Loading...
1987/12/08City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Bob Simpson CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR: John Poole ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Leonard McGhee PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Ftck A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 2:30 p.m. on December 4, 1987 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session to consider the following items: a. 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. b. Labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6. c. Personnel matters - Government Code Section 54957. d. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c). Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. (12:35 p.m.) Councilwoman Kaywood MOTION CARRIED. AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members bein~ present with the exception of Councilman Ehrle, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (2:02 p.m.) INVOCATION: The Reverend Don Crider, Anaheim Free Methodist Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Irv Pickler 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: 1129 Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Bill of Rights Week, December 13-19, 1987. Red Ribbon Season, December 14, 1987 to January 2, 1988. Dolores Staxred accepted the Bill of Rights proclamation and Kathy DePeri accepted the Red Ribbon proclamation. 119: PRESENTATION - CERTIFICATES OF ACHIEVEMENT TO CITY EMPLOYEES: The following employees were presented with Certificates of Achievement issued by the Employee Involvement Program Board of Directors, along with monetary awards ranging from $30 to $2,426: Barbara Hoisington - Secretary/City Manager's Office; Doug Hubert - Street Maintenance Leadworker; Chuck Palisin - Substation Test Technician Supervisor/Utilities; Kenneth F. Pflaum - Lead Custodian/Maintenance; Nancy Lerner - Recreation Services Manager; Jon Fazzio - Park Maintenance Worker II; Allen W. Eichorn - Police Officer; Beth Ann Socia - Records Clerk Specialist-Matron/Police. The suggestions submitted will either save City costs, improve service to the public or prevent possible hazards. Mayor Bay and Council Members congratulated each employee for their contributions. Special recognition was given to Beth Ann Socia, Records Clerk Specialist-Matron/Police, whose suggestion to change the warrant procedure for requesting a police report in cases that do not involve suspect and/or crimes against persons resulted in an annual savings of $24,260 in labor and material costs. Ms. Socia was awarded $2,426, the largest amount awarded in the history of the program. She was accompanied by Police Chief Jimmie Kennedy. MINUTES: Councilman Pickler moved toapprove the minutes of the regular meetings held October 27, November 10, 1987 and the adjourned regular meeting of October 29, 1987. Councilwoman Kmywood seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,658,366.75, in accordance with the 1987-88 Budget, were approved. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the resolutions on the Consent Calendar were read by the City Manager. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of all resolutions on the Consent Calendar. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARKIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 87R-493 and 87R-494 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 1130 CitH Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. 1. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file) a. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Notice of Public Hearings for Southern California Gas Company Customers, Application No. 87-06-021, request for a $2.926 million rate increase. b. 105: Public Library Board , Minutes of October 28, 1987. c. 140: Public Library Monthly Statistical Report for October 1987. 2. 158: Authorizing the payment of $95,804.45 to William C. Taormina for building modifications at 900 and 902 North Anaheim Boulevard in connection with the North Anaheim Boulevard street widening project, R/W 3500-67. 3. 150: Approving the request of Henry Construction Company to substitute Stolo Cabinets, Inc. for G. & M. Wood Products as subcontractor in connection with the park and recreation building improvements at Manzanita Park. 4. 128: Receiving and filing the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 1987. 5. 175/123: Authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute a Fourth Amendment to Agreement with Spiegel & McDiarmid, to provide expanded legal services in connectionwith the wholesale rate proceedings and power supply matters. 6. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the three months ended September 30, 1987. 7. 160: Accepting the low bid of Vance & Associates Roofing Company, in the amount of $39,515, to replace roofing at the Euclid Branch Library, in accordance with Bid No. 4529. 8. 160: Waiving Council Policy No. 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation, in the amount of $39,516.80 for three 8-phase traffic controllers and one police panel. 9, 144; RESOLUTION NO, 87R-493; A RE$0LUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE AKTERIAL HIGHWAY FINANCING PROGRAM CERTAIN HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (1988-1989). 10. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-494: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONDITIONAT3~ TERMINATING RESOLUTION NO. 87R-346 (CORE LABORATORIES). (which declared the necessity of acquiring a certain parcel of property located at 1200 East Pacifico Avenue) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle 1131 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 87R-493 and 87R-494 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTIONS CARRIED. End of Consent Calendar. 