Loading...
1983/01/11City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983, 10:00 A.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR--ZONING: Annika Santalahti WATER ENGINEERING MANAGER: Ray Auerbach Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: The Reverend Tom Favreau, Hotline Help Center at Melodyland, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ben Bay led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: INTRODUCTION - 1983 DISNEYLAND AMBASSADOR: Mrs. Mary Jones, Director of Community Relations at Disneyland, introduced and presented to the Council Miss Mindy Wilson, the 1983 Disneyland Ambassador. Mayor Roth welcomed and congratulated Miss Wilson on behalf of the Council and the City and presented her with roses and a briefcase with the City seal. 119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Roth and authorized by the City Council: Weekend with the Stars Telethon for Cerebral Palsy Week in Anaheim January 17-23, 1983. The proclamation was accepted by Mr. Elliott Boggus, Board Member. 119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Resolution of Congratulations was unanimously adopted by the City Council to be mailed to the Orange County Community Development Council, extending congratulations on the first anniversary of their Mobile Health Clinic. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held November 30 and December 7, 1982, and January 4, 1983. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda, after reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 11 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983, 10:00 A.M. FINANCIAL D~ANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $5,334,835.88, in accordance with the 1982-83 Budget, were approved. CITY MANAGER/DEPAR%MENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilman Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 83R-6 through 83R-13, both inclusive, for adoption, and Ordinance No. 4387 for first reading. Refer to Resolution Book. 1. 118: The following claims filed against the City were denied and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Donald F. Teeple for personal property damages purportedly sustained due to improper grounding of power ground line to gas meter at 628 South Anthony, on or about September 22, 1982. b. Claim submitted by John James Kibel for personal property damages purportedly sustained due to a power failure at 151 Guinida Street, Apartment No. 4, on or about November 25, 1982. c. Claim submitted by BDH Enterprises for violation of civil rights purportedly sustained due to actions of the Anaheim City Council, on or about August 17, 1982. d. Claim submitted by Marriott Corporation for loss purportedly sustained due to a conflict in accounting periods between the Marriott Corporation and the City of Anaheim, relative to payment of the Transient Occupancy Tax, on or about March 31, 1981 and August 2, 1982. e. Claim submitted by Edward P. Sullivan for personal injuries, and Joan Sullivan for loss of services and consortium of spouse, purportedly sustained due to negligent maintenance at the Convention Center, on or about August 27, 1982. f. Claim submitted by John O. Fuller for personal property damages purportedly sustained due to claimant's car hitting an uncovered manhole in the vicinity of Acacia and Orangethorpe Avenues, on or about November 17, 1982. 2. 108: The following applications were approved in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Entertainment Permit submitted by Quy V. Tong for the Caravelle Restaurant, 2424 West Ball Road, Suites S and T, to permit a five-man band on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday nights from 8:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight. b. Entertainment Permit submitted by Matthew R. Drass for Phase I Audio, 3911 East La Palma Avenue, Unit U, to permit a 4- to 5-person band on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday nights from 9:00 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. t2 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January .11~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M. 3. 123/101: Authorizing a permit agreement with Pacific Drive-In Theatres, Inc., in the amount of 5500 per day for additional parking at Anaheim Stadium for the Orange Drive-In swapmeets, if space is available, for the term July 1, 1982 through June 30, 1987. 4. 123/101: Authorizing an amendment to a permit agreement with OKEH Caterers in the amount of 5300 per month for parking space usage at Anaheim Stadium, for the term November 16, 1982 to November 15, 1987. 5. 123/115: Authorizing the first amendment to a rental agreement with Southwest Innovation Group Inc., decreasing their square footage and monthly fee to ~489 for rental of Office No. 220 in the Civic Center. 6. 123/167: Authorizing an amendment to an agreement with Safety Striping Service, Inc., for pavement marking and painting services, increasing the cost by 512,080, bringing the total to ~151,530. 7. 123/167: Authorizing a third amendment to an agreement with Steiny and Company, Inc., for traffic signal maintenance services, increasing the cost by ~22,293.62, bringing the total to $131,142.96. 8. 167: Continuing the award for Installation of Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting at Katella Avenue and Claudina Way/Katella Way, Federal No. HES-L030(007), Account No. 49-795-6325-E5250, to January 18, 1983. 9. 160: Accepting the low bid of Milo Equipment Corporation in the amount of ~21,244.96, for one tractor with loader/backhoe in accordance with Bid No. 3941. 10. 