2014/05/06ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF MAY 6, 2014
The regular meeting of May 6, 2014 was called to order at 3:00 P.M. and adjourned to 4:30 P.M.
for lack of a quorum. The regular adjourned meeting of May 6, 2014 was called to order by
Mayor Tait at 4:35 P.M. in the chambers of Anaheim City Hall located at 200 S. Anaheim
Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda and related materials were duly posted on May 2, 2014
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members: Jordan Brandman, Gail Eastman, Lucille
Kring and Kris Murray.
STAFF PRESENT: Interim City Manager Paul Emery, City Attorney Michael Houston and City
Clerk Linda Andal.
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
Cecil Jordan Corcoran, Outreach Homeless Ministries, offered comments of a personal nature
unrelated to the closed session items.
William Fitzgerald objected to the land appraisal for Angel Stadium stating it should have been
appraised for use as a third theme park which would value it in the billions rather than millions.
E.T. Snell offered comments unrelated to the closed session items.
At 4:46 P.M., Council recessed to closed session for consideration of the following items:
CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code)
Name of Case: Rafael Gonzalez et al. v. City of Anaheim et al., 9th Cir. Case No. 11-
56360
2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Subdivision 54956.8 of the California Government Code)
Property: 2000 East Gene Autry Way, Anaheim, CA (Angels Stadium of Anaheim)
Agency Negotiator: Tom Morton
Negotiating Parties: Angels Baseball, LP, Pacific Coast Investors, LLC, City of
Anaheim
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment Regarding Lease
At 5:36 P.M., Council returned from closed session.
INVOCATION: Rabbi Joel Berman, Temple Beth Emet
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Jordan Brandman
PRESENTATIONS: Anaheim Fire Department Accreditation Plaque
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 2 of 21
Fire Chief Randy Bruegman explained the first priority of the Department's strategic plan
document approved by Council in 2013 was to become an accredited agency and that goal had
now been reached with Anaheim Fire and Rescue becoming one of 196 departments out of
31,000 in the United States to reach that objective. Specific to Anaheim, this process focused
on quality improvement requiring the department to reaccredit every five years using over 250
performance indicators looking at process and service delivery. He thanked Council for their
vision and support and Fire Marshall Jeft Lutz and Battalion Chief Allen Long for the work they
put into this effort.
Recognizing Brian Beger, President, AMEA
Brian Beger thanked Council for their recognition, remarking that after ten years as an advocate
for Anaheim's employees, he was now taking a different role. Mr. Beger then introduced the
new AMEA president, Mike Holmes and board members.
Recognizing the Anaheim High School 2014 Boys CIF Division III Southern
Section Champions
Coach Joe Chavez remarked becoming Section Champions was a memorable event for the
school as the last time Anaheim High School participated in CIF championships was in 1964,
and reaching this highpoint was all due to the hard work of the 33 soccer players.
Proclaiming May 3 - 11, 2014, as National Travel and Tourism Week
Jay Burress, President, Visitors & Convention Bureau, stated 2013 showed record numbers for
visitation and spending in the Anaheim destination, adding it was time to celebrate the people
that made up Anaheim's industry, the faces of tourism. His department developed a campaign,
a series of videos available on YouTube, and a series of posters recognizing the front line faces
of those who welcomed visitors to Anaheim.
Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later date):
Proclaiming May 2014, as Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage
Month
Mary Ann Foo, Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance, remarked that
Orange County was the third largest Asian Pacific Islander population in the nation,
representing 21 percent of the county (about 600,000 people) with Anaheim having the third
largest population in the county. Ashley Cheri spoke to the Orange County Asian and Pacific
Islander Community Alliance, remarked it helped over 150 low income under - served students in
Anaheim to graduate from high school and go onto college and over $200,000 in scholarships
had been granted.
Proclaiming May 2014, as National Community Action Month
Doug Vogel, Community Action Partnership of Orange County, announced that 50 years ago
the war on poverty led to the passage of economic opportunity act which created the Job Corps,
Adult Basic Education, Vista and Community Action. There were now 1100 community action
agencies in the country focused on local determination and local control, pooling resources in
their joint efforts to help address poverty.
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 3 of 21
Proclaiming May 2014, as Jewish American Heritage Month
Rabbi Joel Berman accepted this proclamation on behalf of all Anaheim's synagogues.
Proclaiming May 2014, as Lupus Awareness Month
Tara Delgado, Lupus Health and Welfare Foundation, explained the characteristics of this
disease, remarking that more than 16,000 new cases were reported annually across the country
and explaining how the foundation assisted those involved.
Proclaiming May 6, 2014, as Crossing Guard Appreciation Day
An elementary school student remarked that many were here this evening to recognize crossing
guards including Anaheim City School District superintendent, Dr. Linda Wagner, teachers,
parents and other students.
Proclaiming May 11 - 16, 2014, as Women's Lung Health Week
Amanda Knitter, American Lung Association, appreciated Council bringing awareness of lung
diseases to the community indicating further information was available on their website.
Proclaiming May 6 - 12, 2014, as National Nurses Week
Dr. David House, West Coast University, appreciated the city's recognition of Nurses Week and
spoke of the successful nursing program at the University,
Proclaiming May 4 - 10, 2014, as Public Service Recognition Week
Chris Chase, Human Resources Department, accepted the proclamation on behalf of the
hundreds of city employees who come to work every day and quietly go about their jobs to keep
Anaheim a special place to live and work.
Proclaiming May 2014, as Meals on Wheels Volunteer Recognition Month
Holly Hagler, SeniorServ, thanked the city for recognizing the volunteers who helped out with
the Meals on Wheels program and Senior Center Lunch program. She noted volunteers gave
over 5,500 hours in the past year and served 90,000 meals, all meaningful programs for seniors
in the county. Judy Huitt, Chair of the Anaheim Senior Subcommittee, remarked she delivered
meals on wheels for 6 years and the rewards she personally gained from volunteering.
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items): The City Clerk explained the public comment
process and delivered a brief decorum statement. She added Public Hearing Item No. 11 was
continued from the prior meeting, however, public comments on that matter were closed and
should any member of the public wish to speak to that item, they could do so at this time.
Cecil Jordan Corcoran read a passage from the bible.
Jill Kanzler, SOAR, reported the inaugural Anaheim /Orange County volunteer fair had been a
great success and celebrated the spirit of volunteerism throughout the community with a
partnership of more than 30 local nonprofits participating in addition to many local, regional and
state representatives. She noted that nearly 1,000 volunteer hours were pledged and with the
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 4 of 21
help of Disney volunteers more than 1,000 care packages were assembled and sent off to the
U.S. Military Units in Bagram, Afghanistan. She thanked everyone for their assistance with this
event.
William Fitzgerald, Anaheim HOME, offered his personal opinions of the Disney Corporation
and some members of the City Council.
Daniel DeMeyere thanked staff and Council for cleaning up the railroad track property adjacent
to the Brookhurst Widening project and brought other issues regarding tagging, conflicts with
the Islamic center, stalled construction, and associated problems to their attention.