149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4889 - OPERATION OF BUSES .IN TRAFFIC LANES: Adding Section 14.32.070 to the Code, relating to operation of buses in traffic lanes. Submitted was report dated November 12, 1987 from the City Engineer, Gary Johnson, concurred in by Police Chief Jimmie Kennedy, that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. In the spring, an ordinance to prevent buses from stopping in travel lanes was submitted to the Council in order to provide a smooth flow of traffic. There was considerable concern from various bus companies with regard to the problem of loading and unloading passengers. During the past several months, he along with other members of his staff and other City staff have been meeting with the committee that was formed to solve the problem. The committee appointed a Task Force who worked diligently to come up with a modified ordinance and a specific plan to provide parking and stopping areas for buses in travel lanes that will later be converted to bus pullout lanes. What started out to be a controversial undertaking in order to provide traffic safety on arterial streets has turned into a very educational experience for both staff and the bus operators. The Grey Line Company was kind enough to loan the use of a bus and driver to drive the various streets in the CR (commercial/recreation) area and explain in physical terms what it means to have to pull off the street in order to serve the public. It is for that reason that several changes have been made to the original proposed ordinance as follows: Certain areas will be designated where buses will be able to stop in travel lanes. They will be posted and marked until such time as bus pullouts can be built so that the buses can actually pull off the travel lanes. This is a long term project. They have been working with the Orange County Transportation District (OCTD) in order to fund some of these pullout areas and will also be working with adjacent property owners to obtain right-of-way. The ordinance before the Council today has the tentative blessings of the bus carriers and bus company representatives'are present to make their presentation and feelings known to the Mr. Stew Allen, Owner/Coordinator, Sightseeing Tours and American Sightseeing, speaking on behalf of the members of the Task Force. The proceedings have turned out to be good for everybody involved. They all came together as a group - everybody in the transportation industry that serves Disneyland. A hard-working committee was formed. It was a real team effort. The Council has a copy of the proposed pick up areas around Disneyland. He feels it is going to work very well. If not, they have all agreed to meet again since they will maintain the Task Force on an ongoing basis to make changes to ensure that it does work well. In the transportation and hospitality industries, the biggest concern is taking care of their guests. Ail of the buses that serve the Disneyland area provide the most important thing they can offer to their guests - convenience. He then announced the members of the Task Force and introduced those who were present in the Chamber audience. He 1132 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. highly commended them as well as City staff for their hard work which made all of their efforts so successful. He learned a great deal about working with City people and also highly commended those staff members involved with the program. He thanked the Council on behalf of the Task Force for caring enough to let them do what they were able to accomplish. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4889 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4889: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 14.32.070 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 RELATING TO OPERATIONS OF BUSES IN TRAFFIC LANES. 179: I~EQUEST FOR REHEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-09 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2943: Request for a Rehearing submitted by Jayendra Shah, ~or Reclassification No. 87-88-09 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2943, for a change in zone from CL to CR, to permit a 12-story, 105-foot high, 200-room hotel complex on approximately 1.68 acres located on the northwest corner of Orangewood Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, with Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, granted by the City Council on October 20, 1987. Mayor Bay. The Council has before it the subject request for rehearing and declaration of merit dated November 19, 1987 with attachments. MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to deny the request for a rehearing. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated that the Council had a full and complete hearing on the project and with extensive public input. Nothing was left out of the hearing. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion of denial. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 105: APPOINTMENT TO THE SENIOR CITIZEN COMMISSION: To appoint a member to the Senior Citizen Commission, for a term to expire June 30, 1988. (Nichols) Councilmam Pickler moved to appoint Mr. Ernest L. Sullivan to the Senior Citizen Commission for the term expiring June 30, 1988. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 179: WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-07 AND VARIANCE NO. 3685: Request from Farano and Kieviet for withdrawal of appeal of Reclassification No. 87-88-07, Variance No. 3685 and Waiver of Council Policy No. 542. Property located at 1500 West Broadway. This matter was continued from the meetings of November 17 and December 1, 1987, to this date. City Clerk Sohl announced that she has not received written consent from Mr. Massoud Manshizadeh relative to withdrawal of their appeal. The recommended motion by the City Attorney is that the Council set the public hearing for Tuesday, December 29, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. unless written notice is received for withdrawal of the appeal by Monday, December 14, 1987 which is the last day Legal Notice can be authorized for publishing in order to hold the public hearing on December 29, 1987. 1133 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. City Attorney, Jack White. This is the item on which the appeal is still pending. To allow the maximum amount of time, the Council needs to set it for a public hearing today but they could instruct the City Clerk that she not set the hearing if she receives a notice that the appeal has been withdrawn by December 14, 1987. Councilman Bay moved that Reclassification No. 87-88-07, Variance No. 3685 and Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 be set for a public hearing on Tuesday, December 29, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. unless the City Clerk receives notice that the appeal by the second party is withdrawn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Mr. Massoud Manshizadeh who was present in the Chamber audience stated that he does have an escrow with the seller. He does have a valid contract and four times in good faith gave an offer to the seller to solve the problem. They told him they were going to negotiate in good faith the last week but they have not done so. Their contract does not say anywhere that if the City Planning Commission has recommended RS-5000 zoning what would happen. That is between the attorneys and the court to decide who will be entitled to the action. His request is for an appeal and he is standing behind it. If something develops between now and next week, between them and the sellers he will notify the City and will w/thdraw the appeal. As of now, he is not withdrawing the appeal. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 105: APPOINTMENT TO PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: To appoint a member to the Public Utilities Board, term ending June 30, 1989 (Skidmore). This matter was continued from the meetings of November 10, November 17 and December 1, 1987, to this date. Councilman Bay moved to continue the appointment to the Public Utilities Board for one week for full Council action. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 106: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BALANCING THE FISCAL YEAR 1987/88 RESOURCE A~OCATION PLAN: Councilman Bay moved to continue the recommendations for balancing the FY 1987/88 Resource Allocation Plan one week for full Council action. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 144: REAPPOINT~ TO ORANGE COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT: Request from Gilbert L. Challet, District Manager, Orange County Vector Control District, for reappointment of Judie De Perry as the City representative on the Board of Trustees, term to expire December 31, 1989. (See letter dated November 20, 1987 from Mr. Ghellet). Councilman Bay moved to appoint Ms. De Perry as the City representative on the Board of Trustees of Orange County Vector Control District, for the term to expire December 31, 1989. 1134 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Before action was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she had offered Ms. De Perry's name for appointment at the outset; however, the Council has never seen a report from Ms. De Perry. They also no longer receive minutes.of the Vector Control meetings. The purpose of the City having a representative on the Board is to be kept informed. She does not have any idea what is taking place and it is important to know. She asked that the City Clerk set up a time with Ms. De Perry that will be convenient for her to be present to give a five minute report to the Council in order to update the Council and then reappointment could be made at that time. Councilman Pickler suggested that they make the reappointment and then send a letter; Councilwoman Kaywood explained that has been done before but no report was forthcoming. Councilwoman Kaywood moved to continue the reappointment of Judie De Perry as the City representative on the Board of Trustees of Orange County Vector Control District, for one week. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Bay stated during the week Ms. De Perry should be informed of Council concerns. 179: REVIEW OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISIONS - NOVEMBER 19, 1987: 1. VARIANCE NO. 3713: Submitted by Esiquido V. Luna and Larry Fox, to construct a 30-foot high (previously 39-foot high), two story single-family residence on property located at 325 South Mohler Drive, with Code waiver of maximum structural height. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, pursuant to Decision No. ZA87-36, denied Variance No. 3713, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision date was November 25, 1987. 2. VARIANCE NO. 3730: Submitted by Jesse J. and Theresa J. Gomez, to retain a garage conversion, a room addition and a detached storage room on property located at 1306 West Trenton Drive, with Code waivers of required type of parking spaces and minimum rear yard setback. Annika gantalahti, Zoning Administrator, pursuant to Decision No. ZA87-37, approved Variance No. 3730, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision date was November 25, 1987. 3. VARIANCE NO. 3717: Submitted by Neville and Violet Libby, to establish a 3-lot subdivision on property located at 1651 West Cerritos Avenue, with Code waiver of required lot frontage. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, pursuant to Decision No. ZA87-35, approved Variance No. 3717, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision date was November 25, 1987. End of Zoning Administrator Items. 1135 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. 179/142: REQUEST TO CONSIDER A NEW OUTDOOR SIGN ORDINANCE: Request was submitted from Floyd L. Farano, Farano and Kievet, on behalf of Regency Outdoor Advertising, Inc., for Council consideration of a new outdoor sign ordinance. Also submitted was letter dated November 12, 1987 from Farano and Kieviet along with attachment entitled, "Anaheim Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures" which constitutes the request of Regency Outdoor Advertising. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved that staff review the request and recommendation and look at the subject of billboards and outdoor advertising again, particularly from the standpoint of revenue increase in the City and possibly reducing inner City billboards. Before action was taken, Councilman Bay stated he did not feel it will hurt to direct staff to take a look at the issue once again and report back to the Council in a week. Councilman Hunter. He feels they need to take another look, especially if it is a revenue producing item while at the same time reducing inner City boards. Councilwoman Kaywood. The Council looked at the issue not only for one year but two years and wasted an entire year on the issue. Even though the ordinance states now that 8 billboards at each intersection are permitted, which was a trade-off for removing about 30 freeway billboards many years ago, that is not so since there are billboards every place they can be. The only reason there are not 8 at each intersection is because there is either a building or some obstruction in the way. Floyd Farano. A proposal has been tendered to the City. There are several changes he would like to relay that Regency Outdoor Advertising would like to suggest - Page 1, Paragraph 4 of the document submitted, where it says 6, that should be reduced to 4. Thus, the total number of billboards to be permitted on one corner is 4. Also on Page 4 it should state that the fee to be paid for each billboard be $2.00 per square-foot of billboard facing. Joel Fick, Planning Director. Staff can be back to the Council quickly if the intent is to submit the previous reports which were generated in the past, the last approximately January, 1986. If a more in-depth examination is desired, they would need approximately 60 days. Mayor Bay. He would prefer the study be more general. His interest is the chance to reduce further billboards internally in the City and to look at the potential for new revenue sources in the City. He does not believe at this time they should spend two or three months getting to the point of a possible new revenue source. It would not hurt to pull out the past information and take a look at what is different from that. He wants to look at other things such as increased fees on billboards across the whole City, particularly those that are over the size allowed without a variance or CUP within the current ordinance. Councilwoman Kaywood agreed that certainly fees should be increased regardless. The fee has been $100 per company, no matter how many billboards they have, which is a giveaway. 