08/25/2020ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR AND REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING
OF AUGUST 25, 2020
The regular meeting of August 25, 2020 was called to order at 3:00 P.M. and adjourned for lack of a
quorum. The regular adjourned meeting of August 25, 2020 was called to order at 5:02 P.M.
telephonically, pursuant to Governor Newsom's Executive Order N-29-20 (superseding the Brown Act
related provisions of Executive Order N-25-20) in response to COVID-19. The meeting notice,
agenda, and related materials were duly posted on August 20, 2020.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
INVOCATION:
FLAG SALUTE:
Mayor Harry Sidhu and Council Members Stephen Faessel, Jordan
Brandman, Jose F. Moreno, Lucille Kring, and Trevor O'Neil. Council
Member Denise Barnes joined during closed session (all via
teleconference).
Interim City Manager Greg Garcia, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and
City Clerk Theresa Bass
Council Member Jose F. Moreno
Council Member Denise Barnes
Acce tance of Other Recognitions To be resented at a later date):
Recognizing September 2020, as World Alzheimer's Awareness Month
Recognizing September 2020, as National Preparedness Month
Recognizing September 2020, as National Library Card Sign -Up Month
Recognizing September 2020, as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that 23 public comments were received electronically prior to
3:00 P.M. related to City Council agenda items and matters within the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City
Council [A final total of 23 public comments were received electronically and distributed to the City
Council related to City Council agenda items and matters within the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City
Council and made part of the official record]. — See Appendix.
CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE:
Interim City Manager Greg Garcia announced the U.S. Census was ongoing with a September 30
response deadline. He reported Anaheim's response rate was 70.7% as of August 25, which is an
increase over the total 2010 response rate of 69%. In comparison, he reported the Orange County
response rate is currently 74% and the State of California rate is currently 66.5%. He advised efforts
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 2 of 14
continue to get as many people in the community counted and responding. He noted U.S. Census
takers started visiting households the week of August 11 between 9:00 A.M. and 9:00 P.M., including
weekends. He also advised there would be mobile questionnaire assistance centers at food
distribution sites at the City's community centers and parks. Lastly, he noted information about the
census would continue to be distributed through various means, including the complete count
committee members.
Mr. Garcia reported 22 fire personnel from Anaheim were distributed throughout the state to assist
with firefighting efforts. He offered thoughts to all those affected by the fires, expressed pride in the
City's employees, and wished them well and a safe return. He further announced that 14 emergency
evacuation signs had been installed in east Anaheim as part of the "Know Your Way" campaign to
assist residents to leave their neighborhoods in the event of a disaster. He advised the signs are
along major streets, building upon lessons learned during the Canyon 2 fire event, and new maps
and routes would be shared with residents soon.
Council Member Moreno inquired if the information was available about specific areas struggling with
Census response, to which Mr. Garcia responded that information about census tracts with low
response rates is provided in advance so that efforts could be concentrated there. Mr. Garcia stated
he would follow up regarding any real-time data to assist with efforts through the family resource
centers. Council Member Moreno requested a memo with information by Council
district/geography/zip codes to allow for greater assistance and outreach.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiry, Mr. Garcia reported documents were being
finalized to be made available to the community in advance of the September 9th Special Planning
Commission meeting regarding Angels Baseball. Additionally, he advised that virtual Town Halls were
being planned in advance of an agenda item coming before the City Council at the end of September.
Council Member Moreno requested a workshop to allow City Council to discuss any community
benefits package in advance of an agenda item for voting.
Council Member Moreno expressed concerns with issues regarding the Post Office including voting
and receipt of medicine/checks/etc. Mr. Garcia reported there was nothing specific to Anaheim
regarding mail impacts or delays. He announced Vote Centers would be open throughout the City for
a time leading up to the election for in-person voting as well as to drop off ballots and noted voters
could use the Ballot Drop Boxes throughout the City. Council Member Moreno requested an update
at the next meeting.
In response to Council Member O'Neil's inquiry, Chief Communications Officer Mike Lyster reported
there were no significant changes to evacuation routes but they continue to be refined with more
information going to the specific street level to assist residents leaving their homes and getting to the
major streets. He reported the main strategy is to push people north to the 91 Freeway and west
away from fires that typically come from the east. Lastly, he reported 17 zones/specific neighborhood
maps were currently being developed.
CONSENT CALENDAR: At 5:22 P.M., the consent calendar was considered with Council
Member Kring pulling Item No. 14; Council Member Barnes pulling Item Nos. 08 and 22; and Council
Member Moreno pulling Item No. 15 for separate discussion and consideration.
MOTION: Council Member Kring moved to waive reading of all ordinances and resolutions, and
adopt the balance of the consent calendar as presented, in accordance with reports, certifications,
and recommendations furnished each city council member and as listed on the consent calendar,
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 3 of 14
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Faessel. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council
Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and O'Neil); NOES — 0. Motion carried.
B105 1. Receive and file minutes of the Library Board meeting of July 13, 2020.
D116 2. Approve proclamations recognizing Anaheim Public Library for receiving two PR Xchange
Awards from the American Library Association and recognizing September 17-23, as
Constitution Week.
0144.6 3. Approve a response to the 2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Report, "OC Recycling:
Doing it the Right Way," and direct the Interim City Manager to execute a letter and forward
the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Court and the Orange County
Grand Jury.
D129 4. Authorize the Fire Chief, or designee, to accept a donation of merchandise (10 mattresses)
from American Freight (formerly known as Sears Outlet), valuing at $3,000, to the Fire &
Rescue Department.
5. Accept the bids from LineGear Fire and Rescue Equipment, All Star Fire Equipment, Inc., and
D180 Municipal Emergency Services, in a combined not to exceed amount of $59,619.15 plus
applicable tax, to provide fire boots for the Anaheim Fire and Rescue Department for a one
year period with four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to
exercise the renewal options, in accordance with Bid #9455.
D180 6. Accept the bid from Digital Scepter, in the amount of $230,020 plus applicable tax, for the
purchase of Palo Alto replacement network firewall hardware as well as related software and
support, in accordance with Bid #9458.
D180 7. Accept the bid from Glass Box Technology, in the amount of $183,774 plus applicable tax, for
the as needed purchase of AXIS Communications traffic systems CCTV equipment for a one
year period with four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to
exercise the renewal options, in accordance with Bid #9454.
D180 9• Waive the sealed bid requirement of Council Policy 4.0 and approve an increase to the current
master agreement with Bound Tree Medical, in the amount of $30,000 increasing the
agreement from $281,113.38 to $311,113.38, for the purchase of additional medical supplies
due to unexpected usage during the current pandemic.
10. Approve a professional services agreement with Seam Group, LLC, in the total contract
AGR- amount of $205,594.20 to be paid over the course of five years, to conduct an Arc Flash
11456.A Hazard Study at the Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim West Tower, City Hall, Police
Main Station, Police East and West Stations, Police Heliport, Edwards Utility complex, and the
Public Works Yard.