Kurt Brunner, Crestwood Lane resident, appreciated staff's assistance with Brookhurst Street
widening construction impacts, asking that the contractor expedite efforts and finish the project.
In addition, he added the religious center near his home did not have adequate parking for their
needs, asking the police department to patrol regularly.
John Dunton thanked Council Member Brandman for attending St. Justin's school PTA meeting,
remarking there was a fiesta scheduled for May 18 with 1000 attendees anticipated and
encouraged the Council to attend. He also praised Deputy Police Chief Julian Harvey's
community participation.
Mark Daniels, resident, recommended ways in which the community could come together and
work as a collective group to remove trash, graffiti, and identifying broken sidewalks, curbs and
signs that needed to be replaced and to in general, improve the looks of this city.
Robert Brunette stated there were three short -term rental properties on his street, one next to
him, one behind him and one across the street. The homes had been enlarged to
accommodate more people with pools added and one with a game room in the garage which
left street parking only for those tenants. He felt this was not an appropriate use in residential
neighborhoods and that some neighborhoods, such as Pepperwood Village, had gone to court
and had vacation rentals banned. He emphasized parking was a problem along with noise and
disturbance from the numbers of people using those properties.
Julie Brunette opposed short term rentals, emphasizing the negative parking and noise impacts.
She appreciated the efforts of code enforcement but warned she would picket should any more
vacation rentals appear on her street.
Rosa Rowan, Californians for Affordable and Reliable Energy, explained this was a nonprofit
agency headed by California Business Round Table and many chambers of commerce and
energy users. She extended an invitation for Anaheim to join the coalition which addressed
affordable and adequate supplies of energy.
Ron Bengochea encouraged Council to delay going forward with the short -term rental ordinance
and to use a permit system instead which would address parking issues and other impacts to
neighborhoods. In general he felt the upgrading associated with short -term rental homes as
opposed to vacant properties and no accountability was good for neighborhoods.
Marc Trent objected to the stance taken by Arte Moreno suggesting the Council look elsewhere
for a major league baseball team such as the Oakland A's or the Tampa Rays. For the stadium
area, he recommended a central park which combined businesses and residential development.
James Robert Reade read a posting from his website www.manueldiaz.com
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 5 of 21
Nancy West, resident, submitted a document and stated she was asking for a written
explanation as to why her daughter's situation with a stalker and a known felon did not warrant
action by law enforcement. Mayor Tait remarked the Council did not have prosecutorial
discretion and could only ask that the police department again look into her complaints.
Ryan McIntosh thanked the Anaheim Rental Alliance for their commitment to short -term rentals
in the city, remarking their mission was to offer unique and affordable accommodations to
families visiting Anaheim and to strike the right balance between the rights of the owners and
respect for neighbors and long -term residents.
Frances Noteboom, Rental Alliance, asked Council to approve the ordinance governing short -
term rentals. She thanked staff for their efforts and believed the ordinance represented a
workable solution that respected residents, visitors and short -term rental owners, and the city as
a whole. She added the Rental Alliance hoped more owners and managers would join the
organization and use their best practices to ensure positive and healthy neighborhoods and
additionally, encouraged staff to look at this ordinance in six to eight months and provide an
update on its efficacy.
Valerie Van de Zilver, Valerie's Vacation Rentals, remarked that the improvements owners
made to their properties to attract vacationers not only improved the neighborhood but had a
positive impact on property sales in the 92802 area.
David Zenger appreciated the Angel stadium appraisal and for making it available to the public
adding that Council should also understand the costs involved in renovating the stadium via a
professional engineering report to explain the condition of that asset along with an analysis of
what problems the stadium might have as a result of deferred maintenance by the Angel
organization, how much it would cost to renovate it, who was responsible for that cost, and what
the real economic benefit was in having a major league baseball team in Anaheim.
Judy Huitt remarked she was a member of the Park and Recreation meetings because she was
originally on the Senior Commission which disbanded and was now chair of the Senior
Subcommittee who served at the pleasure of the Parks and Recreation Commission. For
personal reasons she could no longer remain on the Park and Recreation Commission and
because of the way the Senior Subcommittee was established, she was told she could no
longer serve on that subcommittee. As a long -term volunteer for Anaheim she inquired if there
was a way she could continue offering her services to the Senior Subcommittee. Mayor Tait
requested the city manager provide a report to council on this matter.
Carla Cortez, addressing the Public Safety Board, in answer to remarks she had made earlier
for the need for psychological, physical and emotional training for police officers, stated Chief
Quezada had explained the new training that had begun in the police department, thanking him
for the way officers now responded to the homeless population in the city. She respectfully
challenged the department to consider how they dealt with the young, male Latino population in
Anaheim as well.
Victoria de Gomez thanked Council for recognizing its many volunteers and pointed out that
parents who lost their sons as a result of police- officer involved shootings were deserving of
recognition as well.
Cynthia Ward spoke to the Angel Baseball negotiations, objecting to comments she stated were
made by Mayor Pro Tern Murray in the media.
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 6 of 21
Mayor Pro Tern Murray, as a point of personal privilege, responded that each council member
had commented on various city programs including Angel Baseball negotiations, and she had
not addressed Mayor Tait's position, but had spoken only of her personal viewpoint.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: None
CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Tait indicated he would abstain on Item No. 7 citing a potential
conflict of interest as his firm worked for one of the parties involved. Council Member Eastman
then moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the consent
calendar as presented, in accordance with reports, certifications and recommendations
furnished each city council member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council
Member Kring. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman,
Eastman, Kring and Murray.) Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
8105 1. Receive and file minutes of the Sister City Commission meetings of February 24, 2014
and March 24, 2014, Public Utilities Board meetings of January 29, 2014 and March 26,
2014, and Cultural and Heritage Commission meeting of March 20, 2014.
AGR -8129 2. Award and approve Master Agreements, in substantial form, with Marina Landscape,
AGR -8130 Inc., Oakwest Services, Inc., Valley Crest Landscape Maintenance, and The Brickman
AGR -8131 Group LTD, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 per work order package, for
landscape and irrigation support throughout the City and Anaheim Resort area, and
authorize the Public Works Director to execute, administer, and take the necessary
actions to implement said Master Agreements.
AGR - 8122.1 3. Approve the Subdivision Agreement with Nara Investments, LLC for Parcel Map 2013-
150 located at 1411 South Manchester Avenue (formerly 1441 S. Manchester) to
establish a 2- parcel subdivision for the construction of a new hotel and the continued
use of an existing one.
4. Approve the Subdivision Agreement with Amanik, LLC for Parcel Map 2006 -229 located
AGR 8133 at 7260 E. Canyon Rim Road to establish and build a 3 -lot single family detached
residential subdivision.
5. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Barrett Sports Group, LLC, increasing
AGR 7891.1 the maximum compensation from $75,000 to $150,000 and extending the term of the
agreement through June 30, 2015.
