Fitch, Suite 280,
Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1126 N. Euclid Street. The
request is for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 or a less intense
zone, to construct a 56-unit apartment complex.
290
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Reclassification No. 88-89-29 was granted by the
Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-29; approved EIR Negative
Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler and Councilwoman Kaywood at the meeting of February 21, 1989, and
public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 23, 1989.
Posting of property March 23, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 24, 1989.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Don Flair, Paddock & Flair, Architects, 17780 Fitch, Suite 280,
Irvine, CA 92714.
The project was approved by the Planning Commission
unanimously. The project conforms to the General Plan. They
are not asking for any variances. The project is also in
conformance with respect to parking, open space and all items
called for in the Zoning Code. The property when purchased was
dilapidated. The developer has removed the buildings and
cleared it for hopefully what will be approval to move forward.
It is a nicely designed project and will be an asset to the
neighborhood.
Councilman Pickler.
His concern is adding 56 units to a street that is very heavily
traveled and the additional traffic and congestion it will
create on Euclid Street. His major concern is density and he
would like to see condominiums or townhouses instead of
apartments.
Don Flair.
The project is compatible to the density adjacent to it. It
would be infeasible at a lower density. The density proposed is
less than would be allowed by the zone.
Councilwoman Kaywood expressed concern with the compact parking
spaces proposed. She felt that they are going to have to look
closely at the Code; Traffic Engineer Paul Singer stated that
staff is coming to the Council with a recommendation that the
City do away with small car parking spaces.
Councilman Ehrle.
It is very unusual to have a developer of apartments come in and
not ask for one variance. Within a couple of weeks the Council
291
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M. --
is going to have a Joint Workshop with the Planning Commission
regarding the RM-3000 and RM-2400 zones. He would like to have
this matter continued until after the workshop because he would
rather see this project developed as condominiums and there may
be a possibility that as a result of the workshop, standards
could be such that it would make it financially feasible.
Councilman Daly.
He agrees relative to condominiums. There is a nice condominium
development to the immediate east and a block to the north. In
recent years, condominiums have proven to be very successful in
the subject neighborhood. He is looking forward to the upcoming
workshop but he is not sure he can support continuing this
project. He deferred to the City Attorney as to Council's
options.
City Attorney White.
The Council has the option to either deny the project, approve
it or continue it.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
In the experience that she has seen, apartments that wear well
are those that are large enough to have on-site management where
they are owned, maintained and managed by the same builder. She
is not necessarily opposed to this project as apartments but she
is willing to look at any other proposal as well.
Mr. Flair then stated it is his understanding the development
would be owned and operated by his client.
Steve Chiang.
He will keep the property as long as he can have an investment
which he anticipates would be 15 years or more.
Mayor Hunter.
The project is not adjacent to single-family homes, it is to
code and less units are proposed then what could be built on the
property. It was approved by the Planning Commission on a 7/0
vote. The project is a good one.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: Mr. Barnett, 1114 North Dresden.
He lives right behind the lot near the mortuary. He would
rather see apartments or condominiums on the property, either of
the two.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
Larry Turks, 216 North Claudina.
His concern is the traffic on Euclid. It is only possible to
get into the property from one direction on Euclid. Otherwise
292
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
it is necessary to go to the corner to make a "U-Turn" to get to
the property going in the other direction.
Fred O'Donnell, 1140 North Dresden.
He has only lived in the area about nine months. He is
concerned about density. If they continue the trend of
apartments in that area, there will be a continued degradation
of the neighborhood. They are presently experiencing crime
problems that have not existed in the past. He does not feel
that apartments or 56 units and the associated people that come
with it is appropriate for that neighborhood.
Paul Singer.
Answering Councilman Pickler, traffic on Euclid is very heavy
and it will increase on arterial streets by 2.3%. The project
will generate 476 trips per day and 50 at peak hours. The
street can presently absorb that increase. The intersections
are approaching critical levels in excess of capacity in that
vicinity. La Palma and Euclid is a designated critical
intersection and the property owner has to dedicate towards
that. A median island will be installed and left turns
curtailed. Those improvements will be made at the time the
critical intersection is improved. Improvements could be
advanced. Median islands do not depend on the critical
intersection. A condition could be added requiring the
developer to construct a median island to preclude left-turns.
However, it will also preclude left-turns into Grand Avenue
which is directly across the street.