AGR- 11. Approve an agreement with Occu-Med, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $500,000, to provide
1914.E medical services in the area of occupational health and medical standards, including pre-
employment medical evaluation services and other employment -oriented medical services, for
a three year period, with a two year optional extension.
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 4 of 14
AGR- 12. Approve an engineering services agreement with Harris & Associates, Inc., in an amount not
12122 to exceed $236,000, for the design of the La Reina Circle and Lincoln Avenue (West of
Magnolia Avenue) Sanitary Sewer Improvements Project; and authorize the Director of Public
Works to execute the agreement and related documents, and take necessary actions to
implement and administer the agreement.
AGR -12123 13. Approve Master Agreements with seven contractors, each in a not to exceed amount of
AGR -12124 $300,000 per work order package or request with no more than three open packages or
AGR -12125 requests at any one time, for facility maintenance, repair, replacement, and immediate
AGR -12126 response services to be used as needed for city facilities with a term ending date of
AGR -12127 September 15, 2021 and one two-year optional renewal; authorize the Director of Public
AGR -12128 Works to execute and administer the agreements and to take necessary actions to implement
AGR -12129 the agreements; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the term
and conditions of the Agreements, as long as such changes are determined to be de minimis
by the City Attorney (Allison Mechanical, Inc., Control Air Enterprises LLC, Harbor Pointe Air
Conditioning & Control Systems, Inc., Pacific West Industries, Inc. dba Pacific West Air
Conditioning, South Coast Mechanical, Thermal Concepts, Inc., and Trane U.S., Inc. dba
Trane).
AGR- 16. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-098 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
3989.11.13 CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the 2019 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
fund transfer agreement between the City of Anaheim and the County of Orange, authorizing
the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required to transfer the grant fund,
and authorizing the acceptance of such grant fund on behalf of the City and amending the
budget for the Fiscal Year 2020-21 accordingly (grant fund allocation of $86,387; revenue and
appropriations increase of $77,748).
17. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-099 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
D182 CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting an Energy Storage Plan and determining that a procurement
target of up to 50 Megawatts of energy storage systems by December 31, 2026 is appropriate
subject to City Council authorization for future capital expenditures and authorizing the Public
Utilities General Manager or designee to prepare, execute, and submit documents and take
such actions as necessary in connection with the determination made hereunder.
P100 18. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting an irrevocable offer of dedication for public park purposes
(Lake House residential development; Lots C and F of Tract Map No. 17819; Anaheim Coves
Trail connection and pocket park).
Pilo 19. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-101 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating a public utility easement located at 1919 S. State College
Boulevard pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 27383, et seq. —
Summary Vacation (ABA2019-00399; City Deed No. 12235; 1919 S. State College
Boulevard).
20. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-102 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
P124 CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim certain real
properties or interests therein (City Deed No. 12323, 1919 S. State College Boulevard; in
conjunction with the Gene Autry Way, from Westside Drive to State College Boulevard, and
State College Boulevard (West Side) from Artisan Court to Gateway Office Improvement
Project and future City rights-of-way).
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 5 of 14
R100 21. RESOLUTION NO.. 2020-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying and approving the actions of the Anaheim Director of Public
Works, or designee, in submitting a grant application on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the
California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) for the Sustainable Transportation
Planning (Sustainable Communities) Grant for the update to the General Plan Circulation
Element and create an Environmental Justice Element Project and, authorizing the
acceptance of such grant on behalf of the City and amending the budget accordingly; and,
determine that these actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Guideline Section 15306 (grant funds in the amount of $213,000).
F130.2 23. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-105 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM declaring its intention to grant non-exclusive taxicab franchises for the
purpose of operating taxicab service in the City of Anaheim; stating the terms and conditions
upon which it is proposed to grant the franchises; and establishing the date, hour and place
when and where any persons having any interest herein or any objection thereto may appear
and be heard thereon (Public Hearing scheduled for September 15, 2020).
D114 24. Approve minutes of City Council meetings of November 19, 2019 and December 3, 2019.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
D180 8. Accept the proposal of Wescam USA, Inc., in the amount of $594,901 plus applicable tax, for
the purchase of an airborne, multi -sensor camera system and five year warranty for the
Anaheim Police Department Air Support Unit, in accordance with RFP #9448.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiries, Police Chief Jorge Cisneros
reported the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) funds slotted to pay for this Item come from
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He advised the UASI Board of Directors approved
the proposal and noted the project is highly important due to the age of the City's current camera and
improved technologies in the current model. He confirmed the UASI Board of Directors' vote was
unanimous.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Police Chief Cisneros reported the Police
Department's helicopter fleet averages about 44-48 hours of weekly airtime and only flies one of its
three helicopters at a time. He noted the height of the helicopter could fluctuate depending on the
type of call. He stated the proposed camera system would work better at higher altitudes. He added
non -police helicopter noise could also be prevalent in certain neighborhoods. He confirmed the
camera can be shifted between helicopters and added the lighter weight of the cameras will help
helicopter flight performance but the type of call is the biggest factor in the elevation of the helicopter.
Police Chief Cisneros and Police Department Administrative Services Manager Kerrstyn Vega offered
to follow-up with information regarding the percentage of Police helicopter use is for non -Police
matters such as fire, and search and rescue support. Police Chief Cisneros speculated the
percentage of non -Police usages, such as fire support, is minimal.
Mayor Sidhu commented that the Police Department's "eye in the sky" is a critical element to
ensuring public, officer, and even suspect safety and expressed support for the item.
MOTION: Council Member Barnes moved to accept the proposal of Wescam USA, Inc., in the
amount of $594,901 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of an airborne, multi -sensor camera system
and five year warranty for the Anaheim Police Department Air Support Unit, in accordance with RFP
#9448, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Faessel. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Sidhu and
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 6 of 14
Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and O'Neil); NOES — 0. Motion
carried.
AGR- 14. Approve the K-9 Transfer, Release and Hold Harmless/Indemnity Agreement with Sergeant
12130 Anthony V. McGlade, in the amount of $4,000, authorizing the transfer of ownership of retired
Police Service Dog "Titan."
DISCUSSION: Council Member Kring praised the work of Sgt. McGlade and Titan keeping Anaheim
safe.
Council Member Barnes shared fond memories of Titan and his rapport with Sgt. McGlade.
Council Member Moreno congratulated Sgt. McGlade and Titan. In response to his inquiries, Police
Chief Jorge Cisneros confirmed the City is not immediately replacing Titan due to financial concerns.
He confirmed the $4,000 is being paid by Sgt. McGlade.
MOTION: Council Member Kring moved to approve the K-9 Transfer, Release and Hold
Harmless/Indemnity Agreement with Sergeant Anthony V. McGlade, in the amount of $4,000,
authorizing the transfer of ownership of retired Police Service Dog "Titan," seconded by Council
Member Barnes. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes,
Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and O'Neil); NOES — 0. Motion carried.
R100; 15. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-097 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
AGR_ CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to submit a grant
4032.N.1 application on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the California Office of Emergency Services,
for the 2020 Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program.