D116 6. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -066 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the destruction of certain City records more than
two years old (Audit Division).
P124 7. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -067 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
certain interests in Real Properties (City Deed Nos. 11597, 11605, 11606, 11634,
11641, 11646, 11680, 11681, and 11682).
Mayor Tait abstained on this item: Motion by Council Member Kring to approve, seconded by
Council Member Eastman. Roll Call Vote: AYE — 4: (Mayor Pro Tem Murray and Council
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 7 of 21
Members: Brandman, Eastman and Kring.) Noes — 0. Abstention — 1: Mayor Tait. Motion
Carried.
8. RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -068 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM modifying Rule Nos. 2 and 22 for the sale and distribution of
D182 electricity as adopted by Resolution No. 71 R -478 and most recently amended by
Resolution No. 2014 -001 and approving a Standard Generation Interconnection
Agreement and authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager or designee to execute
these agreements and related documents and take such actions to implement and
administer them.
Determine that the modifications to Rule Nos. 2 and 22 contained in the Electric Rates,
Rules and Regulations and approval of the attached Standard Generation
Interconnection Agreement (Interconnection Agreement) are exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California
Administrative Code.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
M142 9. ORDINANCE NO. 6299 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM adding Chapter 4.05 to Title 4 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
relating to Short -Term Rental Permits.
Greg Garcia, Deputy City Manager, reported this item would approve an ordinance creating a
short -term rental regulatory program. Specifically this program also referred to as vacation
rentals, addressed residential properties that allowed transient occupancy for a short period of
time ranging from a minimum of three days up to 30 days with any rental period more than 30
days to be considered a conventional rental business and not subject to these regulations. He
explained that short -term rentals were frequently booked on line with a number of internet sites
that offered a large data base of available properties, sites such as VRBO.com,
Homeaway.com, and booking.com.
Mr. Garcia indicated a workshop on this topic had been held last year detailing the results of
staff's research along with initial recommendations for regulating short -term rental housing and
since that time, staff continued to refine the approach to regulate this growing trend in the
tourism industry. With no regulations currently in place, staff as well as the community had
seen an influx of these short -term rentals in neighborhoods, and had raised concerns about
noise, occupancy numbers, parking and trash. He added while the city had received inquiries
and complaints, staff felt the majority of these businesses operated without incident or disruption
to residents. He further added Anaheim was one of the few tourist destinations that did not have
rules to address short -term rentals and by setting up this program, hoped to achieve a number
of goals and to identify and track short -term rental properties in the city and ensure
neighborhoods were protected. The program would help keep tenants and property owners
accountable for any negative impacts, allow for better tracking of complaints, and to deal with
specific complaints appropriately.
Mr. Garcia indicated staff had worked in conjunction with the Anaheim Rental Alliance, a
consortium of short -term rental owners in the community that supported efforts to responsibly
monitor and develop this industry. Since the workshop, staff changes were made in the
proposed ordinance to allow short -term rentals to fit seamlessly into the existing regulatory
structure and to adjust on -going community concerns related to quality of life issues. He
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 8 of 21
remarked staff was recommending approval of this ordinance that would create a short -term
rental program to assure they were accounted for in city records and that no property operating
as a short -term rental caused an on -going nuisance in the surrounding residential community.
Luke Smude, City Manager's Office, outlined the details of the ordinance: 1) any residential
property operating as a short -term rental must be required to register with the city by applying
for a short -term rental permit; 2) property owners or agents acting on their behalf would file an
application and submit a $250 registration fee in order to be considered for approval; 3) the
$250 fee would be used by code enforcement to implement and administer the program; 4)
before receiving a permit, the owner must ensure that the short -term rental property complied
with all applicable codes and city regulations and each approved property would be issued a
short -term rental permit and receive a regulatory identification number that must be included in
all advertisements and literature related to the property; 5) permits would be renewed annually
by resubmitting the permit application and registration fee; 6) the city would maintain an internal
record of all properties operating as short -term rentals in order to ensure compliance with
program guidelines; 7) complaints lodged against a specific property would be recorded,
tracked, and investigated; 8) the database would serve as a tool to administer the short -term
rental program and not as a means for community members to identify properties operating as
short -term rentals; 9) the proposed program would regulate a number of items including the
minimum and maximum allowable stays, occupancy, and parking and also enforce the city's
existing noise restrictions; 10) the minimum stay would be three nights (to reduce the impacts of
arriving and departing guests in neighborhoods); 11) the maximum occupancy of each short -
term rental property would not exceed three persons per bedroom with an additional two
persons allowed in a non - bedroom living area; i.e., a 3 bedroom property would be allowed 11
guests, representing three persons in each bedroom plus the additional two; 12) each property
must provide a minimum of two off - street parking spaces for their guests in order to minimize
the impacts to residential neighborhoods; 13) each short -term rental would be required to
comply with the city's loud and unreasonable noise ordinance and make all attempts to limit
noise between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am; 14) all trash would be required to be stored out of
public view, except in property containers for the purpose of collection between the hours of 5
PM the day before and 8 PM the day of the scheduled trash collection; and 15) each property
owner would be required to provide the name and contact information of emergency contacts
that would, when necessary, be available to respond to reported incidents at any time within 45
minutes.
Mr. Smude remarked to assist in program implementation, a webpage had been created on
Anaheim.net that contained all necessary information related to the short -term rental program
where community members would be allowed to learn about the program and property owners
would be able to access the forms needed to register their property. If problems occurred,
community members would be able to use the city's existing 24 hour telephone support lines
and on -line programs to report any incidents related to the short -term rental program. He noted
this included 311, code enforcement's main line and Anaheim Anytime. In addition, the
establishment of a good neighbor brochure with information to help renters be respectful guests
would be available to all guests outlining rules and expectations and provide information on who
to contact for more information.
Sandra Sagert, Community Preservation Manager, explained the basic enforcement strategy
would follow the existing process, with a policy structure and enforcement process that was
flexible and included a civil citation procedure; the inspection fees would only be necessary if
the property owner did not abate violations during a specific time frame and would reflect $196
and hour, and there was also the ability to seek criminal charges if necessary and /or revoke the
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 9 of 21
regulatory permit. She noted this procedure would allow flexibility to make sure any of the new
time share or vacation owners understood the rules and corresponding enforcement actions.
Greg Garcia remarked the ordinance would return for a second reading, if introduced tonight.
Once the ordinance was adopted and finalized, staff would begin the process of reaching out to
all properties currently operating as short -term rentals, informing them of the new program that
would be effective July 1, 2014. All existing short -term rental property owners would
subsequently receive a letter asking them to comply with the ordinance and to apply for a permit
no later than July 31, 2014.
Replying to a question by Council Member Eastman, Mr. Garcia stated a regulatory permit and
a business license would be required under this program. Ms. Eastman was supportive of the
parking requirements to ensure that renters of a five bedroom vacation house would not cause
parking issues in the neighborhood and would support approval of the ordinance. Council
Member Kring thanked Frances Noteboom for her commitment to best practices, adding this
ordinance would assist short -term rental property owners who did the right thing and rein in
those that did not follow best practices.