160: Accepting the low bid of Carmelita Ford in the amount of ~32,549.02 for one 27,000-pound GVW conventional cab/chassis in accordance with Bid No. 3936. 123/161: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-6: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHELM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF COOPERATION AGREEMENT NO. 22 WITH THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC WORK IMPROVEMENTS (HARBOR CENTER). (reconstruction of site improvements at 397-389 South Harbor Boulevard) 159: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-7: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DIRECTING THE FILING AND POSTING OF PREVAILING RATES OF PER DIEM WAGES PERTAINING TO PUBLIC WORKS. 152: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-8: A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE PROGRAMS. (William O. Talley, City Manager, and Robert G. Berg, Emergency Services Coordinator) 168: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-9: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CHANGING THE NAME FOR LAUREL STREET TO AVENIDA MARGARITA. 13 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983, 10:00 A.M. 168: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-10: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CHANGING THE NAME FOR VIA COPALA TO EUCALYPTUS DRIVE. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-11: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND SERVICE EASEMENTS. (82-4A, a portion of a water line easement acquired by the City located east of Carpenter Avenue, south of La Palma Avenue at 3285 Carpenter Avenue, setting a date and time for the public hearing as February 8, 1983, 1:30 p.m.) 156/152: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-12: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING FOR IMPL~ENTING THE ANAHEIM CAREER CRIMINAL APPREHENSION PROGRAM, AGREEING TO PROVIDE REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS, AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF SAID GRANT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH SAID GRANT. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-13: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Jake S. Foto Trust; Pep Properties, Inc.; Eldon Hauck, et al.) 142/159: ORDINANCE NO. 4387: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION .050 OF SECTION 1.12.050 OF CHAPTER 1.12 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BIDS ON PUBLIC PROJECTS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL Mt~4BERS: COUNCIL M~BERS: COUNCIL M~BERS: Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth None None MOTION CARRIED. The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 83R-6 through 83R-13, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 105: RESIGNATION OF STEWART MOSS FROM THE CCMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to accept the resignation of Mr. Stewart Moss from the Community Redevelopment Commission with regret, as submitted in his letter of January 3, 1983, and that a letter of thanks be sent to Mr. Moss for his long years of service on the Commission. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Roth stated he would appreciate the media encouraging citizens of the community to apply for the vacancy left by Mr. Moss, term ending June 30, 1985. 173: BULLET TRAIN: Discussion relating to a City position to be taken at the January 13, 1983 Orange County Division League meeting regarding the Bullet Train, continued from the meeting of January 4, 1983 (see minutes that date). 14 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983~ 10:00 A.M. Mayor Roth stated that Mr. Randy Smith from VanDell and Associates was in the Chambers audience to speak to the issue. Before calling on Mr. Smith, he (Roth) reported that he had spoken with Jim Jerrell, the Mayor of Buena Park and President of the Orange County League of Cities. Mr. Jerrell's recommendation was that they not take any action at the January 13, 1983 League meeting, and he was going to recommend that the League do the same, including not taking any action on Assemblywoman Bergeson's bill and the City of Tustin's resolution until a presentation was made at the League level. Mr. Jerrell also shared his concern that if they inundated the Bullet Train program with paperwork and additional requirements, such as an EIR, it would slow the process of obtaining the information they so vitally needed. Mr. Randy Smith, Manager of Public Affairs, VanDell and Associates, 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, Civil Engineering and Land Planning Firm, reported that Mr. Larry Gilson, President of American High Speed Rail, had accepted the League's invitation to speak at their February 10, 1983 meeting° He requested that any actions be held until Mr. Gilson had an opportunity to make his presentation, and he urged Members of all City Councils to attend. Mr. Smith then reported on some of the other programs taking place to reassure those concerned that a public process and local review would take place, with the Public Utilities Commission assuming the lead role, since a rail utility was involved. Other agencies who would be holding hearings on the issue were the California High Speed Rail Financing Commission, the Assembly Transportation Committee, the Tri-County Rail Commission chaired by Orange County Supervisor Ralph Clark, Southern California Association of Governments and the San Diego Association of Government. Specific route information would be relayed at the February 10, 1983 League meeting, as well as environmental impacts and