Councilman Pickler.
If the project is going to be approved, the median is something
he would like to see constructed at this time to alleviate the
impacts.
Councilman Daly.
The best looking project is the RM-4000 immediately to the east
of the proposal. It worked well for the community. He cannot
buy the fact that it would not be economical for a developer to
construct condominiums.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
The existing units are RM-4000 which was what condominiums were
when they first started and now have been reduced to RM-3000.
She is frightened to hear the possibility of further reducing
that figure.
Don Flair.
It is very common to put down apartments. Not everyone can
afford homes. When the housing market softens, there will be a
big demand for rentals. In his point of view, the Council needs
293
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30
to evaluate the project on its merits. He does not see anything
wrong with a quality apartment project in the City.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
Councilman Pickler. He asked Mr. Flair whether he would prefer
to have the matter continued for 3 or 4 weeks to see what action
may be taken at the Joint Workshop of April 18, 1989.
Annika Santalahtt, Zoning Administrator.
She interjected and stated as part of the presentation at the
forthcoming workshop, staff is looking at different sites around
the City as to which might be suitable to be lower in density.
The information out of the meeting is not just an issue of
zoning standard but also looking at the kinds of sites that
should or should not be medium density zoning.
Don Flair.
They have spent a great deal of time getting to this point and
would like to get the project expedited. If the Council feels
further study is required, they have no other recourse but to go
along with that. They would like to work with the City and will
agree to a continuance.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to continue the public hearing on
Reclassification 88-89-29 and Negative Declaration to Tuesday, May 2, 1989 at
6:00 p.m. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, RECLASSIFICATION
NO. 88-89-38, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 3116 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
Jafar Jahanpanah and Houssien Tavakoli
520 North Rexford Drive,
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
AGENT:
Ronald J. Crowley
1700 Raintree Road,
Fullerton, CA 92635
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1585 West Katella Avenue. The
request is for a change in zone from RS-IO,O00 to CO, to permit a 47-unit
motel suite complex with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Reclassification No. 88-89-38 was denied by the
Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-37; Conditional Use Permit
No. 3116 was denied by the Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-36;
Waiver of Code Requirement was denied by the Planning Commission; approved EIR
Negative Declaration.
294
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
HEARING SET ON:
A letter of appeal was submitted by the Agent, Ronald J. Crowley, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 23, 1989.
Posting of property March 24, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 24, 1989.
PI~ING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989.
Councilman Ehrle. He was going to refrain from any discussion of voting on
the subject since he has a previously declared conflict of interest. He left
the Council dais.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Dr. Ronald J. Crowley, 1700 Ratntree Road, Fullerton, CA 92635.
He introduced Phillip Stump, Southern California Hotel Research
Center, who first covered five points relating to the hotel
market which he felt would be useful to the Council in
evaluating the need for the project. (1) Anaheim can no longer
meet peak convention demand locally, (2) the most profitable
segment of the hotel market today is the All-Suites property,
(3) Anaheim has a very limited supply of All-Suites type
property in the convention destination location, (4) the success
of a new hotel or motel is a function of the staff who run the
property, (5) highest and best use for the subject site is a
hotel/motel development. He elaborated on each of these points
and in concluding encouraged the Council to consider the
proposal and approve it.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
Joseph R. Bryan, 1582 West Sumac, directly north in the center
of the site.
He does not know where Mr. Stump got his facts that the subject
property is an ideal spot for a motel/hotel. It is
approximately five blocks away from the Convention Center area.
The community is definitely against the proposed project. The
property has been vacant for 20 years. ~is is the fifth time
he has come in to oppose a project where overbuilding is always
proposed. He has talked to and worked with hotel/motel people
for over 20 years. ~ey do not feel that a site out of the
Convention Center area would be of any benefit. The
neighborhood will be faced with traffic and crime problems if a
motel is located on the property. He wants to see something
built there but not a motel. /~ere are some depressed
295
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
commercial offices and other uses along the street. If it is
opened up to one motel other property owners will "bulldoze"
their properties, sell it and propose motels on those
properties. The motels on Lincoln Avenue are major crime
problems. People have plenty of places to stay in the
Disneyland strip area.
Rick Landrum, 1598 West Sumac.
