1988/09/272. O5
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M,
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: James D. Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Anntka Santalahti
ASSOCIATE TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Debbie Fank
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 3:30 p.m. on September 23, 1988 at the Civic Center kiosk,
containing all items as shown herein.
Mayor Bay called the meeting to order at 12:05 p.m.
REQUEST FQR 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; City of Anaheim vs. County of Orange, O.C.S.C.C. No.
50-96-78.
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.
(2:03 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Reverend Stanley Quebe, Zion Lutheran, gave the invocation.
FLAG SAL_~ Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119; PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Bay and
authorized by the City Council:
920
206
CSty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27. 1988. 1:30 P.M.
October is Escrow Month in Anaheim,
Mental Illness Awareness Week in Anaheim, October 2-8, 1988,
Red Ribbon Week in Anaheim, October 23-30, 1988,
Scott Hunt accepted the October is Escrow Month proclamation; Jeannette Hanson
accepted the Mental Illness Awareness proclamation; Larry Slagle and Alan
Hughes accepted the Red Ribbon Week proclamation.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held August 23, 1988. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $8,139,638.75, 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 City
Manager. (Resolution Nos. 88R-364 through 88R-368, both inclusive, for
adoption and Ordinance No. 4963 for adoption and Ordinance No.4964 for first
reading)
Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions and
ordinances. Councilman Hunter 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. 88R-364 through 88R-368, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance
No. 4963 for adoption and Ordinance No. 4964 for first reading.
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended:
a. Claim submitted by Jonathan Bautista for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 15, 1988.
b. Claim submitted by Pacific Bell for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 17, 1988.
c. Claim submitted by Robert E. Perkins, Jr. for Property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 15, 1988.
d. Claim submitted by Michael Sprague for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 6, 1988.
e. Claim submitted by Southwest Laboratories, Inc. for indemnity for
damages sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 11,
1988.
921
203
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, ~988, 1;30 P,M.
f. Claim submitted by Highland Insurance Company (Insured: M & J
Concrete; Claimant: Hernandez) for property damage and bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or June 10, 1988.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission
meeting held August 11, 1988.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Services Board
meeting held August 11, 1988.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission meeting held August 17, 1988.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission meeting held August 24, 1988.
107: Receiving and filing the Building Division Statistical Report
for the month ending August 31, 1988.
A3. 150: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of George
Washington Community Center Improvements by Southern California Builders, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of
Completion.
A4. 169: Awarding a contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Modern Alloys, Inc., in the amount of $7,532 for the Kensington Avenue -
Partridge Street Street Closure.
A5. 158: Authorizing the payment of $120,900 to Stanley L. Hahne for
building modifications to 734 North Anaheim Boulevard - North Anaheim
Boulevard Street Widening Project (R/W 3500-49).
A6. 158: Authorizing a relocation payment in the amount of $24,360 to Orange
County Center for Health, Inc., for reimbursable expenses associated with the
reconstruction of the building located at 503 North Anaheim Boulevard - North
Anaheim Boulevard Street Widening Project (R/W 3500-17).
A?. 160: Accepting the bid of General Electric Company in the amount of
$93,152.80 for one 69 KV open rack three phase, 28.8 MVAR Capacitor Bank, all
in accordance with Bid Froposal #A-4609 as publicly advertised.
AS. 123/160: Authorizing a first amendment to the agreement with Western
Counties Maintenance Company to receive a one percent discount if City pays
contractor within ten days after receiving a statement of work for custodial
services at various City locations in accordance with Bid Proposal #4557.
A9. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change order to Case &
Sons Construction, Inc., for an additional amount of $65,115 bringing the
revised total order to $130,230 for repainting structural steel at Anaheim
Stadium.
922
2O4
Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27. 1988. 1:30 P.M, --
AIO. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by
the Director of Finance for one month ended July 31, 1988.
Ail, 158; RESOLUTION NO, 88R-364; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88R-263 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT. (To
create the position of Labor Relations Director)
~3; RESOLUTION NO, 88R-365; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88R-264 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT. (To
create the position of Assistant Labor Relations Director)
153; RESOLUTION NO, 88R-366; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88R-268 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS CONFIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL AND
TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT. (To create the position of Deputy City
Attorney III-Civil)
153; RESOLUTION NO, 88R-367; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 88R-266 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL
MANAGEMENT. (To create the position of Deputy City Attorney III-Prosecution)
Al2. 153: Receiving and filing the Human Resources Affirmative Action Year
End Report - Fiscal Year 1987/88.