Council Member Brandman thanked the Rental Alliance for their partnership and moved to
introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6299 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adding Chapter 4.05 to Title 4 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Short -Term Rental Permits, seconded by Council
Member Kring. Council Member Eastman was supportive of bringing this back in six months for
a status report and on an on -going basis with Mr. Garcia concurring. Mayor Tait inquired if
there was an estimate as to how many properties offered short -term rentals with Mr. Garcia
responding he had a rough estimate of 240 homes and staff would continue to look for
additional properties.
Roll Call Vote: AYES — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Eastman, Kring and
Murray.) NOES — 0. Ordinance was introduced.
10. Receive and file the Prospective Market Value of Development Rights at Angel Stadium
D124 of Anaheim Appraisal.
Tom Morton, Executive Director of Convention, Sports and Entertainment, reported that at the
April 22" council meeting, Council directed staff to make public the Angel Stadium site
development rights and appraisal and staff had selected and contracted with Waronzof
Associates, and specifically with the principal and lead appraiser, Tim Lowe.
Tim Lowe remarked his assignment was to estimate the market value of the development rights
at the Anaheim stadium site under two premises of value: 1) that the Angels renewed their lease
and remained in Anaheim and the stadium use continued on the site and 2) that the Angels
relocated and the entire site was available for redevelopment. He stated the valuation date, as
requested, was amended to the first day when the Angels could opt to terminate the lease, i.e.,
October 16, 2016, and the request was for a valuation of the fee simple interest in the
approximately 154 acre stadium site along with a valuation of the property as if the manner of
conveyance was a ground lease. The conclusions, he remarked, under the stadium continued
premise and assuming a fee simple sale of the property was $245 million and if the stadium use
did not continue and the site was redeveloped, that estimate was $325 million. He stated if the
property was conveyed by leasehold through a long -term ground lease, Waronzof believed
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 10 of 21
those estimates would be approximately 10 percent lower or $225 million dollars under the
stadium continued premise and $300 million under the redevelopment premise.
APPRAISAL PROCESS: The first step analyzed the property, following by an analysis of the
surrounding area including the Platinum Triangle and the Resort District, looking at current and
historic market conditions and because the valuation date was in the future, projecting what
market conditions would be like in 2016. He explained an estimate of market value of property
typically used the assumption that the property would be used to its highest and best use, and in
this case, the highest and best use analysis considered four factors; i) physically possible uses,
ii) legally permissible uses, iii) financially feasible uses, and iv) uses which were the most
profitable and he noted, as customary, the market value assumed that the highest and best use
of the site could be achieved. With that analysis, an appraisal of commercial property or land
typically included land residual or subdivision analysis (an income approach analysis) as well as
comparison of the property with sales of other similarly situated sites. These two separate
indications of value, he remarked, were then reconciled to a point estimate, the value
conclusion. He pointed out that the highest and best use was a value and exchange concept,
not a value and use concept so that the idea was for willing, financially capable, and competent
parties who were able to transact and that the property would be adequately exposed to the
market place.
Mr. Lowe presented a chart that explained the two approaches to valuation. The first, the sales
comparison approach in which comparables were identified and confirmed and adjustments
made, the indications of value following the adjustment, and those indications of value
reconciled to an estimated value. The second, the land residual or subdivision analysis that
looked at future uses of the property known as the vertical construction. He added two types of
vertical construction was anticipated for the site, those that operated on a rental basis such as
office buildings and retail buildings and for sale condominiums (treated slightly different in
analysis), however, the end result was an estimation of the amount of income left over and that
income which was residual to land and the basis for the value estimate in the land residual
analysis. He reemphasized the fee simple interest was the common practice and assumed the
highest and best use that could be achieved through development; important because it did not
consider restrictions, objectives, or community priorities that could influence future use (for
example there could be enhanced open space facilities or amenities required for school sites or
other public facilities to be set aside within the development). These potential restrictions were
not included and the land was valued as if the city was a private land holder offering this
property for sale. The leasehold interest referred to a renter's or tenant's interest and also
assumed the highest and best use that could be achieved. In this case, Mr. Lowe explained,
the assumption was for the valuation of the leasehold interest to assume the terms and
conditions of a long -term ground lease were typical and did not consider any special restrictions,
objectives or community priorities and since that highest and best use conclusion included
condominium development, the leasehold value opinion reflected an adjustment for what the
perceived extra cost and /or risk would be for developers.
Mr. Lowe stated the appraisal was subject to a number of important assumptions;
• The parking obligations for the existing office buildings, the Grove and ARTIC remained,
and that the parking reservation currently part of the long -term lease agreement with the
Angels also remained at 12,500 spaces;
• That a parking management district would be necessary to manage parking on the
developed mixed use tract;
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 11 of 21
• That a parking community facilities district would be used to fund construction of the
shared structure parking that would be required to meet the needs of the ball park as
well as make land available for development as envisioned in the Platinum Triangle
Specific Plan;
• That the ARC streetcar project would be completed;
• That the developer would use in the normal course of business an additional
communities facilities district to fund certain forms of in -tract eligible infrastructure; and
• That a two -year master entitlement period followed the valuation day.
He added if any of these assumptions changed, Waronzof's opinion of value might change.
Mr. Lowe also remarked there were certain requirements or provisions of the existing lease with
the Angels not included in this appraisal (a set -aside land area for fireworks protection, a view
shed protection area and the use of surface parking lot area for turf or dirt). Additionally at all
times, under the continuing stadium use premise, Waronzof assumed that the stadium
continued to be modern and competitive and met major league baseball standards.
Mr. Lowe indicated in the valuation of the property, one of the critical issues was to decide what
was physically possible on the site, pointing to a slide that illustrated the basic division of use
that the appraisal presumed. There was a concentration of retail development on the north end
and west side of the ball park, a concentration of office uses on the north and west side and a
concentration of both rental and owner - occupied residential uses which set the stage for a
number of scenarios on how development might physically be located. He noted the
construction of structured parking used a large part of the land and staff could not determine the
availability of land area for residential or commercial development until they were assured there
was enough land set aside to hold the structured parking necessary for baseball. In the end,
he stated, under the stadium continued premise, there was a parcel area of 154.61 acres, the
developable area net of the stadium, the Grove and some other set - asides, i.e. 126.1 acres. Of
that, staff estimated approximately 25 acres would be consumed by rights -of -way and that the
master development process would also consume another 15 acres of land leaving a net
developable area of about 86.4 acres. On that land, the conclusion was that about 3,060
residential uses could fit on that 86.4 acres and that just under 1,100 units could be apartment
or renter - occupied with just under 2,000 units slated for owner - occupied condominiums. He
pointed out the significance of those density conclusions; i.e. under the Platinum Triangle
Specific Plan, up to 5,174 residential units were authorized as well as 6.2 million square feet of
office and retail space and under Waronzof's assessment as to what was physically possible
and what was in demand in the market place, it revealed a substantially lower overall density
than that implied in the specific plan.