If there is a 75% occupancy rate.in motels/hotels, that means
25% of the rooms are unoccupied, yet Mr. Stump stated that they
had to place guests outside of Anaheim hotels. The location is
not convenient to the Convention Center. The residents want to
see something on the property there that is not going to create
a detriment to the neighborhood such as a daytime type facility
with no height variance.
Barbara Peck, 1776 Carnelian.
The Planning Commission denied the project. A petition was
previously submitted containing 46 signatures of people in the
neighborhood who are opposed to the project. They do not want
apartments or motels in the area which they have expressed
before. The crime rate goes up and parking is going to be a
problem. There are enough cars on Carnelian.
Gus Asaad, 5076 West Sumac.
He put a swimming pool in his back yard a year ago. If this
project is allowed, it will be an intrusion on his pool. He
does not want to be supplying a nice view of his back yard for
the motel.
John Yaghouvi, 1782 South Carnelian.
His only concern is traffic which is bad even now. Parking will
also be a problem. He is totally against the project. It is
proposed adjacent to the nursery school that his child attends.
There are problems at night on Harbor Boulevard with
prostitutes. They will move slowly up Katella. He does not
want such a place close to his house.
SUMMATION OR REBUTTAL BY APPLICANT: Phillip Stump.
His observation of the hotel/motel market says that All-Suites
property located close to Disneyland could be successful as a
hotel development. The figures are accurate about demand. The
Visitor and Convention Bureau has big plans for the Convention
Center in the future which makes the City a year-round
destination.
Dr. Crowley.
Their Traffic Consultant, Weston Pringle, did an analysis of the
needs of the project finding that the need would not exceed 1.3
parking spaces per unit. They have provided 1.6 parking spaces
296
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
per unit. The City Traffic Engineer concurred with the
conclusions of the Parking Engineer. The property is zoned
commercial office and offices are in over supply at the present
time. They talked to staff about what kinds of product could be
put in that area and this one was the most viable. If they were
to redesign it to make it apartments or condominiums, they would
have to go through a General Plan Amendment as well as a
reclassification. He is open to further suggestion on what
might be built on the property. Relative to the issue of visual
intrusion into the single-family areas, there would be no such
intrusion and they would be 80 feet away from the boundary to
the north. Relative to the possibility that if the motel is not
filled it will be used as an apartment type complex, there are
provisions in the code that make it a criminal offense if motels
are subsequently used as apartments. The people who will be
running the facility are not interested in renting the units out
as apartments.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked how many condominiums could be built
on that parcel.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator.
At 1 and 1/3 acres, somewhere around 24 condominiums; Dr.
Crowley stated it works out to 19 units.
Mr. Joseph Bryan asked to make a comment noting that Dr. Crowley
stated it could not be rented as an apartment. It is a matter
of moving a tenant from room to another after 30 days or the
tenant can leave for one day and then come back in. He also
talked to a representative of Dr. Crowley who told them it was
their intent to build a motel and then to sell it.
Massoud Monshizadeh.
He did speak with Mr. Bryan who asked if he would be selling the
motel. They may sell it but are not intending to do so at this
time.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Hunter, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 89R-108 and 89R-109)
297
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 89R-108 for adoption, denying
Reclassification No. 88-89-38 and Resolution No. 89R-109 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 3116, upholding the findings of the City Planning
Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-108: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A ZONE CHANGE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED IN A
CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED.
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-109; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3116.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Pickler stated he is going
to speak in opposition to a denial. He feels this is an
opportunity of building something that can be used in an area
not too far from Disneyland. He feels it is positive and there
is no visual intrusion.
Mayor Hunter.
He feels it is "block busting". If a motel is allowed on this
property he agrees with Mr. Bryan that some of the more
disadvantaged properties will end up being motels and hotels.
He is opposed to the project.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolutions and carried by the
following vote:
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Kaywood and Hunter
Pickler
Ehrle
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 89R-108 and 89R-109 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - AMEND CONDITION OF APPROVAL, VARIANCE NO, 3794 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED):
APPLICANT: REQUESTED BY:
Magdy Hanna, Newport Pacific Development Corp.