the mitigating measures designed to deal with the concerns of some cities along the route. Councilwoman Kaywood then posed questions which she wanted answered at that meeting as well--what the cost of a ticket would be; how the train would be high-speed if there were going to be enough stops to pick up and drop off passengers between San Diego and Los Angeles; ridership necessary to make the project feasible; with regard to safety, how would they prevent things from being thrown on the tracks in order to avoid accidents. Councilman Bay stated he would like to know the noise source decibels from the train originating at its peak speed and necessary curve of variation of that noise level from average to peak speeds, and the vibration problems. He then referred to the previous Public Broadcasting System program on the Bullet Train, noting that the videotape of that program was available from KOCE in Orange County. He suggested that Mr. Smith and the League attempt to get that film from Jim Cooper at KOCE, since it was his opinion that the film should be shown at the League meeting of February 10, 1983, which would generate questions and discussions that Mr. Gilson would want to answer. Mayor Roth also noted that a great amount of noise was now being generated from freeways, as well as from the present Amtrak trains. Therefore, relative to noise from the Bullet Train, a comparison needed to be made with the present amount of noise being generated. 15 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M. MOTION: Councilman Overholt suggested that at this time they move to recommend that the League take no action on the Bullet Train issue at their January 13, 1983, meeting while at the same time directing staff to continue to monitor the progress of the Bullet Train project. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. A Mr. Gustave Bode, 726 North East Street, who was present in the Chambers audience, suggested that the cities should get together with the City of San Francisco to discuss their transportation system (BART and electric buses), which he felt was efficient and economical. 142/179: ORDINANCE NO. 4382 - HEALTH SPAS AND PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTERS: Adding new subsections to Title 18 to allow health spas and physical fitness centers as a conditionally permitted use in the Anaheim Canyon Industrial Area and as a permitted primary use in all commercial zones in the City. (Continued from the meeting of December 28, 1982--see minutes that date). MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to amend the proposed ordinance to include the Huntington Beach approach that if a facility were over 2,500 square feet, they would be required to file for a Conditional Use Permit. Before any action was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood again broached the parking problems being experienced around the Holiday Health Spa at Magnolia and Broadway, which went in by right because it was commercial zoning in a totally residential area (see minutes of December 28, 1982). If such a facility were allowed in an industrial area, companies could be put out of business because there would be no parking for employees. In a commercial area, the situation could arise where there would be no parking for customers of any other business. Her proposed amendment to the ordinance would, in the future, prevent problems from occurring such as those being experienced by residents and businesses in the vicinity of the Holiday Health Spa. Councilman Bay seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. He then asked to hear from staff relative to the 2,500-square foot requirement for a CUP, whether it would be a new rule of thumb, or might 3,000, 4,000 or 5,000 square feet be better. Annika Santalahti, Assistant Planning Director--Zoning, answered that as~ outlined in her memorandum of January 13, 1983, other spas in the City were much smaller than the Holiday Health Spa, which was over 40,000 square feet. The suggestion in the staff report was that the CUP process be utilized for facilities over 5,000 square feet. Their feeling was that 2,500 square feet might be too small, and they merely doubled the figure to arrive at 5,000. Councilman Bay asked Councilwoman Kaywood if she would consider amending her motion from 2,500 square feet to 4,000 square feet. If so, he would support that amendment; Councilwoman Kaywood answered that she would do so. Mayor Roth expressed his concern that the situation at Holiday Health Spa was an isolated case, and he did not want to see an overreaction in modifying the proposed ordinance because of one such case. 16 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983, 10:00 A.M. Miss Santalahti explained they would, perhaps, have a number of smaller establishments come in under 4,000 square feet, but not many that would be over. Holiday Health Spa was the only one of its size, and it might be that they would have no others. She did not think they would be unduly hampering anyone else with the proposed 4,000-square foot requirement for a CUP. City Attorney Hopkins then explained for the Mayor that should the motion pass, he would request that the ordinance be returned to his office for a revision for an amended first reading in one week. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion amended as follows: That the proposed ordinance be amended to state that any facility over 4,000 square feet in size would be required to file for a CUP; the City Attorney was to revise accordingly and resubmit the ordinance in one week. MOTION CARRIED. 