Al3. 123: Approving an agreement with Recreation Management Services, Inc.,
for the purpose of providing tennis classes and lessons to the community, and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement.
Al4. 123: Approving an agreement with Orange County Community Consortium,
Inc., to provide professional services for the preparation of a human services
needs assessment and action plan for the Jeffrey-Lynne neighborhood area.
!
Al5. 123: Approving an agreement with Community Care Network (CCN) to provide
professional services relative to the City's self-administered workers'
compensation claims, in the form of hospital utilization review and hospital
specified rates.
Al6. 123: Approving an agreement with Orange County Council on Aging to
provide ombudsman services to residents in long term care facilities, and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement on behalf of
the City.
Al7, 175; RESOLUTION NO, 88R-368; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RATES, RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SALE AND
DISTRIBUTION OF WATER AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 72R-600 AND AMENDED BY
RESOLUTION NOS. 73R-255, 73R-387, 73R-532, 74R-433, 75R-315, 75R-469, 75R-479,
76R-378, 78R-418, 78R-419, 78R-459, 79R-643, 80R-304, 81R-124, 84R-402,
82R-355, 83R-331, 84R-246, 86R-118, 87R-188 AND 87R-324.
923
201
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M,
Al8. 142: ORDINANCE NO. 4963 (ADOPTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING SECTIONS 1.01.389.020, 14.32.189.050, 17.28.030.120 AND
17.28.130.030.032 OF CHAPTERS 1.01, 14.32 AND 17.28 OF TITLES 1, 14 AND 17,
RESPECTIVELY, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, NUNC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO
CERTAIN ORDINANCES CONTAINING CLERICAL ERRORS.
Al9. 123: Authorizing the City Manager to exercise the City's lease option
with Magnolia Elementary School District to sublease the Jultette Low School
site to the Rams.
A20, 156/000/142; ORDINANCE NO, 4964 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM TO ADD CHAPTERS 6.99 TO THE ANAHEIMMUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPOSE
THE COSTS OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS UPON PERSONS WHO COMMIT CRIMINAL ACTS.
A21. 123: Approving the First Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement creating the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, and
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement on behalf of
the City, subject to such revisions and corrections as are approved by the
City Attorney.
A22. 123: Authorizing a lease agreement with the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce
Building Limited Partnership for a term of three years, for 1,901 square feet
of office space at the Chamber building, at a cost of $1,901 per month, to
accommodate the new Labor Relations Department.
A23. 123: Approving an agreement with Ralph Andersen and Associates in an
amount not to exceed $68,835 to conduct a management study of the Human
Resources Department.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 88R-~64 through 88R-368:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 88R-364 through 88R-368, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
Roll Gall Vote on Ordinance No. 4963:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4963 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CARRIED.
~05; pARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTEE: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
ratify the appointment of John Carusillo as Planning Commission representative
to the Park and Recreation Commission. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
924
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, %;30 P,M.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
No items of public interest were addressed.
179; ITEMS Cl - C2 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 8.
1988, DECISION DATE; SEPTEMBER 15, 1988 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD
ENDS SEPTEMBER 29, 1988:
VARIANCE NO, 3833, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT. CLASS 5:
OWNER: THE SERVITE FATHERS, Attn: Father Charles Matsko, 1952 West
La Palma, Anaheim, CA 92801-3595
LOCATION; 1952 West ~a palma Avenue
To retain an existing patio cover with waiver of minimum side yard
setback.
Variance No. 3833 APPROVED IN PART by the Zoning Administrator,
Decision No. ZA88-53.
C2,
VARIANCE NO, 3838 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: SANTA FE LAND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY, ATTN: RICK DEL CARLO,
3230 E. Imperial Hwy., #100, Brea, CA 92621
AGENT: WALDEN & ASSOCIATES, Attn: David Walden, 18012 Cowan, Suite
210, Irvtne, CA 92714
LOCATION; Property is approx, 11 acres located at the northwest
corner of La Palma Avenue and Manaserro Street,
To establish a 4-parcel subdivision with waiver of required lot
frontage
Variance No. 3838 APPROVED by the Zoning Administrator, Decision No.
ZA88-54.
Approved Negative Declaration.
End of the Zoning Administrator Items. No action was taken by Council.
MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS; The title of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 88R-369 and 88R-370)
Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179; TERMINATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 491: Councilman Bay offered
Resolution No. 88R-369 for adoption, terminating all proceedings in connection
with Conditional Use Permit No. 491 and declaring Resolution No. 1026 null and
void. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 88R-369; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 491 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 1026 NULL AND VOID.
Roll Call Vote:
925
199
City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-369 duly passed and adopted.
~79; TERMINATION - CONDITIONAL USE pERMIT NO. 1360: Councilman Bay offered
Resolution No. 88R-370 for adoption, terminating all proceedings in connection
with Conditional Use Permit No. 1360 and declaring Resolution No. 73R-65 null
and void. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 88R-370; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAMEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 1360 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-65 NULL AND VOID.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-370 duly passed and adopted.
R~CESS TO CLOSED SESSION: Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session
and upon return from Closed Session that the Council will open the public
hearing portion of the meeting. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. (2:35 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (3:11 p.m.)
105; DISCUSSION - PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD pERSONNEL: Councilman Bay moved to
set for the Council agenda of October 4, 1988 consideration and possible
action concerning Public Utilities Board Personnel. Councilman Hunter
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179; FUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO, ~028 ANP NEGATIVE DECLARATION ' WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO, 543;
APPLIGANT: OWNERS:
Gilbert Medical Partnership
925 South Gilbert Street,
Anaheim, CA 92804
AGENT:
S & M Development Corporation
P.O. Box 3868,
Mission Viejo, CA 92690
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 925 S. Gilbert Street. The
request is to permit a 3-story, 31-unit Senior Citizen apartment building with
waivers of (a) minimumbuilding site area per dwelling unit, (b) maximum
structural height, (c) minimum front setback and permitted encroachments and
(d) minimum recreation/leisure area.
926
ZOO
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M. --
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC88-213 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 3028; approved EIR - Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission
also granted waiver of Code Requirement and waiver of Council Policy No. 543.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood and Councilman Pickler at the meeting of August 30, 1988, and a public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 15, 1988.
Posting of property September 16, 1988.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 14, 1988.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 15, 1988.
COUNCIL CONCERNS:
Councilwoman Kaywood.
Minimum building site area per dwelling unit is 1,200 square
feet and the applicant is proposing 712 square feet. The
proposed 1-bedroom units are 555 square feet which is very
small. Further, although the City Council and the Senior
Citizens Commission had set the age at 62 for occupants of
senior citizen housing, state law allows for a second occupant
of 45 years of age which means that there will be an automobile
and also a younger person of any age can be a guest for no more
than 60 days.
City Attorney, Jack White.
Two people can reside in one unit - one person 62 years of age
and the other as low as 45 and there can be a guest of any age
but that guest cannot stay more than 60 days a year.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
The maximum number of units allowed on the property is 16 and
the request was granted at 28 which is a 75% bonus. The
.8 parking space to the unit is not even one parking space which
could result in an immediate problem which basically has been
created by the state.
Councilman Pickler.
He is concerned with the density. The project is putting too
much in too small an area. Twenty-eight units is overloading
the area.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Kent Boydstun, 703 North Anaheim Boulevard.
If the property, in its present condition, was rehabilitated,
they would be looking at a 3,000 square-foot commercial building
with current market rents. This would generate more traffic.
If RM-2400, 8 to 10 units could be built on the property with 9
927
197
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
cars per 2-bedroom units during a 24-hour period. A senior
citizen's complex would be the best land use and the least
impact to the neighborhood. He then reviewed what had occurred
relative to the project and the meetings that had taken place
before the Planning Commission. They have answered all the
concerns expressed by the neighbors at the Planning Commission
level which involved visual barriers, fencing, increased
planting and landscaping, etc. This is a well designed and well
thought out project that is good land use for the area. He
showed a color rendering of the project to the Council. He also
has a full-sized landscape plan and some pictures taken at an
elevation of 28 feet to establish where the planter will be in
relationship to the other properties. This plan eliminates all
of the visual intrusion from the homes adjacent to it. They
have changed the plan and amended what was needed to be done.
Council Members Kaywood and Pickler reiterated that the density
of the project is the problem and not the land use.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
None.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
It is necessary to cut the density to where it is reasonable
which will alleviate some of the parking shortage. There is no
place to park in that area.
Councilman Pickler.
The project should be what the Code requires or 20 units which
include affordable units.
Mayor Bay.