1136 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Bay. If the Council can have the previously written report resubmitted in a week, they can consider whether or not they are going to change the ordinance and subsequently start the staff work on that. He would like the issue to be on the agenda next weekend followed up on December 29, 1987. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that the last report by staff was extremely comprehensive and lengthy and there was no point in redoing it. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion of continuance. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES: The titles of the following ordinances were read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance Nos. 4883, 4884 and 4886) Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NOS. 4884 THROUGH 4886: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance Nos. 4884 through 4886 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4884: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 11.04.100 TO CHAPTER 11.04 OF TITLE 11 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO TRESPASSING IN WETLANDS HABITATS. ORDINANCE NO. 4885: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 14.32.320 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE TO PERMIT ISSUANCE OF PARKING CITATIONS BY ADDITIONAL CITY EMPLOYEES. ORDINANCE NO. 4886: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION .010 OF SECTION 2.12.070 OF CHAPTER 2.12 OF TITLE 2 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO APPEALS OF HEARING OFFICERS DETERMINATIONS IN TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX PROCEEDINGS. Roll Call Vote: AYES NOES AB§ENT COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay None Ehrle The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 4884 through 4886, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 4888: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4888 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4888: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIMMUNICIPAL CODE R~L~TING TO ZONING. (Amending Title 18, Reclass. 86-87-18, RM-1200(O), south side of Frontera Street, east of Park Vista) 1137 Ctt~ Hall, AnAheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4888 duly passed 'and adopted. 179/142: ORDINANCE NOS. 4880 AND 4887 - PERTAINING TO RECYCLING FACILITIES: Amending Sections 18.44.030 and.050 and 18.45.030 and .050 and 18.46.030 and .050 and 18.61.030 by adding thereto subsections pertaining to recycling facilities and adding Chapter 18.95 to the Code, relating to recycling facilities. Mr. Ronald Rector, 23003 Glendale Boulevard, Los Angeles. He is concerned with a couple of items in the proposed ordinance. The City will not allow two types of recycling or collection facilities in one convenient zone that is designated by the State. They currently have two types of facilities in one zone - one is the reverse vending machine that will take aluminum cans only. The other is a trailer type location that takes the rest of the container types. He understands the City will only allow either the reverse vending machine or the trailer, but not both. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. Staff has been working with Reynolds Aluminum for some time since they first found out about Assembly Bill 2020. They have primarily been working with the National Office, Mr. Hawks in ~orth Carolina. The first he heard of the problem is today. The ordinance as proposed would not restrict having two types of facilities on the property if there is adequate parking. The particular problem he is talking about is JAX Market at Sycamore and East Street. They already have a reverse vending machine and that takes up required parking. They also have a mobile trailer there. They cannot keep adding different facilities without adequate parking. The Code provides, if they submit a traffic study and it is approved, staff could administratively permit that. At that location however, there is going to be a problem. Mayor Bay. He understands, then, they are not prohibited from having two, but limited by whether or not there is going to be enough parking space in a parking lot. The limiting £aetor is the parking. Ronald Rector. He did not understand that but that they either could have one or the other. He continued another item, Page 4 Item D under reverse vending machines - "...shall be located within 30 feet of the entrance to the commercial structure and shall not obstruct pedestrian or vehiclular circulation." Reynolds operates 39 of the machines. Their philosophy is to move them as far away from the entrance as possible but not next to the sidewalk or street where it will obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic. He is proposing to extend that more than 30 feet.' In some locations they do not want to have recyclers and people that shop in the store in the same area. It is better to keep the recyclers further away from the entrance of the stores than to mix them with the customers going in and out of the stores. 1138 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Bay. He asked if there was some appeal system in the ordinance when the 30-foot is found not to be practical in a specific location. City Attorney White. The provisions would be added to the Zoning Code, and as such, locational criteria would be subject to the variance process Just as any other regulations in the Zoning Code would be if there were circumstances to Justify the findings required for the variance. Mayor Bay. Today it is time to vote on the ordinance. If they start changing it there would have to be an amended first reading which will cause a delay. He will try to get answers for Mr. Rector but does not consider the inquiry timely. Ronald Rector. With the new recycling law they have been very busy and are dealing with 25 other cities. He asked if there was any way when they applied for the Administrative Use Permit they can slightly vary from the standard set forth. Councilman Pickler. The City Attorney explained that they can apply for a variance; Mr. Rector stated that would satisfy his client. Mayor Bay. The intent of the new law in Sacramento is what they are interested in and implementing it with the least amount of trouble and cost. Joel Fick, Planning Director. He explained for the Mayor that if operationally Planning staff finds it makes sense to change the 30 feet to some other distance, they will be back to the Council. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES: The titles of the following ordinances were read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance Nos 4880 and 4887) Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. CARRIED. MOTION Councilman Bay offered Ordinance Nos. 4880 and 4887 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4880: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY 0FANAHEIMAMENDING SECTIONS 18.44.030, 18.44.050, 18.45.030, 18.45.050, 18.46.030, 18.46.050, 18.61.030, 18.§1.050, 18.63.030, 18.63.050 OF CHAPTERS 18.44, 18.45, 18.46, 18.61, 18.63 F~ESPECTIVELY, OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHELMMUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SUBSECTIONS PERTAINING TO RECYCLING FACILITIES. ORDINANCE NO. 4887: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING CHAPTER 18.95 TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO RECYCLING FACILITIES. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle 1139 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 4880 and 4887 duly passed and adopted. RECESS: ~ general consent, the Council recessed for twenty minutes. (3:11 p.m.) AFTEKRECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, with the exception of Councilman Ehrle. (3:31 p.m.) 179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3709: APPLICANT: Paul D. & Diane Williamson 7283 Columbus Drive Anaheim, Ca. 92806 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To construct a two story, 35-foot high, single-family residence located on the northeasterly corner of Copa de Oro Drive and Nohl Ranch Road (Lot 32 in Tract No. 12576). ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION: The Zoning Administrator granted Variance No. 3709, in part, (ZAB7-28); determined to be categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR (categorically exempt, Class 5). HEARING SET ON: A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested by Councilman Ehrle. This matter was continued from the meeting of December 1, 1987, to this date. Extensive discussion and input took place at the December 1, 1987 meeting. A vote on the variance resulted in a two-two tie which necessitated continuing the matter for full Council action. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin November 20, 1987. Posting of property November 20, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 20, 1987. STAFF REPORT: See the decision of the Zoning Administrator (ZA87-28) dated October 13, 1987. Mayor Bay. He explained on the advice of the City Attorney, the public hearing that was closed last week had to ~tay clo~ed on th~ basis that the Council Chamber was full of people who were present at that time and involved in the hearing. All of the evidence had been taken. If the hearing were to be reopened today, there will be technical problems because of the people who were present last week but not today. He strongly recommends that the public hearing not be reopened. The Council has heard the evidence, as well as viewing the balloon test in the slide presentation that was given, which also involved the subject lot, lot 32. It is now time for the Council to make a decision although a full Council is not present again today. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: read by the City Clerk. The title of the following resolution was 1140 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 87R-495 for adoption, granting Variance No. 3709 for a 35-foot height. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-495: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3709. Before a vote was taken, Mayor Bay stated it is his concern that the entire development, not just lot 32, be looked at closely by staff and Council. He does not want to see lot-by-lot piece mealed into the Council for individual hearings on any height variances. He reiterated, it is time for staff, the developer and the Council to look at the entire development and to work on the possibility of handling the entire development on all the lot pads together on any height variance. That is his intent and further approval or denial of this particular variance will have no bearing whatsoever on the decision of any or all of the lots from the standpoint of precedence. He then confirmed that the requested height variance was for 35 feet from the 25 feet permitted in the scenic corridor. A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution: Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pickler and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-495 duly passed and adopted. Mayor Bay. The pads on the east end of the development are not going to get a consideration for height variance from him that have that much effect on views of the people on the east. He wants to look at that information done on the study plus any other information. He asked the City Attorney if there was any technical problem involved relative to handling the whole development together. City Attorney White. Assuming that the developer applies for a variance for all of the lots that he wishes considered or in the development, there would not be a problem processing them all at one time and handling them in one hearing and acting on them all at one time. Legally, the staff cannot compel the developer to file an application for a variance. There may be other avenues open to the City such as an overlay zone that would accomplish the same purpose without the need for a bulk variance application. He believes there are ways to have them all done at one time. 1141 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. 134/179: Mayor Bay. It is up to the developer as to what he wishes to do but he is voicing his opinion that he does not want to see each and every one on a separate hearing. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 233, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-22 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2956: APPLICANT: Lincoln Limited and Lincoln Property Ltd., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., Suite #240 Irvine, Ca. 92715 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan proposing a redesignation from the current commercial professional designation to the General Commercial designation, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to CL, to permit an automobile service and commercial center in conjunction with an existing office structure, on approximately 3.6 acres on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Street (1780-1786 West Lincoln Avenue), with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum number of parking spaces, (b) maximum building height, (c) minimum structural setback. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-226 approved General Plan Amendment No. 233, Exhibit A; Resolution No. PC87-227 granted Reclassification No. 87-88-22, and Resolution No. PC87-228 granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2956. Approved EIR - Negative Declaration. PUBLIC NOTICEREQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin November 26, 1987. Posting of property November 25, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 25, 1987. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 9, 1987. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3720: APPLICANT: Lincoln Limited and Lincoln Property Ltd., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., Suite #240 Irvine, Ca. 92715 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To permit a freestanding sign on approximately 3.6 acres on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Street (1780-1786 West Lincoln Avenue), with the following Code waivers: (a) Maximum area of freestanding sign, (b) permitted location of freestanding signs. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-230 granted Variance No. 3720; determined to be categorically exempted (Class 11) from the requirements to prepare an EIR. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin November 26, 1987. Posting of property November 25, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 25, 1987. 1142 9 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 9, 1987. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VAR/ANCE NO. 3721: APPLICANT: Lincoln Limited and Lincoln Property Ltd., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., Suite #240 Irvine, Ca. 92715 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To establish an 8 lot commercial subdivision on approximately 3.6 acres on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, approximately 1005 feet west of the centerline of Euclid Street (1780-1786 West Lincoln Avenue), with Code waiver of required lot frontage. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-229 granted Variance No. 3721; approved EIR - Negative Declaration. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin November 26, 1987. Posting of property November 25, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 25, 1987. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 9, 1987. It was determined by the Council that since all the foregoing items (General Plan Amendment No. 233, Reclassification No. 87-88-22, Conditional Use Permit No. 2956 and Variance Nos. 3720 and 2721) are inter-related that they should all be considered under one public hearing. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Dale Falasco, General Partner, Lincoln Limited and Lincoln Property Ltd., 19742 MacArthur Blvd., Suite #240, Irvine, Ca. 92715. Their concept is to develop a plan that will allow them to redevelop the existing 34,000 square feet, 20 plus year old office project at 1780 through 1786 West Lincoln Avenue which they have owned for almost 6 years. They have found with the development in downtown and around the Stadium with prime office space that the area of the proposed development will not support the kind of occupancy needed to maintain the property. The school to the rear which has been on the property for almost 20 years, Control Data Institute, would like to remain on the property. It is an "L" shaped parcel.. The "dog leg" portion is the portion Control Data will continue to occupy. The rear portion that abuts the few residential homes will remain the same as it has been for the last one-quarter century. On the front portion, the plan is to have a service-commercial type project that would be a mix of various types indicated in the CL (commercial-limited) zone. There is not much that would be pure retail because the property is so narrow. It is not a retail shopping center type site because they do not have the exposure. The uses within CL that they would be looking for 1143 City Hall, An~h,im, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. would be those that do not require a great deal of exposure although they will have signage on Lincoln to direct people back to the services. One of the uses proposed is auto service, which services would be compatible with the existing office uses. They are looking at low intensity auto service uses. There is a list in the staff report submitted to the Planning Commission - uses that can all be done inside the individual units. The setback variance is necessary again because of the narrow nature of the property and in order to get reasonable parking and have space for the buildings. The existing access would be improved dramatically with their proposal. They will keep the westerly-most access, and the easterly-most would be a joint access with the Kettle Restaurant which the City Traffic Engineer has designed to City standards which will improve the Kettle's access. A traffic study was done by Weston Pringle showing there is more than enough parking on the side for their contemplated uses. They are going to be removing 21,000 square feet of existing office space and only putting in 31,000 square feet of new space. There should be more than sufficient parking on the site. Relative to the signs, it is intended to have a smaller sign than what would be allowed under the current sign Code. They are propoging to have a sign a little under 200 square feet for the freestanding and the two monument signs, one each for the front pads. The reason for the location change, it would better serve the public than if it were located close to the easterly entrance. Mr. Falasco then explained for Councilwoman Kaywood that in order to provide better access, the existing front building would need to be removed in its entirety. The second courtyard back would be removed as well and redeveloped. The third courtyard would remain the same but it would be completely refurbished. Control Data wants to have their facility updated and the development plan is to completely renovate the interior. There have been no complaints from the single-family homes to the rear. Councilwoman Kaywood. She was surprised to see the proposal for automotive uses; Mr. Falasco explained it may ultimately be.that there will only be a few automotive uses or none at all. Their market studies have indicated those uses would serve a definite demand in that area. Councilman Pickler. He finds that the area is generally occupied. Although the developer has indicated there will be plenty of parking, he notes that 758 spaces are required and 260 spaces are proposed. 