He then explained the details of the development: the plan assumed a circular roadway system
with large rights -of -way that encompassed the ball park and the preservation of the three
historic points of entry to the ball park for games: Douglass, State College and Orangewood.
The Orangewood access reflected an open space and included an assumption that the
residential area would be integrated and there would be a canopy over that Orangewood
entry /exit to the ballpark to allow the formation of a cohesive residential neighborhood area.
The plan included the cost and the benefits of a large promenade that would connect ARTIC,
Amtrak and ARC station site to the ballpark itself with approximately $10 million budgeted to
allow modifications to the stadium to integrate that connection into the corridors, promenade
and the ball park. There were areas for retail development both in free - standing buildings on
the north and west sides as well as retail space integrated into the ground floor of the parking
structure near the Douglass entry. There was a shared parking structure to serve the office
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 12 of 21
buildings and retail and another parking structure to ring the east and south sides of the ballpark
with residential apartments attached and facing southward so it buffered and separated the
residential neighborhood of the south from the noise and the activity of the ball parks for
baseball and other events. There was also a separate community - serving retail site in the
extreme southeast corner of the site on Orangewood providing typical community serving retail
for grocery and other services. The retail to the north he pointed out would more likely be
entertainment retail to take advantage of the public transit that was available. Mr. Lowe
indicated Waronzof envisioned 9,123 shared parking spaces in defined locations and with the
remaining surface parking, staff believed it would provide no less than 12,500 parking spaces
for baseball events.
He made the point that it was not uncommon in American cities to have sites considered for
reuse and development that needed significant public investment to make them competitive and
to reposition them for their new use. He believed that investment had already been made with
the improvements Anaheim created through the Platinum Triangle Specific Plan, the ARTIC
hub, the proposed Anaheim Rapid Connection as well as some of the coordinated planning
around the Resort District, therefore, the next step in the development process was for private
capital. In addition, staff envisioned the future development as being beautifully designed,
master planned, and done by a competent master developer with this property able to compete
with any large scale new mixed use development in Orange or Los Angeles counties and the
assumption of value was that there would be qualified competitive development firms interested
in this property and would bring their skills and talents to create a desirable project. He
emphasized Waronzof was a real estate appraiser firm, not master planners or architects and
that this plan was provided to the city for appraisal purposes only.
In the without stadium or redevelopment premise, Mr. Lowe pointed out that the plan remained
largely the same; it would continue the fairly high density development of the site without the
stadium given the presence of the Honda Center and the rest of the Resort District plus the
associated transit characteristics, and was an appropriate site for mixed use higher density
development. The ultimate valuation presumed that the former stadium site continued to be, in
this case, residential, but recognizing that in any redevelopment of the entire site, there could be
office or retail or a submix of uses to occupy that center and could also become a suitable place
for a large open space amenity or special feature. In the highest and best use analysis without
the stadium, there was an unallocated area in the west that was given a lesser value in the
appraisal in the belief it would constitute phase 2 of the site later in the life of the project. He
added the canopy remained at the Orangewood access because it offered a way to integrate
and separate the residential neighborhood.
Mr. Lowe remarked the land residual analysis included a forecast of cash flow and assumptions
around the timing for development, with an October 2016 valuation date, followed by a two -year
period of entitlements, and master development beginning to occur as soon as entitlements
were obtained and land sales revenue to follow. The rationale for that premise was because it
was not uncommon in large developments to have concurrent development underway and
subdivision work being done the same time as vertical development was commencing. Office
development could continue late into the process and residential development could also
continue but land sales revenue would likely occur during a ten year period from 2019 to 2028.
In the land residual analysis, he noted staff anticipated about $811 million of land sales revenue,
with the majority coming from condominium sales, an important assumption in the appraisal.
Development costs, he stated were just slightly over 50 percent of the hard costs, and about
$85 million was anticipated to be paid in development impact fees. There would also be tax
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 13 of 21
obligations to be paid to the Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District (CFD) and to the
assumed in -tract CFD that the developer was expected to form. Also in that development cost
estimate was an assumption that the net cost to the developer of the tract for its share of
shared - structure parking was about $52.3 million in present dollars and with all of those cash
flows left over, the developer would receive a profit margin which in the land residual analysis
was treated as an expense because Waronzoft was trying to get to the cash flow left over for
land. Of those cash flows left over for land, the net present value reflected $248 million. Mr.
Lowe pointed out there were dollars lost to the time value of money because the developer
would have $450 million out of pocket, however the present value of that amount was $248
million which formed the basis for the $248 million valuation estimated based upon the land
residual analysis.
Another chart showed the timing of the cash flows in which the expense of development was
shown as an outflow, the developer profit was reflected as an outflow and the revenue from land
sales for each year was forecast with the actual residual cash flow of land coming back on a
discounted basis to a value of $248 million, a total value conclusion of $245 million. He noted
that in the land residual analysis, assuming the stadium did not continue, all of the assumptions
remained the same around product type, but a few of the numbers changed. There was no
need to construct shared - structured parking, which saved $60 million, there was additional land
revenue because of additional land area and the residential unit count increased to about 5,500
residential units with marginally higher development costs along with $20 million estimated for
the stadium demolition cost. This would provide for an additional land area of 10 -20 acres of
usable land which contributed to the value approximately $15 million. That concept, he
explained, resulted in a net change to the present value by the land residual analysis of plus
$81 million and a value conclusion of $325 million.
The sales comparison approach, Mr. Lowe emphasized, was a surprise, given the complexities
of the site and found there were comparables available that were suitable for analysis.
1) The Carson Market Place mall site, an older sale of 169 acres sold in January of 2007,
which included a $115 million reclamation project because it was a former landfill, at
$45.4 million.
2) The February 2014 recent sale of a metropolis site located near Staples and the 101
Freeway in the heart of downtown Los Angeles, $150 million.
3) The October 2013 sale of the site at the Transamerica building in LA, an $80 million
transaction.
4) The January 2014 sale of the former Walmart site in Inglewood, 60 acres, acquired by
the owner of the St. Louis Rams and rumored to be a possible stadium site. Mr. Lowe
did not have the details but reported this as a listing of $95 million and now had more
reliable information that this transaction occurred at a price higher than $95 million.
5) The September 2005 sale of Hollywood Park, 238 acres of mixed use development,
with the removal of the race track and the presence of the Forum nearby, a good mixed
use comparable.
6) The ARTIC acquisition by the city of Anaheim at a $32.5 million reported price for 13.6
acres.
7) The May 2013 transaction for a mixed use commercial park in El Segundo, and the
following two predecessor sales.
8) September 2000, Central Park West at Jamboree and the 405 Freeway, with
subsequent transactions there that could not be reliably confirmed but demonstrated the
continuing value for mixed use and mid -rise residential;
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 14 of 21
9) Three transactions at Park Place, unique among the comparables because it had
similar parking liabilities where development sites were created through the conversion
of a parking field to structured parking.