142/179: ORDINANCE NOS. 4388 AND 4389: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos. 4388 and 4389 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4388: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (82-83-12, MHP, Mobilehome Park Overlay Zone, 2111 South Manchester (Orangewood Acres), and 300 West Katella Avenue (Riviera Anaheim Mobilehome Park) ORDINANCE NO. 4389: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ~{ENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(102), C-R, 1630 South Harbor Boulevard) 114: TELEVISING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS: Mayor Roth thanked Storer Cable TV for televising City Council meetings. He had received good response from citizens who were informed through the Anaheim Bulletin that the meetings were going to be televised on Channel 6. This would give citizens an opportunity at their leisure to have a better understanding of what took place at Council meetings, since it was business that affected them. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to discuss personnel matters, labor relations and potential litigation with no action anticipated; the City Attorney requested a Closed Session to discuss litigation and potential litigation with action anticipated. Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (10:47 a.m.) AFTER CLOSED SESSION: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (1:18 p.m.) 112: CITY OF ANAHEIM VS. GREGORY KRUEGER: Councilman Roth moved to authorize the City Attorney and Ruston and Nance to settle the City of Anaheim's cross complaint in Orange County Superior Court Case #32-09-15, City of Anaheim vs. Gregory Krueger, for the sum of ~2,385.60. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 17 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983, 10:00 A.M. 103: SANTA ANA CANYON ANNEXATION NO. 9, S.A.V.I. NEGOTIATION UPDATE: Mr. Jim Erickson, representative of S.A.V.I. Properties, explained that a great deal of time had been spent with staff in the last six weeks in attempting to negotiate and finalize a development agreement between S.A.V.I. and the City in order to know the rules when they annexed to the City. Ail issues had been resolved but two, and he felt those were probably issues that would have to be resolved by the City Council, since the dialogue between them and the staff would not be productive unless and until the Council made a decision on the two policy issues. Their basic position was that they had no objection to paying a fee reasonably related to the benefit received, but they did have an objection to paying a fee which they did not feel related to any benefits the City would confer on them. The two issues were the fees that were expected to be paid on water and sewer. He first spoke to the sewer issue, concluding that they did not feel they should pay an additional $350 an acre fee for a general connection charge the City had proposed, or the additional fee of 5575 an acre for the purpose of helping the Bauer Ranch pay for their sanitary sewer system. City Manager William Talley stated that although he had nothing to add, in the Closed Session and in numerous meetings with representatives of the property, they had covered the issues and, if in any way City services were availed by the property owner, that the benefit or use could not be restricted to merely the property boundaries. On the other hand, if the City was not needed in any way to allow them to hook up to a County Sanitation District line, and the City did not have to use its good offices in any manner, they would recommend in the development agreement that the fees not be collected, even though they believed that property owners as a group benefited from the infrastructure in the corporate entity to which they annexed or were proposing to develop. Relative to library fees, as long as S.A.V.I. agreed that they would not be constructing any residential units, he would recommend that those fees not be collected. He felt they had agreed to the extent residential units were constructed, they would be subject to appropriate pro rata share of the cost of a library if, in fact, they did establish such fees. Mr. Erickson first confirmed that they were not proposing any residential use on the property whatsoever. He then emphasized that the only thing the City could ever do for them was to give its blessing to hook up the connections already in place, and he did not feel that was worth 550,000. Mayor Roth stated that the Council at length today reviewed what had been discussed last night at the liaison meeting. On behalf of the Council, he emphasized they would continue to negotiate in good faith on the issues. Mr. Erickson then broached the other matter of concern, the water issue upon which he elaborated. He questioned why they should pay the City an additional 51,700 an acre for facilities that would not be in place for ten or fifteen years, if ever, and not providing them with anything more than they had now. 18 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11~ 1983, 10:00 A.M. Both City Manager Talley and Ray Auerbach, Water Engineering Manager, then spoke to Mr. Erickson's concern relative to the water issue during which Mro Auerbach clarified that the City did have ultimate plans in the area for a 30-million gallon reservoir which was the point of contention between the City and S.A.V.I. Mr. Erickson stated it was his understanding then that the Council was not prepared to reach a conclusion on either of the issues today° In the meantime, the Council wanted to proceed with the annexation in the absence of any commitment to them in the form of a development agreement° City Manager Talley stated relative to the City's position, he had been instructed to continue working with representatives of S~A.V.I. to the end of achieving a development agreement and intended to move forward with it expeditiously. Further, the City would request LAFCO to proceed wit~ the annexation and that the conclusion of a development agreement was not required in order to have a LAFCO hearing. After further dialogue between Mr. Talley and Mr. Erickson, the Mayor again reiterated that they would continue to negotiate in good faith. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2390: Pulliam Properties, Inc., (The Ungambling Casino), to permit on-sale of beer and wine in an existing school for gambling instruction on CL zoned property located at 3456 East Orangethorpe Avenue, with a Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC82-208, reported that the Planning Director had determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3o01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirement for an Environmental Impact Report, and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR, and further, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2390, subject to the following conditions: 1. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. 2. That the proposed use is hereby granted for a period of one year to expire on November 15, 1983. 3. That no alcoholic beverages shall be sold or made available to persons other than those paying the standard daily instruction fee of no less than seven ($7.00) dollars. A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the meeting of December 7, 1982, and public hearing scheduled this date. 19 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983~ 10:00 A.M. The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Mr. Jack Teal, Attorney representing the applicant, Wayne Peterson (Ungambling Casino) 505 City Parkway West, Suite 1000, Orange, requested that they grant the use. They were willing to comply with the conditions of the Planning Commission and were prepared to answer any questions. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that the Council had denied the same request one year ago, November 10, 1981. The property was in the Project Alpha area and the Redevelopment Commission, as well as the Police Department, recommended denial of the requested CUP. She questioned Mr. Teal as to why the applicant wanted beer and wine, since that was not the intent when the Ungambling Casino was opened. Mr. Teal explained that patrons had to pay ~7 to enter the Casino. If they wanted to have a beer, they had to leave the establishment and go down to the liquor store and thereafter consumed their beverage as they sat out in the parking lot. The manager had to continually clear the lot of empty containers. Their intent was to keep the people at the Casino, and also to get more people to patronize it. He also confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that they did not have to pay a second fee if they left the building and then came back in. This was controlled by a hand stamp. ' Councilwoman Kaywood asked if this was a subterfuge for a gambling casino. Mr. Teal answered that it was not a gambling casino, and Mr. Peterson did not have any method or way of gambling at the business. It was strictly to instruct people who intended to go to Las Vegas or wherever to gamble. There were no facilities for buying chips, trading them in and getting money back. Patrons received 700 chips for ~7. If they lost all those chips, they could buy an additional 100 chips for ~1. Mr. Teal then reported the following as a result of questioning by Council Members: The business had two functions, one as a school for instruction on how to play blackjack or roulette, the other where patrons could actually play poker and have somebody advising them how to play. They found that they were losing customers by not having beer and wine, and if they did so, the business would be paying much more taxes to the City than at present. On Mondays, it was a state licensed school for dealing, with no beer and wine to be s01d on that day. The other days were for general lessons to the public. Hours of operation were from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Mr. Wayne Peterson, applicant, 575 Laguna Canyon Way, Laguna, then explained that the Monday class was taught by licensed dealers approved by the State in a course also approved by the State. The blackjack course was 64 hours in length and cost ~300, and the course in craps was 120 hours in length and cost ~500. The students were preparing to learn both games in order to be able to deal either in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, or wherever there was a job. On other nights, those people would deal to the public, which gave them a 2O City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11, 1983~ 10:00 A.M. knowledge of what to do under actual conditions. Relative to the number of patrons, he explained it had to do with the time of day. In the evening, they averaged 20 to 25 people, and on weekends the average was 20 to 30. The request for beer and wine was basically to assist with the overhead structure. Presently, there was no age limit, but with beer and wine it would be 21. Councilman Bay agreed with Councilwoman Kaywood that there was no basic concept or logic as to why beer and wine would be necessary in a school. He saw no correlation whatsoever in serving alcoholic beverages to students in the process of learning. Councilwoman Kaywood stated if it were not for the