4400 MacArthur Blvd., 9th Floor,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION/REQUEST: The properties are located at 3333, 3335, and 3335 1/2 West
Ball Road. The petitioner requests amendment to a condition of approval in
Resolution No. 88R-387 for Variance No. 3794 which permits the construction of
a one and two story, 12-untt "affordable" condominium complex with waivers of
(a) minimum building site area per dwelling unit, (b) maximum structural
height, (c) minimum floor area of 3-bedroom dwelling units, (d) minimum
298
115
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES April 4. 1989, 5;30 P.M.
structural setback abutting a single-family residential zone and (e) minimum
recreational/leisure area.
A negative declaration status was granted on the project when it was
originally approved.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 23, 1989.
Posting of property March 23, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 24, 1989.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report dated March 21, 1989 from the Planning Department
recommending denial of the request.
Mayor Hunter.
He first referred to memorandum dated March 15, 1989 from the
City Attorney to the Planning Department recommending, "that the
City retain its current practice of requiring final subdivision
map recordation prior to building permit issuance for projects
involving land subdivision. ." He then deferred to the City
Attorney.
City Attorney Jack White.
He responded to an inquiry from the Planning Department asking
his opinion about a change in the procedure requiring that final
tract maps be recorded prior to issuance of building permits.
In response, his memorandum of March 15, 1989 states that he
feels it not to be in the best interest of the City to entertain
any change in the current procedure.
The current procedure as established, and as followed in most
cities in California, is one that is contemplated in the
Subdivision Map Act requiring that the final map be recorded and
that the individual units or lots be placed of record before
permits are issued to allow construction on the property. Under
existing Zoning Codes, to allow building permits for most
projects prior to the tract map being recorded would be a
violation of the Zoning Code. It would be allowing units to be
built on one lot when the code contemplates that each unit be on
a separate lot, or in the case of condominiums it would be
allowing building of an apartment complex for a condominium
project which would only become a condominium project upon
subsequent recordation of the condominium plan and final tract
map.
Even if there was no zoning violation, there is no guarantee in
the future the final map will ever be recorded. Property may
pass to a different ownership and circumstances change which end
up in no final map being recorded. The proposed solution - that
no final occupancy permits be issued until a final map is
299
116
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
recorded for the project - is a dangerous precedent. There is
no guarantee that an owner of property could not subsequently
mandate the City to issue the final Certificate of Occupancy.
The Building Code provides that the Building Official is
entitled to withhold the occupancy permit until such time as the
building complies with all applicable building codes. If built
in compliance with the Building Code~ even though there may not
be a recorded map, it may violate a condition of previous
approval or other discretionary approval, a court could compel a
Certificate of Occupancy.
The last problem is one where not all the conditions are
complied with for a project. The project under consideration
has met or would be able to meet all the conditions of the
tentative map as a condition precedent to the building permit.
As this also entails a potential policy that would apply to
other projects, it is feasible if approved as a policy not all
conditions would be met prior to issuance of the building permit
in which case the City would not be legally in a position to
require those conditions as conditions of the building permit.
For the foregoing reasons and while he is sympathetic to the
interests of the developers and the delays they encounter in the
recordation process, his personal opinion is that it is not in
the City's best interest to amend current practices.
A1 Marshall, Newport Pacific Development, 4400 MacArthur
Boulevard, Newport Beach.
Addressing Mr. Whtte's concerns, there are nine local cities
which do allow, in one form or another, building permits to be
issued prior to final recordation of the tract map which is
basically a "rubber stamping" of the tentative map providing the
tentative map has been complied with. They are present to
attempt to offer an alternative in trying to save 3 to 4 months
in the start of construction. They are not denying there are
significant issues; however, the Map Act does allow for some
alternatives and simple documents that can be put into place in
order to insure completion of the final tract map or no
Certificate of Occupancy will be issued. One is the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement, another is a developer's agreement and
another would be a vesting tentative tract map. They are trying
to find a vehicle that will work within the administrative plan
check procedure that will avoid this issue in the future. The
situation as it now stands involves a 3 to 6 month delay which
means an increase per unit of $1,500 to $4,000 on the sales
price. Until Certificates of Occupancy are issued, there is no
usable building in any form but just an organized pile of
material on the site that cannot be used. They are asking that
they be allowed to institute a subdivision improvement agreement
or a vested tract map or the short form developer's agreement -
anything that will allow them to proceed in a timely fashion.
300
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES
April 4, 1989, 5:30 P.M.
Magdy Hanna, Newport Pacific Development, 4400 MacArthur
Boulevard.