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the City of
Santa Ana for the 2020 Urban Area Security Initiative.
Police Chief Jorge Cisneros reported Anaheim and Santa Ana have received a Fiscal Year 2020
grant from UASI for $5,250,000, 17.3% of which will be retained by the California Office of
Emergency Services (CaIOES). He advised the City could expect additional funding from the CalOES
for direct support. He identified ways the grant money helps Anaheim and Santa Ana.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Police Department Administrative
Services Manager Kerrstyn Vega confirmed the four priorities for this funding are enhancing
cybersecurity (including election security), enhancing the protection of soft targets and crowded
places (including election security), enhancing information and intelligence sharing in cooperation
with federal agencies (including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)), and addressing
emerging threats. She advised that 20% of the funds must be allocated to these priorities and the
remaining 80% must be directed to the gaps identified in the Urban Areas Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA). She confirmed existing terrorism threats are considered
classified information, and sharing specific information is calculated by the DHS and Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI). She confirmed the larger the population, the more information flows from the
federal government, noting Anaheim/Santa Ana ranks No. 15 on the list. She added special events
and critical infrastructure also enters into the equation.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Police Chief Cisneros confirmed there are times
when the City must request additional aid. He stated the City has handled peaceful demonstrations
well recently with no arrests after the first one. He confirmed the Police Department will own its
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 7 of 14
mistakes as any organization should and confirmed this grant will not prevent the Anaheim Police
Department from doing its job. He advised the department complies with all state law and noted if
assistance is needed, it is his responsibility to request aid through Orange County. Lastly, he
confirmed the Anaheim Police Department does not racially profile.
MOTION: Council Member Barnes moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2020-097 A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Chief of Police
or his designee to submit a grant application on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the California Office
of Emergency Services, for the 2020 Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program; and
authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Santa Ana
for the 2020 Urban Area Security Initiative, seconded by Council Member Kring. ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES — 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and
O'Neil); NOES — 0. Motion carried.
C350 22. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-104 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
C340 CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Plan for the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening Project and making the required environmental
findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Approve the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening from West Street to Harbor Boulevard Project
design and alignment; and reaffirm City Council direction to cease work on the right-of-way
acquisition and construction phases of the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening from West Street
to Harbor Boulevard Project, until there is sufficient community support.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Director of Public Works Rudy
Emami clarified "stakeholders" applies to anyone who would be impacted by the widening of Lincoln
Avenue. He advised this includes residents of the surrounding area impacted by cut -through traffic,
property and business owners on Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim High School students and their parents,
along with St. Boniface's Catholic Church members. He noted the community is opposed to the
project. He stated the City would not initiate the project until they received a request from the
stakeholders
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Mr. Emami noted the City would not proceed with this
project unless there is a majority of community support from residential constituents and businesses.
In response to Council Member O'Neil's inquiry, Mr. Emami confirmed the repayment of the $590,000
could come from either the General Fund or the Gas Tax.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiry, Mr. Emami clarified he meant all Anaheim High
School students and their parents. He advised residents who drive the farthest to school are the most
impacted with the congestion. He reiterated stakeholders remain strongly opposed to this project at
the current time.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiry, Mr. Emami confirmed the project would move the
centerline of Lincoln Avenue north because the Environmental Analysis determined it would be the
least impactful option. He advised that as a part of this action the City is canceling its grant to carry
right-of-way but it needs to be defined.
Council Member Moreno advised he would support the Item and criticized previous Council action
that accepted a grant the City now must return due to strong public opposition to the project. He
advised Mr. Emami to look into other solutions to address the area's congestion.
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 8 of 14
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiry, Mr. Emami confirmed the City can change the
Orange County Transportation Authority's Master Plan but it would bring undesirable results. He
advised it would require an Area Traffic Analysis covering parallel streets like Sycamore Street and
Broadway as alternative options to alleviate congestion on Lincoln Avenue. He advised this
hypothetical would not be a good solution based upon the often -stated feelings of the area's
residents.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiry, Mr. Emami advised Fullerton carries more traffic on
Lemon Street instead of Harbor Boulevard, whereas Anaheim carries almost all of its traffic on Harbor
Boulevard. He advised the City needs to analyze where it wants to push traffic if taking it off main
streets.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Mr. Emami confirmed this action would halt the
project and reported staff has no intention of reviving the project until the community requests it. He
advised the City would continue to look at other potential improvements to Lincoln Avenue such as
improving the intersection at Harbor Boulevard and pushing for a school drop-off zone not located on
Lincoln Avenue. He noted Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) drivers find the current
turnouts challenging to navigate which cause delays in bus service and traffic backup behind them.
He stated the removal of street parking would require input from businesses whose customers rely on
those spaces.
MOTION: Council Member Kring moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2020-104 A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening Project and making the
required environmental findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
approve the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening from West Street to Harbor Boulevard Project design
and alignment; and reaffirm City Council direction to cease work on the right-of-way acquisition and
construction phases of the Lincoln Avenue Street Widening from West Street to Harbor Boulevard
Project, until there is sufficient community support, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Faessel. ROLL
CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and
O'Neil); NOES — 1 (Council Member Moreno). Motion carried.
R100 25. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM announcing its commitment to end child marriage by calling for an "End
Child Marriage Under 18, No Exceptions" Law and authorizing the City Manager, or designee,
to publish educational information pertaining to ending child marriage.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno reported child marriage with no age limit is legal in California
and terming it "disconcerting." He advised it is a violation of human rights as declared by the United
Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF). He advised the United States has
denounced it in other countries as a human rights abuse contributing to economic hardship. He
reported child marriage is legal in 46 states with over 200,000 since 2000 with marriages happening
as young as age 12 and advised 10 states, including California, have no minimum age for marriage.
He reported child marriage often happens with girls, stunting their personal and educational
development through early pregnancy, social isolation, is often used to cover up statutory rape, and
leads to higher than normal incidents of infant mortality, domestic violence, and divorce. He urged the
City Council to join Irvine and other cities to pass a resolution to end marriage under the age of 18
with no exceptions. He added Irvine's State Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie -Norris has publicly stated
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 9 of 14
her commitment to looking into the issue at the State level and asked the City Council to urge
Anaheim's state legislators to take up this issue.
Council Member Moreno reported the Anaheim Police Department is a County leader in the fight
against human trafficking. He added California leads the nation in calls to the National Human
Trafficking Hotline and human and sex trafficking is up 842%. Lastly, he noted human trafficking is
tied to child trafficking, which is tied to child marriage.
Council Member Brandman thanked Council Members Moreno and Barnes, Mayor Sidhu, and Interim
City Manager Greg Garcia for their work to bring the resolution to fruition and expressed support for
the item.
Mayor Sidhu, Mayor Pro Tem Faessel, and Council Members Barnes, Kring, and O'Neil expressed
their support for the item.
MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2020-106 A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM announcing its commitment to
end child marriage by calling for an "End Child Marriage Under 18, No Exceptions" Law and
authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to publish educational information pertaining to ending
child marriage, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Faessel. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7 (Mayor Sidhu
and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and O'Neil); NOES — 0. Motion
carried.
0148 26. Nominate and appoint a voting delegate and up to two voting alternates to the League of
California Cities annual conference, to be held on October 7 - 9, 2020.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Barnes reported she has already signed up for the event as a City
representative and invited others to attend. Council Member Moreno nominated Council Member
Barnes as the voting delegate.
In response to Mayor Sidhu's inquiry, City Clerk Theresa Bass confirmed there is not presently an
alternate delegate. Council Member Barnes nominated Council Member Kring as the alternate. City
Clerk Theresa Bass stated the City can have up to two alternates, but not required.
APPOINTMENT. Council Member Barnes
ALTERNATE: Council Member Kring
ALTERNATE: none selected
Council Member Moreno nominated Council Member Barnes as the voting delegate and Council
Member Barnes nominated Council Member Kring as the alternate. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 7
(Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring, and O'Neil); NOES
— 0. Nominations approved.
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 10 of 14
D116 27. Update on the City's Response to COVID-19.
Mayor Sidhu reported Orange County was taken off the State watch list on August 22 due to
improvements in COVID-19 monitoring data. He praised residents and businesses for following best
practices such as social distancing and wearing facemasks. He advised that these best practices
must still be followed to remain below the State monitoring threshold and to begin reopening. He
stressed protecting public health and reopening the economy are not mutually exclusive. He urged
residents not to let their guard down and allow the City to regress, forcing businesses to shut their
doors again and schools to remain closed in the fall.
Interim City Manager Greg Garcia commented the City is not through the pandemic yet and residents
should maintain their vigilance.
Chief Communication Officer Mike Lyster reported Anaheim has seen 8,006 running cases since
March 27 with 211 deaths. He added there have been 546 cases at skilled nursing facilities with 102
deaths. He advised there have been 715 cases among children but no known deaths in Anaheim. He
noted there is continued improvement in average cases per week although they are still too high in
many neighborhoods. He added there were no new cases in nursing facilities during the past week.
Mr. Lyster advised the County was removed from the State monitoring list on August 22 and noted
the County must stay off the list for 14 days ending on September 6. He advised that should Orange
County remain off the list public schools could opt for in-person classes as soon as September 8. He
advised that individual districts would make this decision with distance learning underway for most of
Anaheim and set to continue for the near-term.
Mr. Lyster advised the City is awaiting State guidance for businesses to potentially reopen after
September 6. He clarified the City needs to hear which businesses could reopen and which ones may
require some operational modifications. He advised staff has been working on messaging which
stresses the need to remain vigilant. He noted it is bilingual best practices messaging targeting high -
impact neighborhoods and messaging regarding testing will continue.
Mr. Garcia reported staff has been working on residential internet access, focusing mainly on virtual
learning schoolchildren, with the Public Utilities Department taking the lead. He expressed his hopes
there will be details to present to the City Council soon on programs and local partnerships with Wi-Fi
providers.
Mr. Garcia reported the City currently has just three COVID-19 positive employees, which reflects the
City's vigilance in protecting its employees. He advised there have been a total of 47 City employee
cases with 44 having recovered. He noted the City continues to distribute Personal Protection
Equipment (PPE) into the community and is increasing the quantities distributed and advised there
will be a specific facemask giveaway in early September. He expects there to be public confusion
over what will be reopened so Code Enforcement is busy ensuring compliance and is prepared to
assist with guidance in advance. He highlighted the Anaheim Convention Center testing site and
noted staff has been working with the County to extend it for the foreseeable future. Lastly, he
advised the site would be available to schools as they decide whether or not to reopen.
Mr. Garcia reported the United States House of Representatives and Senate did not come up with a
compromise on another COVID-19 relief package before leaving for its current recess. He noted the
City continues to advocate for assistance to state and local governments.
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 11 of 14
DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tem Faessel stated his appreciation Mr. Garcia's regular updates on
Emergency Operations Center (EOC) conditions and for Mr. Lyster and his team for the thorough
website and regularly update. He noted other municipalities around the County use it as a model.
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Mr. Garcia stated issuing parking is something the
City has struggled with so they have continued to push back timelines for street sweeping. He added
it has been a tough balance because they receive complaints on both sides. Director of Public Works
Rudy Emami added the City stopped all parking enforcement unless there were safety-related
concerns. He advised the street -sweeping citations have restarted after community outreach. He
advised parking permits were automatically renewed because City Hall was closed, but now that is it
reopened, people can do it safely online. He reported staff has been as flexible as possible navigating
the crisis.
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiries, Mr. Garcia confirmed staff has recently placed
large -quantity PPE orders giving him the confidence to start distribution plans for the second week of
September. He advised the details would be disseminated once they are locked down. He reported
there is PPE on hand, but there is much more on its way, knowing the pandemic will be around for a
long time still. He intends to use Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act
funding to assist in this effort. He reported he did not have a status update on the most recent
allocation to the Anaheim Community Foundation (ACF) but one can be provided.
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Mr. Garcia confirmed he signed the order to extend
the eviction moratorium. He added he can continue to advocate for a statewide solution Mr. Lyster
confirmed the information was added to the City's website in real-time once the action was taken at
the August 11th City Council meeting.
Council Member Brandman expressed his pleasure at seeing many Anaheim resident's social
distancing and wearing masks, adding it is a marked improvement.
Council Member Moreno commended Orange County Public Health Director, Dr. Clayton Chau, for
providing incredible local -level data and his work in helping contain the virus. He praised Mayor Sidhu
for his earlier comments about politics having no place in a discussion of public health, citing a lack of
data in some areas for providing an opportunity for political mayhem, eroding public trust, and placing
the public at risk. He expressed his belief that public health and not economics has created a
recession, if not depression, and the City cannot reopen its economy without a robust public health
plan. He expressed concerns about a few uncompliant businesses forcing things to close back down
earlier in the pandemic.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Mr. Garcia confirmed the City receives regular
case count and hot spot zip code data from Orange County. He advised the City tries to focus its
efforts on those hot spot neighborhoods, targeting them with PPE, communication, and testing. He
did not have the data on hand but stated it is all trending positive and offered to send it along. Council
Member Moreno expressed dissatisfaction at not having the numbers immediately available.
Council Members Kring and O'Neil both thanked Mr. Garcia and Mr. Lyster for the updates.
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Mr. Lyster confirmed Orange County is in the
process of translating the testing application form into several different languages per a statement
earlier that day from Public Health Director Chau. He advised the delay on the County's end is not
only the form itself but also having staff on hand who can converse in those languages. He added it
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 12 of 14
should be fixed in a matter of days, including versions in Spanish, Korean, Mandarin, Vietnamese,
and other languages.