Four requested variances have now been reduced to one, minimum
building site per dwelling unit. The property is zoned RM-1200
which would allow 16 units and with a 25% density bonus for an
affordable senior citizen's apartment complex, the maximum would
be 20 units. Twenty-eight units is a 75% bonus bringing the
RM-1200 down to RM-712. He cannot support that type of density
bonus. The project is so far above the Code on the density that
it also gives him problems relative to precedent.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Bay closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT gEPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, 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
928
198
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
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. 88R-371)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 88R-371 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 3028. Refer to Resolution Book.
Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 88R-371 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 3028, finding that the requested density exceeds
that otherwise authorized by state law pursuant to Section 65915. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-371; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3028.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Boydstun, upon questioning by Councilwoman
Kaywood, referred to other projects in the City where similar density bonuses
were requested and granted, noting that what he is requesting is in line with
other projects in existence.
Councilman Ehrle.
He favors the recommendation of approval of the Planning
Commission. The type of project proposed is desperately needed
in Anaheim and he does not have a problem with the extra bonus.
Plans have been revised to make the project acceptable to the
neighbors.
Councilman Hunter.
He agrees with Councilman Ehrle. The Planning Commission
approved the project on a 5/0 vote. It is a good project and
there is a need for senior citizen housing.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing Resolution.
Roll Gall Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
Ehrle and Hunter
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-371 duly passed and adopted.
929
195
City Hall, Anaheim, CalSfornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M,
179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO, 3047 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
Marc V. Bahner and Candice Jayne Bahner
21165 Via Ausa,
Yorba Linde, CA 92686
AGENT:
RI{RAssociates
17321 Coventry Lane,
Yorba Ltnda, CA 92686
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 4527 E. La Palma Avenue. The
request is to permit an automotive repair facility with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC88-222 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 3047; Approved EIR - Negative Declaration and waiver of Code
Requirement.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood and Councilman Pickler at the meeting of August 30, 1988, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 15, 1988.
Posting of property September 16, 1988.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 14, 1988.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 15, 1988.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Robert Kirkpatrtck, Project Manager, KHR Associates, Agent.
His firm has prepared a traffic impact study as well as an
addendum which supports approval of the CUP and waiver of
parkin§ for the project. He wants to be certain that the
package presented by staff includes an 8 x 14 modified Exhibit
which was the numerical counts of parking spaces on the site and
modifications which were made subsequent to the Planning
Commission approval of the CUP. Concerns were raised by the
City Traffic Engineer. The original site.plan presented to the
Planning Commission showed 17 parking spaces. The current plan
now shows a total of 29 spaces, 9 of which are located inside
the facility. They discovered there were an additional 6 stalls
located on site directly behind the building which would leave
accessible to the facility a total of 23 stalls inside and out.
These are far in excess of the minimum number which their report
found necessary to support the automotive repair facility. He
is requesting affirmation of the Planning Commission's
decision. The facility is intended to repair Mercedes Benz
930
196
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M.
automobiles. All operations will occur inside the facility.
There are five interior parking spaces besides the four bays
reserved for the placement of vehicles awaiting service or
pick-up by owners. It is a first-class operation and no
maintenance will be done outside.
Debbie Fank, Associate Traffic Engineer.
She clarified for the Mayor that the applicant still does not
have the Code requirement of legal spaces and thus the parking
waiver is still needed. She also confirmed that the waiver
involved the difference between legally presented 11 parking
spaces vs. a requirement of 28 spaces.
Robert Kirkpatrick.
They understand they still require a waiver which they are
requesting along with the CUP. Mr. Ertckson, the applicant is
present as well as Mr. Geren who owns the entire building.
COUNCIL CONCERNS:
Councilwoman Kaywood.
Parking was a grave concern and the Traffic Engineer said
parking was not adequate and that 5 non-usable spaces were being
counted. The Redevelopment Commission voted to deny the
project. It is in the Project Alpha northeast industrial area.
The project is only 38 percent of Code and nothing should be put
into that critical area without adequate parking.
Robert Kirkpatrick.
Answering Council questions he explained that there are 7 or 8
other types of automobile repair facilities in the immediate
area. The original parking study determined that Mr. Erickson's
operation would require 15 stalls at the peak 15-minute period
of time in each operational day. He is well in excess of that
parking availability. Regarding the 5 substandard spaces, 2
have been eliminated and 3 remain to be used by employees and
will not be used by the General Public. The operator who
occupies the rear half and owns the entire building requires a
total of 4 parking spaces maximum. He creates race car parts
which are ordered by telephone and shipped from the site.