school, she did not believe the business would have been permitted in Anaheim at all; Miss Santalahti stated that the first business license was issued on the basis of being told it was a training facility° Councilwoman Kaywood noted that there were nine Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC) licenses already issued in the area, and if someone had to have a drink, they had nine places to go; Mr. Teal stated he believed she was reading that from the Police Department report to the Council. There were two places in the Center itself, a sandwich shop next door, which closed about 4:00 p.m., and the other was off-sale liquor at the end of the center. Otherwise, there was nothing for 1/2 mile. They had been trying to figure out where the nine places were in the area. Councilwoman Kaywood then broached the requested Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, noting that 218 were required and there were 175 existing, which she presumed was even without the beer and wine. Miss Santalahti explained that beer and wine required a slightly higher parking requirement. The Commission's reason for accepting the waiver was the fact that the users of the Training School would be drinking and thus, they would not be generating parking as with a bar. Sgt. James Brantley then gave the names and locations of the nine businesses who had ABC licenses in the area and the types of licenses involved. In summation, Mr. Teal stated they tried to answer all questions, involved was an Anaheim businessman trying to conduct his business, and in order for him to survive, he needed a variance of parking spaces from 175 to 218 or 219. Other businesses were not open in the center when Mr. Peterson's business was most viable, basically in the evening. Further, if he could have the variance to secure the beer and wine license, he would be able to make a success of his business. The Planning Commission granted the permit for a period of one year, to November 15, 1983, and they had no objection to that. The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak. 21 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January liD 1983, 10:00 A.M. Mr. Gustave Bode, 726 North East Street, offered a suggestion to Mr. Peterson as to how he might reduce his overhead. There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing. ENVIROhMENTAL ~PACT REPORT -'CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the City Council ratified the determination of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 1, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood offered a resolution to deny Conditional Use Permit No. 2390 on the basis that the business was in the Project Alpha area, the Redevelopment Commission and Police Department recommended denial, the purpose, original intent and reason the CUP was granted initially was on the basis of the business being a school for gambling instruction. The fact that it would not be permitted to serve beer and wine on the day it was an actual school was for her an indication that it was not a proper use. Before any action was taken, Mayor Roth stated he had a problem with one of the reasons for denial, that being the fact that it was in the Redevelopment area. He did not understand how that would have any effect. More importantly, the Police Department's recommendation of denial was based solely on the number of alcoholic beverage licenses in the area, rather than the conduct of the Ungambling Casino in the past 12 months. If gambling was being conducted in the facility, other problems, or if someone were arrested in the Casino, he would take a different attitude. The Planning Commission supported the request with a one-year probation to see how it would work out. Councilman Overholt agreed with the Mayor and if something was going on, Sgt. Brantley and his organization would eventually find it. The beer and wine licenBe was a means whereby they could create an atmosphere on non-instruction days to keep people at the casino without having them go to other places in the area. He saw no legitimate reason to deny them to operate with a beer and wine license. Councilman Pickler asked with regard to the Police report, if the only reason for their recommendation of denial was due to the other alcoholic beverage licensed in the area; Sgt. Brantley answered it was that reason in conjunction with the fact that the Police Department did not feel that a secondary educational school needed an ABC license, as they had initially stated a year ago. A roll call vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution of denial offered by Councilwoman Kaywood and failed to carry by the following vote: 22 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 11~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ka~ood and Bay Pickler, Overholt and Roth None Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 83R-14 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2390 in accordance with the City Planning Commission conditions and Interdepartmental recommendations. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 83R-14: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2390. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickier, Overholt and Roth KNywood and Bay None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 83R-14 duly passed and adopted. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. p.m.) (2:31 AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (4:03 p.m.) ADJOURkMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:03 p.m.) LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK 23