Council Member Moreno requested additional data from the County be presented to City Council by
staff to support decisions in the interest of public health. In response to Council Member Moreno's
inquiries, Mr. Garcia advised he does not receive daily zip code -level updates. He stated he would
package up the data he has and send it to the City Council. He advised local schools have been
getting their data from the same calls he has been on.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Mr. Lyster stated he receives the number of
cases for each zip code daily but not the positivity rate. He noted the rates in hot spot zip codes are
about two times higher than the County average. He advised the state requirement to come off the
list as being below 100 cases per 100,000 residents with a positivity rate below 8%, but the state
does not look at just Anaheim but rather Orange County as a whole. He advised the City has the
challenge of communicating to its residents how the pandemic remains strongly entrenched in
Anaheim even when the County is clear to start reopening. He noted staff could calculate the
positivity rate from the data on hand but cautioned the City may not know the exact 14 -day period the
County is taking so the first preference would be to get the numbers from the County instead.
In response to Council Member Moreno's inquiries, Mr. Garcia clarified that once the County and City
are off the list on September 6th it has no idea what the State's reopening guidance will look like. He
confirmed the City has already declared its own public health emergency. City Attorney Robert
Fabela stated the City has chosen to abide by the County in general but does have the ability to
address public health issues specific to its jurisdiction. He confirmed it can consider its restrictions but
reiterated it has generally followed the County Public Health Officer's lead.
Council Member Moreno asked his colleagues to consider a Special Meeting to consider a more
localized and data -driven reopening plan because the next Regular Meeting will not be until after
September 6.
Mayor Sidhu clarified this is an informational Item and not an action item.
In response to Council Member Barnes' inquiry, Mr. Garcia clarified the state has not given Orange
County the right to reopen. He advised there first must be a continuation in the downward trends for
14 days along with required guidance from the State and County. He advised schools could make
their own decisions on reopening due to their unilateral authority. He believes it will not be a full
reopen but rather a step-by-step process with great caution from learning a lesson on the last failed
attempt.
Council Member O'Neil expressed his desire to not complicate operational matters for Anaheim
businesses even further than the state mandates. He advised that if the County numbers are moving
towards a reopening he believes the City should support it. He noted the school districts have the
localized data on infection rates and those decisions are theirs to make and not the City's. He stated
the pandemic is a regional issue and operating independently of the County does not make sense.
He stated he stands behind the decisions being made at the County level.
Informational Item- No action taken.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (non -agenda items): None
City Council Minutes of August 25, 2020
Page 13 of 1d
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS/AGENDA REQUESTS:
Mayor Pro Tem Faessel requested the meeting adjourn in memory of Darrell Ament, former Public
Utilities Assistant General Manager of Finance. He reported he reached out to Assembly Member
Tom Daly's office regarding Caltrans not addressing homeless encampments on their property during
COVID. He reported that through the efforts of the staff of Assembly members Daly and Sharon
Quirk -Silva, a partnership was arranged with Caltrans and the City's Code Enforcement Division to
address the encampments, with recent efforts conducted at the 1-5 and Orangewood and the 91
Freeway and Harbor Boulevard. He stated that last Tuesday they held a socially distanced meeting
with the Police Department in the Almont community to address traffic and parking concerns. He
thanked the North Net Joint Powers Authority for his election to Chairperson of that body. He
announced he and his wife Susan recently celebrated their 48th anniversary. He shared that he and
Susan joined ICNA Relief last Friday on Canfield Street to distribute food, masks, hand sanitizer, and
shopping bags and today he joined the Orange County Labor Federation to distribute 250 food boxes
to residents.
Council Member Barnes emphasized the use of masks and referring to health care officials for
recommendations. She addressed the need for more clean-ups along the highways and the railroad
to keep residents safe, secure, and healthy. She asked the City Attorney's office to work with the
railroads to address needed repairs, clean-ups, etc. She requested staff develop an application to
assist residents with evacuation routes. She thanked all those who have come through food
distribution sites and stated her commitment to ensuring food and housing are available. She asked
the City Manager to provide information on how Visit Anaheim has used the funding they received
from the City.
Council Member Brandman encouraged residents to visit www.anaheim.net to connect to the many
services and resources provided by Anaheim Library Services. He reported his participation in a
conference call with members of the Lakeview Homeowners Association (HOA) in the Anaheim
Shores area of District 2 regarding the growing need for homeless services at John Marshall Park. He
thanked the community and City staff for coming up with some good actions that will resolve several
issues facing the HOA which will lead to improvements that have been long needed in that area. He
reminded everyone to stay vigilant in the face of fatigue and constraints on daily lives, to practice all
safety measures recommended by the CDC and the California Department of Public Health, and to
contact the City via the website, Anaheim Anytime, or his office if they need assistance.
Council Member Moreno thanked Interim City Manager Greg Garcia for the update and direction to
staff to review broadband access to assist with access to virtual library services, distance learning for
students, entrepreneurs, and those working from home. He hoped the City could use some COVID
relief funding to address the digital divide by collaborating with telecommunications companies,
school districts, and local businesses. He shared data about the different percentages of the
community who currently have broadband access. He thanked Dukku Lee and Public Utilities staff for
a Zoom meeting, including simultaneous translation, to share programs and support systems for
residents. He invited everyone to a Zoom meeting on August 27 at 6:30 P.M. with public health expert
Dr. America Bracho, Latino Health Access executive director, to discuss recent data and how to best
develop public health initiatives and best practices. He thanked his colleagues for supporting the
resolution to end child marriage. He requested an agenda item for September 15 to discuss a report
from the City Clerk and City Manager on how Council could use video conferencing to meet and allow
the public to provide live comment, citing the Police Review Board as an example, concurred by
Council Member Barnes (request failed for lack of a second concurrence). He asked his colleagues to
consider re -opening City Council meetings as part of other re -opening procedures. He thanked staff
City Council Minutes_ of August 25, 2020
Page 14 of 14
for their work with limited resources and parameters and thanked Public Works Director Emami and
Interim City Manager Garcia for reconsidering speed humps in the Willow Park neighborhood.
Council Member Kring reported she joined with Council Member Barnes and Congressman Lou
Correa at a Serving Our Community food distribution at the Sheraton Park Hotel to assist hospitality
workers affected by COVID-19 shutdowns. She announced that on August 26, the City would join
with others nationwide by lighting City Hall purple and yellow to commemorate the women's suffrage
movement and the 100th anniversary of the 191 Amendment, sharing that Miriam Kaywood was
Anaheim's first female City Council member, elected in 1974, with a total of seven women council
members. She reminded residents to tip and toss any standing water inside and outside, use bug
spray, and wear long sleeves and pants in order to combat mosquitos. She advised concerns about
standing water in public spaces could be referred to Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control,
which also has great resources at www.ocvector.oru. She announced September is National Library
Card Sign -Up Month and shared that a friend estimated she saved about $200/month by using
curbside checkout and other library services and commended the Library staff for their system and
services.
Mayor Sidhu emphasized that the City and County were within a 14 -day watch period and
encouraged everyone to wear masks when outside their homes, keep six-foot distancing, avoid large
gatherings, wash hands often, and use sanitizer regularly so that everyone can move forward
together. He thanked Interim City Manager Garcia for his service and leadership over the last few
months.