10) Newport Village project, the redevelopment of industrial buildings on Jamboree now
under development for 1,200 mid and higher mid -rise residential, owner and renter -
occupied with price based on the square foot of developable building area (FAR).
Mr. Lowe added there were also four transactions of interest treated separately: First the
Archstone Sportstown deal of 2007 that did not proceed, with compensation for about 50 acres
of property for as much as $225 million; Transaction B which also did not proceed, but which
had a competitive offering for $100 million for the Orange County Fairground, Transaction 3, the
El Toro Naval Station, a 2005 sale that closed at a reported $649.5 million and Transaction D,
the recent transaction by Orange County with a development and disposition agreement with
Lowe Enterprises for about 100 acres of the El Toro Site that the County assumed. He added
the value was not known and the property was adjacent to several hundred acres of the Great
Park neighborhood and came equipped with a significant adjacent competitor.
Mr. Lowe showed a slide comparing the transactions at a price per square foot versus the price
per developable square foot on properties, remarking he believed the conclusion value for
Anaheim's subject property was within the range demonstrated by the comparables he had just
outlined for Council.
Referring to the analysis for structured parking, Mr. Lowe remarked that the plan and conclusion
of the highest and best use showed 9,123 shared parking structures constructed. He
emphasized that none of the residential development in their plan included counts or uses of
shared parking, the analysis included exclusive private parking for all residential development
although commercial development, retail, office and baseball would use shared structured
parking. He envisioned that at a cost of $23,500 per space in 2014 dollars, there was about
$214 million in capital costs associated with these spaces. In addition, there was $11.1 million
for the cost of the promenade between ARTIC station platform and the ball park itself which also
served to benefit retail development on the north side of the site, with a cost for parking at about
$225.5 million. He noted there were a number of sources for payment of those costs, the
largest of which was the parking revenue from baseball and event parking in structures, with a
present value of those future net revenues at about $109 million, which presumed that the team
share or profit in the parking revenue continued to be shared with the team. The office and
retail buildings both would avoid conceptually the cost of buying land for surface parking that
generated $14 - $19 million in proceeds and assuming The Grove or replacement entertainment
venue would generate over the long term approximately $20 million of the capital funding
necessary. Others sources would be through grant funding and the ARTIC station could
contribute $10 million to the cost of parking as well, which left $52.3 million for the developer's
share of structured parking.
Referring to the leasehold value estimate, Mr. Lowe explained it was detailed in the report that
there were concerns over the difficulties nationwide in successfully selling condominiums on
leasehold land, and that developers were cautious about putting residential development on
leased land. For that reason, Waronzoft applied a ten percent adjustment for the leasehold
conveyance, under each of his valuation scenarios.
Council Member Kring appreciated the thorough report, wondering why no hotels were included
in the highest and best use. Mr. Lowe responded that no hotels were entitled as an approved
use in the Platinum Triangle Specific Plan, however, he pointed out, the developer could come
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 15 of 21
in with a process to amend the specific plan to allow for a hotel. He added in this case, with the
nearby presence of the Disney Resort, it seemed to be an unremarkable outcome of
development. There was some discussion on the failed Archstone Sportstown project with
Council Member Kring pointing out that no other developer had made an offer on that property
since 2007. Mr. Lowe responded that in the context in which this market value was presented,
he made the assumption the city would do everything possible to expose this site to the market
place so that any qualified developer could make an offer and that a failed attempt when the
real estate recession hit and the financial crisis played out, should not impact this effort.
Mayor Pro Tern Murray remarked for the purposes of negotiation with the Angels she was most
interested in the $225 million valuation and hope the city would be working off that number as
the process continued. She added it would complement the additional economic analysis the
Waronzof would conduct for the stadium and its value as well as the stadium needs analysis
which was reported to be in the range of $120 to $150 million dollars. She asked the city
attorney to clarify the purpose and intention of the MOU's related to the negotiation process.
Mr. Houston responded the first MOU dealt with the rental of the land which provided a non-
binding framework to discuss a concept of $1 a year for 66 years. The second MOU was a
discussion of the development rights that could be negotiated and potentially conveyed to the
Angels development partner providing control of those development rights but did not discuss
the valuation of those rights. Mr. Houston added that to say that the land value of $1 a year was
an all- encompassing definition of the economic benefit that the city would extract was not an
appropriate analogy and that the resolution adopting the MOU required city staff to negotiate an
additional economic benefit to the city apart from any discussions in the MOU. Ms. Murray
added that in her viewpoint, she understood that through negotiation the city and the team
would come to terms with an agreement that made financial sense to the city but also found a
way to raise capital privately to upgrade a stadium that was 50 years old and there was nothing
in the framework that encumbered additional debt service, no bonding or backing of bonding to
upgrade the stadium, and that the city would save over $600,000 /year on the stadium's capital
reserve fund which translated to $12 million in savings over a 20 year period. Additionally there
would be no risk to the general fund and Angels Baseball would be responsible for all financial
investments to prepare the land for development, upgrade the stadium and the city would
continue to generate a revenue stream from the land and the stadium and retain the Angels.
Now that the appraisal had been received, she asked the city manager to go back to the
negotiation table and bring back a deal with real benefits for all and to secure Angels Baseball in
Anaheim for years to come.
Council Member Brandman moved to receive and file the Prospective Market Value of
Development Rights at Angel Stadium of Anaheim Appraisal, seconded by Council Member
King.
Mayor Tait clarified a few points asking why condominiums versus apartments since the market
appeared to be more robust for apartment buildings. Mr. Lowe responded the plan included
1,080 apartments because they buffered the stadium area and were attached to the parking
structures envisioned which left just under 2,000 owner occupied condominium units. He added
condos provided a higher residual value to land and represented a more profitable way to
develop land than apartments and that pattern had been consistent for a couple of decades.
Generally speaking, he added condominiums were a preferred alternative as they resulted in
the highest and best use. Mayor Tait asked if developers addressed costs per unit with Mr.
Lowe indicating the appraisal was based on price per square foot and price per square foot of
buildable area and did not use a price per unit comparison as it was a less discrete method of
analyzing value because the placement of that product on the land offered a more reliable
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 16 of 21
answer. As to why 3,000 units were used as opposed to 5,100 units, Mr. Lowe stated they
followed the planning rule of keeping similar uses together and in some areas, such as the
separation of the traffic way to Orangewood, he felt it was more conducive to a nice residential
neighborhood of attached units and in areas closer to the hustle and bustle of game day with
commercial traffic for retail and office uses, land would have a different character and ultimately
less valuable especially in an owner - occupied context which would influence what people would
pay. Without the stadium scenario, he confirmed there would be 3,550 units, adding there
remained an unallocated area that could be considered for phase 2 or phase 3 and was not
necessary for development at this time. Mayor Tait remarked that Waronzoft would also be
addressing the replacement cost of this asset in the very near future, adding the reason he was
interested was because it would offer information on what it would cost a major league baseball
owner to duplicate the Anaheim site elsewhere, i.e, the cost of the land and to build a stadium.