They developed a townhouse type unit of between 1,200 and 1,300
square feet. It cannot be an apartment. There is no way
economically that he could build it as an apartment. They
cannot start construction because they do not have a building
permit. The cost will be passed to the consumer. The delay in
the project is 6 to 9 months since the project was approved on
October 11, 1988. Ail conditions have been met. If the City
wants to see condominiums and homeownership, it will be
necessary to ease the requirements and restrictions in the
City. He also questioned once he builds his project can the
Gtty deny his right to rent it.
City Attorney White.
If a condominium project is approved and constructed in the City
of Anaheim, the City cannot prohibit the rental of the
individual units.
Magdy Hanna.
He confirmed the project will be homeownership and asked the
City to consider the three proposals offered by Mr. Marshall.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
George Brott, 3306 West Glen Holly.
The developer has been given every waiver he has asked for on
this project. This request is another which will be precedent
setting. They do not want any more requests granted to the
deyeloper. They especially do not want apartments and want the
City to take every step to assure that the project will not
revert to apartments.
June Luntz, 3312 West Glen Holly.
She i~ opposed to opening the door to possible problems and to
take away safeguards that are in place. She concurs with the
City Attorney in his advice to the Council.
Jim Peck, 3341 West Deerwood.
He concurs with the previous speakers. They have spent 3 years
dealing with this property and they finally thought the issue
was resolved. The Planning Gommtssion said they would be
getting condominiums and now it is his understanding there could
be a possibility that the project will not be condominiums. He
also stated he had complained relative to clean up of the
property in the way it was being handled. He asked that the
Council have someone go out and clean up the property.
301
114
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5:30 P,M,
Henry Ledesma, 3342 West Deerwood.
His concerns are relative to traffic.
apartment it will be a traffic problem.
If it becomes an
SUMMATION BY APPLICANT: MagdyHanna.
They need to speed the process to get the condominium project
built which will answer the concerns relative to clean up of the
property. He reiterated and emphasized it is their intent to
develop a condominium project and one which will be pleasing to
the neighbors. They are unable to do anything at present
because they do not have the building permit. They can try
during the delay to put up a block wall or chain link fence.
Their intent is clear. Economics and other issues preclude the
building of anything other than condominiums on that site.
Answering Councilwoman Kaywood, City Attorney White stated in
99% of the cases he foresees absolutely no problem with what is
being proposed either for a subdivision agreement, a covenant or
development agreement, but in his opinion there will always be a
risk that the City may end up as Mr. Marshall stated with a well
organized pile of material on a piece of property that cannot be
utilized because the City is unwilling to issue a Certificate of
Occupancy until a subdivision map is recorded. There will also
always be the risk that the City may not get what it bargained
for if they go to a procedure that allows building permits prior
to final tract map recordation.
Councilman Pickler.
He is interested in finding a way to eliminate such long delays
to developers. That time delay ultimately hurts the people who
are going to buy the condominiums..
CoUncilman Ehrle.
If the County is behind as much as it is in recordation of final
maps, it will be necessary to find some solution. He is
suggesting for Council consideration continuing the hearing for
4 weeks in determining what kind of tract record adjacent cities
have had doing what the applicant is requesting. He tends to
agree with the City Attorney but also with Councilman Pickler
that they should provide the development community with some
solution since the Council continues to encourage developers to
come in with condomininums.
Mayor Hunter.
He feels that the Council must follow the advice of the City
Attorney on this issue.
It was determined that a negative declaration was previously approved on this
project.
302
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - April 4, 1989, 5;30 P.M.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-110)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-110 for adoption, denying the
requested amendment to a condition of approval in Resolution No. 88R-387 for
Variance No. 3794. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 89R-110: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN VARIANCE
NO. 3794 AS APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 88R-387.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Kaywood and Hunter
Ehrle and Pickler
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-110 duly passed and adopted.
114: COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 25. 1989; The Council determined that the
starting time for the Tuesday, April 25, 1989 Council meeting will be
2:30 p.m. instead of 1:30 p.m. in order to allow Council attendance at the
Annual Disneyland Community Service Awards.
RECESS; By general consent, the Council recessed to Closed Session to
consider the balance of the Closed Session items from 4:00 p.m. (11:30 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS:
being present.
ADJOURNMENT:
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
(12:29 a.m.)
Councilman Hunter moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood
(12:30 a.m. - April 5, 1989)
303