ADJOURNMENT:
At 8:02 P.M., with no further business before the Council, Mayor Sidhu adjourned the City Council
meeting in in memory of Darrell Ament.
pally submitted,
ere a::3ass, CMC
Clay C ork
From:Andrew Esquivel
To:Ellie Yazdani;Public Comment
Subject:Lincoln Ave Widening
Date:Thursday, August 13, 2020 4:47:03 PM
To whoever this email can reach out to, I am a long time anaheim resident- born and raised
here. I do not support the widening of Lincoln Ave much less at the cost of the Anaheim High
School or Visser’s Florists, or St Boniface these places are long time staples of the city and
Lincoln; they hold a special place in the hearts of us in the community. Franklyspeaking the
widening being brought back to the table is frustrating as the community had largely already
spoken up about our disinterest in this project.
From:Steve White
To:Public Comment
Subject:Lincoln Widening
Date:Thursday, August 13, 2020 6:59:44 PM
Please put a stake through this vampire project!
Sent from my iPhone
From:Tamara Jimenez
To:Public Comment
Cc:Jose Moreno;Harry Sidhu (Mayor);Trevor O"Neil;Denise Barnes;Lucille Kring;Jordan Brandman;Stephen
Faessel;Loretta Day
Subject:Strong Support-Item #25 End Child Marriage Under 18, No Exceptions
Date:Friday, August 21, 2020 12:26:44 PM
Good afternoon,
Please accept this as our position of Strong Support for Item #25. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM announcing its commitment to end child marriage
by calling for an “End Child Marriage Under 18, No Exceptions” Law and authorizing the City
Manager, or designee, to publish educational information pertaining to ending child marriage.
Please see below from https://actionnetwork.org/letters/end-child-marriage-in-the-state-of-
california/
Many Americans believe “Child marriage only happens in other countries.” Not so!! Child
marriage is legal and practiced in 46 of the 50 U.S. states including California. Each year in
the United States, children are forced and coerced into marriages. An estimated 248,000
children as young as 12 were married between 2000 and 2010 in the US.
California state laws do not protect minors who are coerced into Child Marriage. Currently,
there is no “age floor” in the state of California and no restrictions on the age difference
between adult men and minor girls that can legally marry. The only way to protect girls from
abusive relationships with older men is to pass an “18 No Exceptions” law.
The American Medical Association has called for an end to Child Marriage stating “Child
marriage is associated with higher rates of sexually transmitted infections, early pregnancies,
divorce, and intimate partner violence when compared to women married at age 21 or older.”
Child marriage adversely affects the victim’s health, education, and employment
opportunities.
Child Marriage is defined as a human rights abuse by the Human Rights Watch, the United
Nations, and UNICEF. We must protect our own children in the state of California.
Current law provisions in the state of California require parental consent for Child Marriage
which are exactly the provisions that allow this abuse to persist. To end the statutory rape of
minors, we must end Child Marriage. We ask you to support our campaign by completing this
form to advocate for “No Child Marriage under 18, No Exceptions.”
Have a great day,
Tamara Jimenez
Community Relations Manager
Anaheim Lighthouse
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and
Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent
unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of
this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The
Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or
drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail
and destroy all copies of the original message.
From:on behalf of Kit Gutierrez
To:Public Comment
Cc:peter@anaheimtogether.com
Subject:Please Support the Mayor"s Community and Economic Recovery Program
Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2020 6:46:55 AM
AGENDA COMMENT
Dear Mayor and City Council:
I am writing to urge your support for Agenda Item 14, the next phase of the Anaheim Community and Economic
Recovery Plan proposed by Mayor Harry Sidhu.
The City Council has helped many residents and businesses through this trying time, but the duration of the COVID-
19 pandemic has exceeded earlier expectations. Anaheim businesses continue suffering under renewed state
restrictions.
More action is needed, which is why we support Agenda Item 14 to use $4 million in federal CARES funding to
sustain and expand this program, including an extension of the eviction moratorium to September 30 and more
funding for rental assistance and small business assistance.
Especially important is helping Anaheim businesses succeed by:
• Waiving special event permits, fees and other red tape so businesses – especially restaurants - can maximize
their ability to operate outdoors is vital and cope with pandemic-induced restrictions.
• Establishing a Buy/Shop/Dine/Hire/Purchase Local program
• Expanding small business assistance and rental assistance programs
• More funding for COVID-19 testing and PPE.
Anaheim restaurants and businesses are struggling to keep their doors open, and many have closed them
permanently. They drive our local economy, create jobs and generate tax revenue.
The regulatory relief and Buy/Shop/Dine/Hire/Purchase Local program are critical to the ability of local businesses
to ride out the economic downturn while developing a long-term culture among Anaheim residents of dining,
drinking, and buying locally.
We urge you to support the Mayor’s Community and Economic Recovery Plan.
Sincerely,
--
Kit Gutierrez
kgutierrez@greatwolf.com
From:on behalf of Katrina Ortiz
To:Public Comment
Cc:peter@anaheimtogether.com
Subject:Please Support the Mayor"s Community and Economic Recovery Program
Date:Friday, August 14, 2020 10:54:23 AM
AGENDA COMMENT
Dear Mayor and City Council:
I am writing to urge your support for Agenda Item 14, the next phase of the Anaheim Community and Economic
Recovery Plan proposed by Mayor Harry Sidhu.
The City Council has helped many residents and businesses through this trying time, but the duration of the COVID-
19 pandemic has exceeded earlier expectations. Anaheim businesses continue suffering under renewed state
restrictions.
More action is needed, which is why we support Agenda Item 14 to use $4 million in federal CARES funding to
sustain and expand this program, including an extension of the eviction moratorium to September 30 and more
funding for rental assistance and small business assistance.
Especially important is helping Anaheim businesses succeed by:
• Waiving special event permits, fees and other red tape so businesses – especially restaurants - can maximize
their ability to operate outdoors is vital and cope with pandemic-induced restrictions.
• Establishing a Buy/Shop/Dine/Hire/Purchase Local program
• Expanding small business assistance and rental assistance programs
• More funding for COVID-19 testing and PPE.
Anaheim restaurants and businesses are struggling to keep their doors open, and many have closed them
permanently. They drive our local economy, create jobs and generate tax revenue.
The regulatory relief and Buy/Shop/Dine/Hire/Purchase Local program are critical to the ability of local businesses
to ride out the economic downturn while developing a long-term culture among Anaheim residents of dining,
drinking, and buying locally.
We urge you to support the Mayor’s Community and Economic Recovery Plan.
Sincerely,
--
Katrina Ortiz
anaheimshores@newportpacific.com
From:Jill Ackerman
To:Public Comment
Subject:Invest in social services
Date:Monday, August 17, 2020 10:19:53 AM
To the Anaheim City Council:
My name is Jill Braman and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater
Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community
health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and
Brown residents and that must come to an end.