Mr. Lowe added he would address the cost of a stadium and then follow up on what it would
cost a baseball team to have a replacement stadium, understanding that in most cases these
were two different figures. Speaking to the obligation to upgrade the stadium, Mayor Tait
remarked this came from the existing lease which stated it was the Angels obligation to maintain
the stadium as a first class venue and because of that, the lease payments over the term of that
agreement were nominal. In 1996, when he voted on the existing lease, the city essentially
gave up all the revenues: the parking revenue, the naming rights, concessions, advertising and
a percentage of the ticket sales. The only revenue received was $2 for every ticket sale above
$2.6 million. In that agreement, he emphasized, what the city received in return was "Anaheim"
in the team name and that the Angels would take over the maintenance and care of the
stadium. If no deal was struck, he stated, the lease would continue or the Angels could opt out,
but he doubted they would find a better deal elsewhere. Mayor Tait ended his statement saying
he believed the stadium site could be developed jointly and that an agreement could be reached
with Angels Baseball including a team name with "Anaheim" in it.
Council Member Eastman mentioned the $150 million figure that had been discussed to
upgrade the stadium, and how the appraisal would address that. Mr. Lowe remarked that what
was asked and authorized for his firm to provide was to focus on new replacement costs for a
stadium of similar capacity and the amount that a baseball franchise could be expected to pay
to occupy such a facility recognizing there could be public investment factored in that number.
He would not be addressing the cost of upgrading the existing stadium. Council Member
Eastman thanked Mr. Lowe for his thorough presentation and looked forward to continuing the
dialogue with the Angels.
With a motion by Council Member Brandman and a second by Council Member Kring, a vote
was taken to receive and file the Prospective Market Value of Development Rights at Angel
Stadium of Anaheim Appraisal.
Roll Call Vote: AYES — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Eastman, Kring and
Murray.) NOES — 0. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARING: The public hearing was considered at 9 :16 P.M.
11. Continued public hearing.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013 -05706 (DEV2013- 000114)
C220 OWNER: Jongsok Lee, Ben's Equity, LLC, 13550 Sherman Way,
Van Nuys, CA 91405
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 17 of 21
APPLICANT: Mohammad Abdo, The Vault, 1000 North Home Place,
Anaheim, CA 92801
LOCATION: .93 -acre property located at 2951 West Ball Road on the north side
of Ball Road approximately 438 feet east of the centerline of Beach Boulevard
The applicant proposes an indoor and outdoor smoking lounge in an existing retail
building.
Environmental Determination: This proposal is Categorically Exempt from the
requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -05706 (Resolution No. PC 2014 -022) with
an added condition of approval requiring that the trash bins located on the north side of
the building shall not be utilized after 10 p.m. or before 6 a.m., daily. VOTE: 4 -3 - Chair
Ramirez and Commissioners Caldwell, Lieberman and Seymour voted yes.
Commissioners Agarwal, Bostwick and Persaud voted no. (Planning Commission
meeting of February 24, 2014)
(Appealed on March 5, 2014 by Esther Wallace)
(Continued from Council meeting of April 22, 2014, Item No. 34)
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -069 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -05706 and making
certain findings in connection therewith (DEV 2013 - 00114).
OR
RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM denying Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -05706 and making
certain findings in connection therewith (DEV 2013 - 00114).
Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director, reported at the previous meeting Council considered
this appeal of a Planning Commission decision that approved a conditional use permit allowing
an indoor and outdoor smoking lounge at 2951 West Ball Road. She added City Council
continued the hearing for two weeks in order to provide an opportunity for the applicant and
project opponents to meet and explore a potential compromise and to allow staff to prepare a
resolution for denial of the permit. After the hearing, she noted, staff attempted to set up a
meeting between the applicant and the appellant, Esther Wallace of WAND, however that offer
was declined. Following publication of the staff report, Council then received letters from the
appellant and from the applicant and these were distributed to all parties. In one letter, she
explained, Ms. Wallace expressed concern that the basis for her appeal had not been
accurately represented to Council. The written appeal cited two areas of concern; the first
related to the proposed smoking lounge's distance from an adjacent apartment community and
a continuation high school in the Center. She noted the written appeal correctly cited the fact
that the proposed smoking lounge would be located 40 feet from an apartment community to
the north and 160 feet from a continuation high school to the east, however, pointed out the
zoning code did not prohibit smoking lounges under these circumstances as had been alleged
in some of the correspondence council received. The zoning code allowed smoking lounges
within 1000 feet of a school or 200 feet of a residential zone but subject to approval of a
conditional use permit and that was the issue before the Commission. She added the zoning
code required a finding to be made that intervening structures or other factors mitigated the
potential noise, odor and other impacts of such units and that the project opponents felt the
applicant failed to demonstrate that these mitigating factors existed.
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 18 of 21
The second area of concern in the appeal related to the proposed lounges proximity to the
adjacent restaurant outdoor dining area with the appellant believing that hookah smoke from
the proposed business would negatively impact diners within the restaurant patio area. Ms.
Vander Dussen stated that staff carefully considered all of the appellant's concerns and a
detailed analysis of these points were raised in the April 22 staff report.
She noted that although the applicant was not given the opportunity to meet with the appellant,
he indicated a willingness to reconsider the design and operation of the business to address
concerns that were raised during the last council meeting. He proposed the following: 1) to
redesign the outdoor patio by adding a solid wall along the east side, however, Ms. Vander
Dussen pointed out, this afternoon the applicant informed staff he was withdrawing his request
for the outdoor patio and no smoking would be permitted outdoors if this application was
approved so there was no need for a redesign; 2) The applicant would replace the wrought
iron opening in the block wall that separated the shopping center and the adjacent apartment
community to the north with solid blocks to alleviate concerns that children playing in the
apartment courtyards would be exposed to the sights and sounds of the smoking lounge; 3) the
applicant also proposed installation of an emergency alarm on the north facing rear door
located adjacent to the apartment community to ensure it was used only for emergency access,
given in response to concerns that patrons or employees might disturb residents living along
the rear property line; 4) the installation of trees along the north property line was also
proposed to help screen the adjacent residences from their proposed use; and 5) the applicant
proposed to further restrict the night time hours to allow employees to use the trash enclosure
adjacent to the apartment community restricting the use starting at 9:00 P.M.
Ms. Vander Dussen stated staff believed the proposed modifications represented a significant
attempt on the part of the business owner to address the concerns raised during the prior
public hearing.
She also noted that the staff report offered two resolutions; one would affirm the Planning
Commission's decision to approve this application (and should Council wish to approve the
project, conditions of approval could be modified or added to reflect the changes proposed by
the applicant as she outlined and could be read into the record, if Council desired) and the
other would deny the conditional use permit with the draft resolution reflecting the concerns
described at the previous council meeting.