Customers do not come to the site. That coupled with the
parking study previously done in the City and supported at a
ratio of 4.49 stalls per 1,000 combine to make the site
practical but not necessarily legally conforming to City Codes.
There are 11 restriped lawful spaces in the front and an
additional 6 staff approved stalls behind the site. The stalls
were originally required when the building was constructed.
They are not the substandard stalls. The area behind the
building is not subject to easements by other property owners.
It is unrestricted use.
931
193
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1958, 1;30 P.M,
Annika Santalahtt, Zoning Administrator.
Referring to the Exhibit which is different from the Exhibits
staff received, across the rear of the building there is a
31-foot distance from the rear of the building to a block wall.
While she does not doubt that the building was built showing and
counting those spaces, it seems in the interim a block wall was
constructed across the back and now it is not possible to have
an 18 or 19-foot deep space backing into a 12-foot backup
space. As shown on the Exhibit, it does not meet the Code
requirement.
Mark Bahner.
He is the owner of the property. Regarding the 5 unlawful
spaces that have been mentioned, he questioned why these are now
unlawful because he was required to have those spaces when the
buildi~ was constructed at a cost of $100,000. The location of
the proposed business is critical and it cannot be just
anywhere. He (Bahner) needs only 4 parking stalls for his
employees and himself. Parking for his operation is minimal.
He would be willing to have the proposed business use his
parking spaces if it would help the situation.
Annika Santalahti.
When major parking code revisions were made several years ago,
up to that time, there were two standards, 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet for manufacturing use and 1 parking space per
1,000 for a warehousing use. When the Code was modified, they
went to 2.25 spaces across the board. The project several years
ago could have been built to Code if the building were split.
Mayor Bay.
The basic intent of the northeast industrial project area is
that it is a job-producing industrial area. For someone in the
manufacturing business, Mr. Bahner is right where he should be.
One automotive repair business after another and even
quasi-commercial areas one after another are starting to erode
the northeast industrial area. If it continues the way it is
going, there will be no place for manufacturing and industrial
where it belongs and will threaten a good job producing area.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
None.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Bay closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION; On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Hunter, the City Council approved the negative
932
194
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988. 1:30 P.M.
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further findtng 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. 88R-372)
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 88R-372 for adoption, denying
Waiver of Code requirement and Conditional Use Permit No. 3047, reversing the
findings of the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-372; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3047.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-372 duly passed and adopted.
179; pUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO, 3051 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
P/A State College Investors,
15751 Rockfield Boulevard, #200,
Irvine, CA 92718
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1177 S. State College
Boulevard. The request is to permit a 6-unit, 8,670 square-foot commercial
retail center including a 2,800 square-foot convenience market with waivers of
(a) minimum structural setback for trash enclosure and (b) required screening
of parking area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC88-224 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 3051; approved EIR - Negative Declaration and granted Waiver of
Code Requirement.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler and Councilwoman Kaywood at the meeting of August 30, 1988, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 15, 1988.
Posting of property September 16, 1988.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 15, 1988.
933
191
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988. 1:30 P.M.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 15, 1988.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Mr. Gary Mierau, Park Abrams Development, Irvine.
The project received approval by the Planning Commission in
November, 1987. Ordinance No. 4901 relating to convenience
markets was subsequently adopted and effective in March of
1988. No provision was made for projects which were in the
system that did not have a building pprmtt. A request was heard
by the Council on June 21, 1988 asking for issuance of building
permits without consideration for a CUP which was denied and
they were then directed to obtain a CUP from the Planning
Commission. A Planning Commission hearing was held on
August 15, 1988 where they received unanimous approval of their
project. On August 30, 1988 a public hearing was requested
before the Council. They have spent considerable time to
develop a quality development and have met with most of the
neighbors. Their project is not a Circle K or 7-Eleven
convenience market but a ranch market for grocery items and
products. They have agreed to limit their hours to 11:00 p.m.,
curtail deliveries in order not to disturb apartment residents
and to curtail trash as to pick ups and deliveries. They will
be catering to the neighborhood which will be repeat business
and will not become a hang out. Six-foot walls surround the
project on all sides and there is a buffer between the wall and
the building to further buffer noise. They are installing
cut-off lights to eliminate any glare to the homes and
apartments. They agree with Planning staff recommendations and
the Planning Commission approval of August 15, 1988. He
explained for Councilwoman Kaywood relative to the trash
enclosure being 3 feet away from Elmont and zero feet away from
the existing apartments, it is an existing enclosure and they
have asked for a waiver in order to leave it in its place. He
also confirmed that they will not have fast-food to heat and go.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
None.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Bay closed the public hearing.