The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some
of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020
budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.
Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed
33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related
deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average
for police in California.
I demand that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on
surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.
I also demand that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles.
Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global
pandemic.
I am calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community
refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.
Thank you,
Jill Braman
Sent from my iPhone
From:Emily
To:Public Comment
Subject:Public comment for cooling center
Date:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 1:31:47 PM
With a heat advisory in place, the city of Anaheim needs to ensure they are doing everything to protect their citizens
from heatstroke or even death. By search via google, the city website and the city Facebook, there’s no obvious
information on cooling centers, only alerts about power outages. Surrounding cities like Santa Ana and Tustin have
set up city Senior Centers as cooling centers several days ago in anticipation for the 10 day forecast indicating high
levels of heat. This is a basic human rights issue and one that the city of kindness should not be this late to the game
on, as human lives are at risk. I urge the council to pass a motion opening at least one cooling center within 24
hours, and advertising it clearly both on the Facebook page and website, so those most at risk can access it. Due to
COVID concerns, I urge the council to see how surrounding cities have made use of waivers, masks requirements
and social distancing to keep the current pandemic from spreading even more. Thank you.
Em
From:Edgar Arellano
To:Michelle Gallardo;Public Comment
Cc:Harry Sidhu (Mayor);Lucille Kring;Jordan Brandman;Jose Moreno;Denise Barnes;Stephen Faessel;Trevor
O"Neil
Subject:Our City needs to adhere to its own RHNA requirements
Date:Wednesday, August 19, 2020 2:48:17 PM
Dear Housing and Community Development Commission Chair and Members,
It is unfortunate that our city leaders continue to ignore our community needs for fair and
affordable housing. Rental Assistance is not Affordable Housing. Our own City of Anaheim
April 2019 Housing Element Annual Progress Report for 2014-2021 planning period states
that the City has an extreme deficit of affordable housing an overabundant surplus of above
market rate housing production.
Now it is more prudent than ever to provide safe, dignified, affordable housing options so that
our community can weather the economic & long lasting effects of Coronavirus. As I travel
through our Anaheim City streets I notice that house after house is going up for sale as a mass
exodus of our community begins to take shape. Some are being sold. Many have remained on
the market, reminiscent of the 2008 housing crash as many homes remained on the market
until ultimately joined by hundreds of foreclosures. We should learn from past mistakes and
create incentives for more affordable housing so that our community remains intact.
Our City is shameful for approving above market housing year after year as we've exceeded
our RHNA requirements for that type of housing production. I guess I'll write the #'s to remind
that we should be pushing for the enhancement of affordable housing productions & programs.
Rental Assistance is not enough, nor is that an adequate affordable housing program. To date,
the City has outperformed and exceeded their above moderate-income RHNA requirement,
constructing 7,182, or 4,681 more (287%), than the 2,501 required. The City has permitted
only 145 housing unity in the affordability level of low and very low. What is the point of
having RHNA requirements if the City will continue to decide to build without regard to the
requirements. Again, Rental Assistance is not Affordable Housing.
Once more, since this is the latest solution out of City Hall, Rental Assistance is not
Affordable Housing. Nor is it sustainable. Please continue to champion affordable housing
production in the city and pressure our City Council to adhere to our own City's RHNA
requirements.
Onward!
Edgar Arellano
Resident & Business Owner District 2
From:buddyfitz
To:Public Comment
Subject:Fwd: Public Comment for Aug 25 Anaheim City Council Meeting
Date:Thursday, August 20, 2020 6:40:39 PM
Attachments:Anaheim Aug 25, 2020 Public Comments.pdf
RESENT
-----Original Message-----
From: buddyfitz
To: publiccomment@anahein.net <publiccomment@anahein.net>
Sent: Thu, Aug 20, 2020 6:29 pm
Subject: Public Comment for Aug 25 Anaheim City Council Meeting
Attached Public Comment for Anaheim August 25 council meeting.
From:Noah Juliano
To:Public Comment
Subject:No on Items 8 and 15
Date:Monday, August 24, 2020 11:05:23 AM
Good morning Anaheim City Councilmembers,
My name is Noah Juliano and I am a resident of Santa Ana, CA. I work in Anaheim and have
always been enmeshed into the community.
I ask you all to please deny Item 8’s proposal of $594,901 to update the “Angel” helicopter’s
camera. This is an absolute overspend and foolish allocation of funds. $600K to update a
camera that can already identify a target up to five miles away? That is tax-payer dollars being
used to further a Big Brother panopticon universal fear of surveillance. We don’t need infrared
and low light police eyes in the sky. Please stop giving the police more money to insight fear
and panic in all of our residents. Flying helicopters incessantly into the late hours of the night
is solely a fear tactic. Depriving your citizens of sleep so they are too tired to protest the next
day is psychological warfare. I didn’t sleep for two weeks and was legitimately hallucinating
and manic, resulting in my first stress induced staph infection. They circled above non stop all
of June, driving me to my wits end.
It is also so very expensive to use all of that gasoline to suspend helicopters in the air for hours
on end, which is more tax payer dollars wasted.
I ask you to please deny Item 15. The only acts of terrorism we need to mitigate are the
injustices committed by the police force. “Anti-terror equipment, planning, training and
exercises” does not sound like it shall benefit the community. Crime doesn’t just happen, it
arises when people cannot adequately provide for themselves within this system. Police
aggravate most situations and have been proven to only solve less than 5% of major crimes.
Armed police officers should not be in schools around K-12 students. Replace them with
social workers and nurses, career counselors or mental health experts. Please stop giving the
police more money to fund critical capabilities and infrastructure.
Please approve Item 25 and enact an “End Child Marriage Under 18 No Exceptions.” This one
does not need an explanation and you have absolutely no reason to oppose this measure,
unless you support pedophilia and child trafficking.
Please approve Item 27 and provide an update on the city’s response to the covid pandemic.
Thank you for all of your time and service you all commit to your community. I could never
know the depth and breadth of your daily civic duties, and I truly appreciate you investing
your time and energy to serve your brothers, sisters and everything in between.
Love and Light,
Noah Juliano
From:KATHY CHANCE
To:Public Comment
Cc:Loretta Day
Subject:I SUPPORT Item 8: Purchase of a new HD/IR camera for APD"s Air Support Unit
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 10:13:19 AM
Accept the proposal ofWescamUSA, Inc., in the amount of $594,901 plus applicable tax, for the
purchase of an airborne, multi-sensor camera system and five year warranty for the Anaheim
Police Department Air Support Unit, in accordance with RFP #9448.
SUPPORT
I am in of spending $594,901 plus applicable tax to purchase a
new HD/IR camera for the Anaheim Police Department Air Support Unit.
Kathy Chance
30+ year homeowner
West Anaheim, D-1
From:Edgar Arellano
To:Public Comment;Harry Sidhu (Mayor);Lucille Kring;Jordan Brandman;Denise Barnes;Jose Moreno;Stephen
Faessel;Trevor O"Neil
Subject:No on Consent Calendar Item 8
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:16:18 PM
Just a month ago you approved ~$60,000 for maintenance of the current camera. There is no
reason to spend almost$600,000 to buy a new camera so that PD "can see colors" as stated in
the staff report.