1144 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. The number of required spaces are large because of the school since the school has a separate requirement in the Zoning Code. However, the nature of the school is known and their needs are also well known and well documented. The school is using very few of their parking spaces required by Code. This is not a generic school but a known entity. Councilman Pickler. The proposed automotive uses are of concern to him and he does not feel they belong in the development. It is a bad spot since there is already heavy traffic and congestion on Lincoln and Euclid. The little buildings proposed are going to make it worse and will not help but hinder the area. Dale Falasco. The individual buildings are not meant to be only auto service. Their design is single user buildings. One of the areas he did not cover is the parcel map. The reason they filed for a parcel map was done for two reasons. The largest market for what they want to do there is owner/user buildings for perhaps carpet wholesalers or a contract or engineering company that wants to have its own facility in the 3,000 to 5,000 square-foot range. They asked the architect to develop as flexible A plan as possible to allow for accommodation of those uses. Further, the reason it is presently crowded on the site is that the Control Data Institute now parks in the front of the property and do not use the 100 plus parking spaces in the rear to which they will have exclusive use. The maximum the school has at any one point in time, including employees, is approximately 95 and they have shown 100 spaces on their plan. Councilman Pickler. He wanted to know what could go into the development under general-commercial zoning. Ammika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. If straight CL zoning, any retail activity is permitted. However, any automotive use where any installation is done requires a CUP. Occasionally there are difficulties with some uses with things that go inside cars where they want installation. Basically, automotive repair and installation always requires a CUP. If under general-commercial, that is the General Plan Amendment which designates the land use. The zoning is the critical part from the standpoint of needing a CUP or not. CL zoning does not allow it by right but C-H (heavy commercial) will but that is not being proposed. They would have to come in for a CUP in order to have automotive uses and the request for a CUP for such uses follows the General Plan Amendment and is part of the public hearing today. 1145 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Bay asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition; no one wished to speak. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. Mayor Bay. He asked staff if, with the parking study and the technical requirement for 758 spaces vs. the proposed 260, the Traffic Engineer was in agreement with the study which indicates there is sufficient parking. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. He agrees with the findings of the study. That includes any type of retail use. The retail uses are a very small variance. The greatest variance on parking is the school. The rest of the property is practically to Code. Councilwoman Kaywood. It is difficult to change a tire without creating noise. If the CUP is approved, that type of work would have to be done indoors with the doors closed. Further, with automotive uses, the area becomes dirty with oil and she can see the fastest way of running down a new center is by allowing automotive uses. Mayor Bay. This proposal went through extensive hearings in the Planning Commission. He does not hear any concerns from the staff. The parking study seems to be in agreement. No one is present from the single-family area bordering the property with complaints relative to the proposal. He cannot see any problem with any of the requests. Councilman Pickler. He is opposed to all of the requests. He does not think this is a viable location for automotive services in a commercial cemter. What is there now is what it should be. Parking could also be a problem and the signage proposed requires a variance. Mayor Bay. The uses are limited by the list on Page 6 and 7 of the November 9, 1987 staff report to the Planning Commission (Item No. 4). It is all light automotive uses that exist in a number of places all over their city right now, some bordering residential. Annika Santalahti. If Council does approve the proposal, on the Planning Commission Resolution for the CUP, although it does tie the project to Exhibits 1 through 4, that list of uses was not put into the resolution. Therefore, the Council may wish to include that list as an additional condition (Page 6 and 7 of staff report to 1146 City. Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. the Planning Commission dated November 9, 1987 (Item No. 13) which continues to Page 7 of that report). It would make it easier for staff and future tenants seeking a business license to have the uses listed. Mayor Bay. He agrees. He was just assuming under the developmental proposal, as listed under Item No. 13 (Page 6 and 7 of the staff report), those were the automotive uses. He asked the developer if he would have a problem specifying those proposed automobile services as listed in the staff report. Dale Falasco. He answered no and that would be agreeable. Mayor Bay. He asked that staff make certain that list is included. And that way staff will have better control with all of Item No. 13 listed in the resolution, so that there will be no body shops and heavy trucks, etc. Leonard McGhee, Associate Planner. The C-G designation is not used under the General Plan. Commercial General is the official overall designation for the General Plan and the letters CL'or CG are used for zoning. No abbreviations are used for General Plans. Annika Santalahti. She confirmed that the condition as proposed, relative to the list of uses, will be inserted in the CUP and that under the Reclassification the zoning will be CL. Therefore, on Conditional Use Permit No. 2956 a new Condition No. 22 will be added which will have two parts, the first being that the automotive service uses shall be limited to the following which are under Item No. 13, 1 through 12 and the second part - the following automotive related uses shall be prohibited and that is the paragraph following the listing starting with body shops, onsite service of heavy trucks, etc. Councilwoman Kaywood. As much as the motoring public needs automotive services, she does not believe those services are needed at this location. If the automotive services were to go in the front of the development, it would limit the uses in the rest of the new building and it might result in something far less desirable for the developer and the City. The following actions were then taken by the Council: General Plan Amendment No. 233, Reclassification No. 87-88-22 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2956: 1147 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Bay, 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. Councilman Pickler voted no. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 87R-496 and 497) Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. CARRIED. MOTION Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-496 for adoption, approving General Plan Amendment No. 233, Exhibit A, as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-496: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 233. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-496 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-497 for adoption, approving Reclassification No. 87-88-22 (CL Zoning). Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-497: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-22. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-497 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Bay offered a resolution, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2956, imcluding the added condition as stated by staff which will incorporate the uses as listed under Item No. 13, Page 6 of the November 9, 1987 staff report, which included the automotive uses. The resolution failed to carry by the following vote: Roll Call Vote: 1148 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter and Bay NOES: CO~CIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to continue the action on Conditional Use Permit No. 2956 for one week for full Council action, due to the tie vote. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman' Pickler voted no. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Since the public hearing portion of the hearing was closed, the only action to be taken by the Council at the meeting of December 15, 1987 will be a vote on the resolution for the requested Conditional Use Permit which will be placed under the Unfinished Business portion of next week's Council agenda. Variance No. 3720: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Hunter, the City Council ratified the determination of the Planning Director that the proposed project falls within the definition of categorical exemptions, (Class 11) as defined in the State EIR guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to prepare an EIR. Councilman Pickler voted no. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-498 for adoption, granting Variance No. 3720, subject to the conditions of the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-498: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GF~ING V~R_IANCE NO. 3720. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-498 duly passed and adopted. Variance No. 3721: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Bay, 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 1149 Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 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. Councilman Pickier voted no. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-499 for adoption, granting Variance No. 3721, subject to the City Planning Commission conditions. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-499: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THECITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 372i. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-499 duly passed and adopted. li4: FIRST MEETING - ANAHEIM ECONOMIC' DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Mayor Bay reported on the first meeting of the newly formed Anaheim Economic Development Board (AEDB) which was held Thursday, December 3, 1987 attended by himself and Mayor Pro Tem Pickler as liaisons to that Board. He noted for the City Clerk that the permanent liaison to the Board will be Mayor Pro Tem Pickler and Councilman Bill Ehrle. He sat in for Councilman Ehrle who was unable to attend the meeting. It was a very positive and productive start to what he feels will be an outstanding new Board to advise the Council on economic development. He was pleased when the Board decided to meet every two weeks starting in January. He is looking for great ideas to come out of that nine-member group. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Ron Bengochea, 1751 So. Nutwood, Anaheim. He spoke on the same issue at the last meeting relative to the proposal by Anaheim H.0.M.E. that there be an admissions tax in the City of Anaheim (see minutes of December 1, 1987). He is again voicing his opposition to such a tax. Councilman Pickler. He read an article in Orange County Business Week dated December 7, 1987 stating that Anaheim was pondering such a tax and that the City Council is expected to consider a proposed 10% admission tax. He does not believe it is the intent of any Council Member to do so. Councilman Hunter. After Mr. Kintz spoke and presented the proposal last week, the next morning he (Hunter) sent telegrams to the Angels, Gene Autry, 1150 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 8, 1987, 1:30 P.M. the Rams, Georgia Frontiere, Mike Bullis, Disneyland Hotel, and Jack Lindquist, Disneyland stating that he is unequivocally opposed to any entertainment tax in the City. He also believes that is the way the Council feels on the issue. He feels that Mr. Kintz and H.O.M.E. are completely out of line on this issue. Mayo~ Bay. Just because a citizen comes and proposes something to the Council, he is hoping that the media does not come to the conclusion that those are recommendations coming from anyone on the Council. After the proposal was presented last week, there was deadly silence b~ the Council. He is disturbed that the media tends to pick up on that. The microphone is open to anybody who lives in the City who wants to address the Council and many unusual items and issues have been brought up. When there is no response from the Council, it does not mean approval or denial. He would appreciate it in the future that the media not assume things. He will say unequivocaily that he does not favor any admissions or entertainment tax in the City and never has any more than he favors any kind of taxes added in the City. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. Councilman Ehrle was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (4:37 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 1151