Councilman Ehrle.
The project has come before the Council previously. He is
pleased to see that it is a mini-farmers market and not a
convenience market which will be a plus for the neighborhood.
934
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P.M,
Councilwoman Kaywood.
She asked staff if there are problems with the trash being next
to residents and what could be done.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator.
There is a condition imposed that trash storage be provided
which is acceptable to staff. If it turns out to be
troublesome, hopefully the developer will work with the City to
relocate it.
Councilman Pickler.
His concerns have been alleviated. He thought the project was
going to be a convenience market with hot food. Since it is
not, and with the assurance that the trash will be monitored, he
has no problem with the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION; On motion by Councilman
Ehrle, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 88R-373)
Councilman Ehrle moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Ehrle offered Resolution No. 88R-373 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 3051, upholding the findings of the City Planning
Commission and subject to the conditions imposed. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 88R-373; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3051.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-373 duly passed and adopted.
~5~; CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - REOUEST TO REVISE TIMING ON CONDITION NOS.
12. 59. 60, 61, 80, AND 96 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO, 88R-69, SYCAMORE
QANYON SPECIFIC pLAN ¢SP88-1), EIR NO. 283: REQUEST TO AMEND CONDITION No, 29
OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO, 88R-69, SYCAMORE CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-1),
APPLICANT: James Highland, Woodcrest Development
17911 Mitchell Avenue,
Irvine, CA 91714
935
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M,
AGENT:
Frank Elfend, Elfend & Associates
4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 660,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: Sycamore Canyon. Subject property is approximately 325 acres and
is bounded on the north by East Hills Planned Community, on the west by The
Highlands at Anaheim Hills, on the south by The Summit of Anaheim Hills and on
the east by Irvine Company property in the County of Orange, and is further
described as Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan (SP88-1).
The applicant requested a continuance of the public hearing of one week at the
Council meeting of September 20, 1988.
Frank Elfend, Elfend & Associates, 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite
660, Newport Beach, CA 92660.
He is requesting that the Council take action regarding
conditions of approval on the Sycamore Canyon project in the
manner set forth in the resolution and ordinance for that
project. He will defer to the Planning Department and he also
understands the City Attorney has some comments before he makes
his statements. He further understands that no staff report was
prepared and perhaps it would be more appropriate at this time
for the City Attorney to make his comments.
City Attorney, Jack White.
He does not have any comments at this time.
Joel Fick, Planning Director.
There have been some meetings in the interim with the hopes that
everything would be worked out in order to prepare a staff
report. There have been ongoing negotiations which concluded
yesterday morning between the attorney representing the
developer and the City Attorney's Office. His understanding was
that language was reached and acceptable to the City Attorney's
Office. The Planning Commission yesterday, in a related action
regarding a condition with the tentative tract maps reached an
agreement and approved the a~reement of wordin~ of the condition
on the tract maps. If that same agreement has been reached
between the Gity Attorney's Office and the Attorney for the
applicant, staff would recommend favorably for those amendment
changes.
Frank Elfend.
The City Council, in approving the large developments in the
ordinances and resolutions included wording which stipulated the
Council could set a later date if it was so determined that late
date was acceptable to the City and the City Attorney's Office.
On the Sycamore Canyon project, they have satisfied almost all
conditions of approval and in working with staff on the
financial mechanisms understanding it was taking some time to
resolve those items, they said they wanted to move forward in a
936
190
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988. 1:30 P,M.
manner in which the Council approved the condition allowing the
Council to set a later date for the formation of those items.
By working closely with the City Attorney's Office and the
Planning Department, appropriate wording has been formulated
whereby the setting of that date is at a later time which is at
the sale of any unit, residential lot or a Certificate of
Occupancy for any residential unit excluding the commercial
tracts. That is the way the condition is now modified. The
Planning Commission approved this wording yesterday as a
condition on the tentative maps. By coming up with the wording
and requiring the recordation of a covenant which would protect
the City assuring that the mechanisms would be in place, they no
longer need to amend Condition No. 29. Therefore, the
resolution to amend Condition No. 29 and the motion related to
that is no longer needed. The Council could adopt a resolution
and include in that Condition No. 29 as well.