Mayor Tait stated he had met with the applicant today and had visited the site and the bakery.
Council Member Kring reported she had met with Esther Wallace and Bernice Danker and had
also met with Mr. Abdo and his wife, Mr. Ronald Park, and Mr. Lee and had lunch at the next
door restaurant in the shopping center. Council Member Eastman stated she had met with the
applicant, Esther Wallace, and members of WAND as well as with a Planning Commissioner.
Mayor Pro Tern Murray reported she had met with both the applicant and the appellant.
Council Member Brandman indicated he had communications with the applicant, the appellant
and a Planning Commissioner.
Council Member Kring was appreciative that the applicant withdrew the outdoor smoking area,
citing the various points of discussion she had with the applicant. She was supportive of the
proposed business because the applicant had made a number of concessions to address the
community's concerns.
Council Member Eastman had visited the Center and seen the improvements made by the
owner remarking favorably on the mid - century modern architecture. She had also been
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 19 of 21
assured by the Center owner that the internet cafe which had been a source of problems would
be leaving at the end of July. Additionally, she explained, the owner indicated he would
resurface the parking lot, refurbish some of the landscape and continue investing in and
improving the center and the only thing she could add to that was to use free lights offered by
the city which had been proven to discourage any negative activity in business areas, as long
as those lights did not intrude into the neighborhood. With these conditions and changes in
place, Council Member Eastman remarked she would support this business.
Mayor Pro Tern Murray stated with concessions made to address the neighbors and her
concerns, the quick action by the center owner to eliminate a business that had a suspect client
base and his continued investment and improvements to the center, she would also be
supportive of the proposed business.
Council Member Brandman appreciated the concessions made and that the outside patio had
been eliminated, remarking the applicant had exceeded his expectations in addressing the
communities concerns and he would be supportive as well.
Council Member Kring thanked Esther Wallace for her staunch commitment to West Anaheim,
stating that because of her appeal, the result was a better project than the one proposed.
There was some discussion on reducing the size of the hookah lounge. Ms. Vander Dussen
indicated that the size of a proposed use could be reduced but not expanded without coming
back to modify the conditional use permit, which allowed the applicant the ability to determine
whether or not to reduce the lounge capacity.
Ms. Vander Dussen read the following conditions into the record:
1) The business owner shall install and permanently maintain a filtration system on the
exhaust vent oven to minimize potential impacts of odors. The design of the filtration
system shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director and shown on plan
submitted for building permits. The filtration shall be installed and operational prior to
final occupancy. The exhaust vent for the oven shall be installed on the southernmost
portion of the roof in order to maximize the distance from the adjacent residential
properties to the north.
2) The business or property owner shall not make any changes to the exterior of the
subject two story building that would compromise its architectural significance. All
exterior building modifications shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning
Director.
3) The entire parking lot shall be resurfaced and restriped in accordance with exhibit 1, the
site plan on file with the Planning Department. This improvement shall be shown on the
plans submitted for building permits and concluded prior to final occupancy.
4) The rear north facing exit door shall be equipped with an emergency alarm to insure it is
not used by patrons or employees during normal business operations. The alarm
system shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits and installed prior to final
occupancy.
5) Landscaping consisting of trees planted a maximum of 20 feet apart and shrubs
providing complete ground cover within a period of one year shall be planted along the
portion of the north property line that separates the proposed smoking lounge from the
adjacent residential property. Landscaped plans shall be reviewed and approved by
the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits and landscaping shall be
installed prior to final occupancy.
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 20 of 21
6) The smoking lounge shall be completely physically separated from the restaurant
proposed on the west side of the building and these uses shall not share a common
entrance of ventilation system.
7) There shall be no outdoor patio permitted and all smoking activities shall be conducted
wholly within the building.
15) Shall be revised to read as follows: trash binds located on the north side of the building
shall not be utilized between the hours of 9 pm and 8 am.
The continued public hearing was closed and the applicant thanked Council for approving the
permit. He also confirmed he had heard and approved the conditions that were read into the
record.
Council Member Kring Moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -069 A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use Permit No.
2013 -05706 and making certain findings in connection therewith, seconded by Council Member
Eastman. Roll Call Vote: AYES — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Eastman,
Kring and Murray.) NOES — 0. Motion Carried
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: The City Attorney reported on Closed Session Item
No. 1 that Council authorized the City Attorney to file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the
United States Supreme Court in the case of Gonzalez v. City of Anaheim. (Vote: 5 -0).
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Council Member Eastman discussed Planning Department efforts to obtain grant funding to
improve and create a new specific plan for the Beach Boulevard corridor. She announced
the Art Crawl scheduled for May 10 the Free Annual Health Fair on June 1S the Pearson Park
2014 Family Concert Series and spoke of her attendance at the 38th Annual California Peace
Officers Memorial Ceremony in Sacramento. She reminded the community that May 4 — 10 was
Wild Fire Preparedness Week and spoke to the Metro Cities Fire Authority's PulsePoint CPR
mobile application.
Council Member Kring also spoke of her attendance at the 38th Annual California Peace
Officers Memorial Ceremony and the release of Bruno from the Yorba Regional Animal
Hospital, announcing that Bruno would be present at the next Council meeting for his official
retirement. She requested the City Manager look into who owns Buster's Room and announced
the WAND Annual BBQ at Twila Reid Park on May 10 and the Candlelight Ceremony for all
Fallen Soldiers on May 17
Mayor Pro Tern Murray announced the following events: the 19th Annual Taste of Anaheim on
May 8, the WAND Annual BBQ on May 10 the Annual Job Fair on June 11 and Bruno's
official retirement at the May 13 City Council meeting. She also spoke of her attendance at
the 38th Annual California Peace Officers Memorial Ceremony.
Council Member Brandman spoke of his attendance at the 38th Annual California Peace
Officers Memorial Ceremony and announced the Annual Health Fair to held be on June 1 st at
the Anaheim Convention Center. He mentioned the upcoming special election on June 3 rd and
the three (3) Anaheim measures on the ballot.
City Council Minutes of May 6, 2014
Page 21 of 21
Mayor Tait spoke of his attendance at the following events: AC Green's speech on character at
Western High School, Youth in Government Day, the Cinco De Mayo community event, Dia de
los Ninos at Paul Revere, Ponderosa and Pearson Parks, the Canyon High School Relay for
Life, the Grand Opening of the Crescent Free Clinic, the Grand Opening of the Habitat for
Humanity ReStore and the Friends of the Mormon Church Helping Hands event in Central
Anaheim. He expressed his support for the Anaheim Ducks and announced his friendly wager
with the Mayor of Los Angeles.
ADJOURNMENT: With no other business to conduct, Mayor Tait adjourned the May 6th
2014 meeting at 10:15 P.M. in memory of the 13 police officers that lost their lives in the line of
duty.
espe�ptfully submitted,
Linda N. Andal, CIVIC
City Clerk