Jack Whtte, City Attorney.
Relative to the conditions under discussion, his office has
looked at all of those. These originally required that the
conditions be complied with prior to, or concurrent with,
recordation of the final tract maps but the language in each of
the conditions states that - ". . or such additional time as
otherwise approved by the City Council but the implementation of
those conditions may be deferred to a later date." Because of
that specific language in the conditions, it is not necessary
for the Council to go through the process of amending all of
those individual conditions in the resolutions or in the
ordinance. What he would recommend, if the Council is agreeable
to the request is that the Council adopt one resolution relating
to the implementation of the conditions that have been specified
that would defer their required implementation to a later date
that would be specifically in connection with the sale of the
first unit and the language would track what the Planning
Commission approved yesterday in connection with the vesting
tentative maps.
The Council should be aware that this is a solution that allows
the developer to go forward at this point. Legally the
conditions do not come into issue until units are sold. By
deferring to a later date as being proposed, there is no
guarantee that units could not be sold in the interim. It would
then be up to the City to deal with the individual lot owners as
far as the covenant that is going to be recorded on each of the
parcels. What they are in essence doing is recording a covenant
against all of the parcels that will put buyers on notice that
they will jointly and severally be liable for these financial
mechanisms under discussion. It is an imperfect solution but
may be the only solution in order to allow the developer to
proceed in a timely fashion.
937
187
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988, 1;30 P,M,
Joel Fick.
The conditions that are requested for amendment primarily
pertain to maintenance of landscaping. There are some
assessment district type conditions but primarily maintenance of
landscaping in open space is concerned.
Mayor Bay.
He heard the City Attorney say if the timing is revised, it is
possible the conditions will not be settled prior to first
sale. He does not intend to vote for anything that will leave
conditions open that will go beyond the first sale.
Joel Fick.
The wording of the Planning Commission was, prior to the sale of
the first residential lot or issuance of the first Certificate
of Occupancy that the conditions would be complied with. That
wording was inserted into the various tract conditions.
Jack White.
That is correct. Since the City is not involved in the sale
process, it is possible that the individual units could be sold
even with this condition without having met the requirement of
creating the assessment districts or recordation of the CC6uR's,
or anything else. The City does not have the power to control
the sale of units. Once the tract map is recorded those units
are all legal separate lots and can be sold. It is putting a
cloud on the title of every one of the parcels and relying on
the fact that the buyer is going to take it with knowledge of
his obligations under those covenants and use that as a handle
to make sure there is compliance. How it can be controlled is
through approval of the final tract map and recordation. Once
that event occurs, individual lots can be sold without the
City's involvement. He cannot guarantee to the Council the City
will end up without 200 different property owners and without
having a set of CC6~R's and without having assessment districts
created. That is potentially a possibility.
Frank Elfend.
Conditions of approval state clearly that landscape maintenance
is the first option and there are other financial mechanisms
which would hopefully be homeowner's associations. They have
been complying with those conditions of approval. When it
became apparent that the timing to record the first final map
was becoming excessive, they sat down with outside Counsel
retained for that purpose and for other items. At the meeting,
the Deputy City Attorney and outside Counsel felt comfortable
with the mechanisms. They are planning to record a covenant on
the property which would cloud the title which would make the
sale of the individual lots highly unlikely. This is a
by-product of spending the time to work something out and they
feel they have gone to a reasonable extreme to give the City
adequate and maximum protection. Recording the covenant and
clouding the title will satisfy the concerns.
938
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27. 1988. 1;30 P,M, __
City Attorney White.
Once the tract maps are recorded, lots could be sold. Chances
are that will not occur. It is also unlikely anyone would be
willing to purchase a lot with covenant recorded against it
making them liable individually for the cost of maintenance for
all open space and landscaped areas and slopes in the
subdivision. His purpose is to point out the legal
technicalities and possibilities that will result. The reason
the matter is coming to the Council is the request of the
developer. It is not the City's request. They have attempted
to work with the developer in the best way possible to allow him
to move forward and still provide protection to the City. The
City is less protected by doing this than it would be if the
City did not approve the final tract maps until all the items
were complied with. He does not know it is a great risk but it
is somewhat less protection than the City would otherwise have.
He does not feel particularly uncomfortable going forward but
would be very uncomfortable going forward without having
informed the Council what he has told them at this hearing.
Councilman Pickler asked for confirmation that the essence of
the reason the Council has the request in front of them today is
because the developer is ready to move forward and if the issue
is not resolved, it would hold up the developer where he cannot
go forward; Planning Director Fick answered that is what staff
has been told.
Mayor Bay.
In his opinion, this is the first time he has heard in a hearing
process where they are going to start talking about an area
where assessment districts are going to be set up to handle
maintenance of slopes where in his mind there should be
homeowner's associations and CC&R's set up as done in the rest
of Anaheim Hills. All that has changed without any direct
communication back to the Council.
Councilman Hunter.
Even thou§h the City Attorney has stated that there is some risk
by §oing ahead, as he understands it, what happened at the
Planning Commission yesterday, there is a condition precedent
saying that before any home is sold, financial mechanisms would
be worked out. Either way whatever mechanism it is going to be
is going to be set in place. He understands the City Attorney's
position that there is nothing to prevent the developer from
going out and selling.
Joel Fick.
The Planning viewpoint has not been at odds with the City
Attorney's Office. Several lengthy meetings have been held. It
is not an "iron clad" solution to the problem but the general
consensus of all who participated was that the cloud of the
title created a substantial barrier to sale of residential lots
939
185
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27, 1988. 1:30 P.M.
and the City having control on the Certificate of Occupancy
process provided a level of security. While not "iron clad",
staff felt comfortable with it.
Mayor Bay.
He feels that the Council's Planning Liaison (Council Members
Pickler and Kaywood) needs to become involved in the planning
negotiations and report back to the Council where those
negotiations are heading and if the intent of the Council is
being followed or not. He does not know what a week's
difference would make on approving the revisions until there is
an opportunity to set up that Liaison meeting.
Frank Elfend.
The City does not lose any ability to make any decision on the
type of mechanism desired. If it is the decision of the City
that there be a homeowner's association and CC&R's, that is what
it is going to be. The Council's action today has nothing to do
with that. Those are separate issues. If the Council's actions
today are affirmative, the Council still has the right to choose
whatever alternative they wish.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
She asked how the developer could guarantee nothing is sold
before it is supposed to be.
Jim Highland, Woodcrest Development.
They are a major developer in the Anaheim area and it would be
shocking to him if they were able to start selling with no one
from the City Planning staff or Council knowing they were doing
so. Specifically, however, relative to the cloud on the title,
a person buying a house will look at his title report in 90% to
95% of the cases. Further, 95% or better will have a bank who
will look at the report. If the City is worrying about 200 or
400 people buying and not being aware of what is going on, the
chances are infinitesimal. There is a possibility of one or
two, but that possibility is unlikely.
Mayor Bay.
He reiterated the more he hears, the more he feels it is urgent
that there be a meeting with the Planning Liaisons.
COUNCIL ACTION:
There being no further persons who wished to speak to the issue either in
favor or in opposition, the Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mayor Bay noted only one resolution is now necessary which
revises the timing of conditions which will also include
Condition No. 29.
City Attor~v. Jack White.
£,~ a~!cpt'i~-,-. ta. resolution by title, staff would know the intent
c,f ...... t th~: d]scussion has been and the resolution will be
940
18 5
City Hall, Anaheim, CalSfornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 27. 1988. 1:30 P.M.
framed to conform with the discussion that has taken place.
also noted it was not necessary to take action on the
Environmental Impact Finding at this time since it was
previously acted upon.
He
Joel Fick, Planning Director.
He reiterated the timing the Planning Commission adopted
yesterday was, "prior to sale of the first residential unit or
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for residential
unit, whichever comes first."
James Ruth, Assistant City Manager.
A meeting is scheduled to take place Thursday, September 29,
1988 at 1:30 p.m. between City staff and the developer in the
City Manager's Office Conference Room and the Council Liaison is
invited to attend that meeting.
Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 88R-374 for adoption, approving the
revised timing as requested on Condition Nos. 12, 29, 59, 60, 61, 80 and 96 of
City Council Resolution No. 88R-69, Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan (SP88-1).
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-374; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING REVISED TIMING ON CONDITION NOS. 12, 29, 59, 60, 61, 80 AND
96 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 88R-69, SYCAMORE CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN
(SP88-1).
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Pickler and Bay
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-374 duly passed and adopted.
ADJOURNMENT; Councilman Ehrle moved to adjourn to Tuesday, October 4, 1988 at
2:00 p.m. for the purposes of a Closed Session. Councilman Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (2:02 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
941