From:KATHY CHANCE
To:Public Comment
Cc:Loretta Day
Subject:I SUPPORT Item 15: Submit Grant Application to CA Office of Emergency Services for the 2020 UASI Grant
Program
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 10:43:53 AM
15.
RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to submit a grant application
on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the California Office of Emergency Services, for the 2020
Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program.
SUPPORT
I am in of item #15 to submit a Grant Application to the CA
Office of Emergency Services for the 2020 UASI Grant Program.
Kathy Chance
30+ year homeowner
West Anaheim, D-1
From:Daniel Paul
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fwd: Lincoln Widening IS MND public comment (Visser"s Florist)
Date:Monday, August 24, 2020 9:25:56 PM
Attachments:Lincoln Widening ISMND comment letter DPaul 082420.pdf
To Whom It May Concern at the Anaheim City Clerk's Office,
For tomorrow's Council hearing, please include the attached as a public comment.
Thank You,
rchitectural Historian
Glendale - La Crescenta, CA
91214
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Glendale, CA91214
August 24, 2020
Anaheim City Council
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim,CA
92805
c/oAnaheim , via email:
publiccomment@anaheim.net
Subject: Lincoln Avenue Widening Project: cultural resources a
property,701 W. Lincoln Avenue.
DearMayor Sidhu, Mayor Pro Tem Faessel, and Council Members Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring,
:
My name is Daniel D. Paul, and Iam a former Anaheim resident,having been raised here. I consider
Anaheim my hometown. Presently I ama 36 CFR Part 61 Federally Qualified Architectural Historian.
,located at 701 W.Lincoln Avenue. Isent this
analysis as a Lincoln Avenue Widening Project comment letter on January 29, 2020, and ittiersoff an
earlier comment letterIsent for the Widening Project from November19, 2016, also attached.
Ifthe Lincoln Avenue WideningMND is adopted as-is,the Vissers Florist propertywillbeformally
identifiedashavingno historic significance. The preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise. Though
features of the propertywithits ephemeral, rare detailsand associated design elements.
Please note that concurrent with adopting the MND, under PRC 5020.1(k), just as Council did with the
Anaheim Colony and Historic Palm Districts, through aresolution,you can
historical resource for CEQA purposes, thereby affordingitsome protection, and alocalstatusmore
reasonable and true than theMNDstates. It is my hope that youmight please consider themotion,for
thisproperty already perceived asan Anaheim landmark.
Please see attached.
Thank You and Sincerely,
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Attachments:
1.D.Paul, Nov.19, 2016 Lincoln Blvd Widening comment letter
2.
3.California Historical Resource Status Codes, Dec. 8, 2003
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD
Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
6L
Other Listings
Review CodeReviewer Date
PageofResource Name or #:
1 6 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
P1. Other Identifier:
Visser’s Florist; 115 N. Resh Street
*P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County:and
Orange
(P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a
Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad:Date:T RB.M.
Anaheim, CA
1981 ; ; San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana land grant;S.B.
c. Address:City:Zip:
701–711 West Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 92805
d. UTM: Zone:
11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.)
e. Other Locational Data:
APN 255-053-07, -08, and -09;
(e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) :
located on the north side of West Lincoln Avenue and spans the block between North Resh Street and North Citron Street in
the locally designated Anaheim Colony Historic District (ACHD)
*P3a. Description:
(Descrbe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The buildings associated with this property are on three parcels (255-053-07, -08, and -09) and related parking lots are on three
adjacent parcels (255-053-05, -06, and -10). The only building that is currently 50 years of age or older is the building at the
See Continuation Sheet
northwest corner of North Resh Street and West Lincoln Avenue.
nd
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
HP6-Commercial Property (1–3 stories); HP2-Single-family residence (2
(List attributes and codes)
floor apartment)
*P4. Resources Present:
Building StructureObject SiteDistrictElement of District Other
(Isolates, etc.)
P5a. Photo or Drawing
(Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.)
P5b. Description of Photo:
(
View,
Top: Original
date, accession #)
building, façade, view to the
northwest; Bottom: East elevation,
view to the west (4/20/16)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources:
Historic
Prehistoric Both
Circa 1964 (HIstoricaerials.com)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Unknown
*P8. Recorded by:
(Name,
affiliation, and address)
Casey Tibbet, M.A.
LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, CA 92507
*P9. Date Recorded:
April 20, 2016
*P10. Survey Type:
(Describe)
Intensive-level CEQA compliance
See Continuation Sheet
*P11. Report Citation:
Historic Resources Assessment for the Lincoln Avenue
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.")
Widening Project, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California 2016. Prepared by Casey Tibbet, M.A. (LSA Project No. KRE1601)
*Attachments:
NONELocation Map Sketch MapContinuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record
Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record
Artifact RecordPhotograph Record Other
(List):
DPR 523A (1/95)*Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*
PageofNRHP Status Code
26 6L
*Resource Name or #
701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
(Assigned by recorder)
B1. Historic Name:
Visser’s Florist; Visser’s Macres Florist
B2. Common Name:
Visser’s Florist
B3. Original Use:B4. Present Use:
Florist Florist
*
B5. Architectural Style:
Vernacular
*
B6. Construction History:
(Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Although a permit for this building was issued in 1960, historic aerial photographs reveal that the building was not constructed
until sometime between 1963 and 1972 (Historicaerials.com 1963 and 1972). Similarly, a permit was issued in 1967 for an
addition to this building, but the addition was not constructed until sometime between 1972 and 1980 (Historicaerials.com
1972 and 1980). The greenhouse, which is located north of the original building, was permitted in 1973.
1960 - permits issued to William P. Visser to erect a two-story commercial building at the northwest corner of Resh and
Center (701–703 W. Center) and for sewer connections. Architect listed as U. Bauer (Ulysses E. Bauer on later
permit).
1960 – permit issued to Macres Florist for a neon sign projecting 8.5 feet from the building wall about 12 feet above the
sidewalk.
1963 - permit for double-faced, projecting, neon wall sign at 701 W. Lincoln.
1967 - permits issued to William P. Visser to demolish a residence at 705 W. Lincoln, construct a two-story commercial
addition to 701–703 (architect Ulysses E. Bauer), and for sewer connection.
1968 – permit for canopy sign (707 W. Lincoln)
1973 – permits issued to Visser for a greenhouse addition (architect listed as Swint) at 701 W. Lincoln and to Visser’s Macres
Florist for electrical
1974 – permit for addition to greenhouse
1977 – permit for addition to greenhouse
1998 – permit to remove and replace fascia and awning for a sign. Visser listed as owner, Linda Nath listed as applicant.
2003 – permit for alteration to free-standing sign
2006 – permit to reroof issued to owner David A. Nath TR
*
B7. Moved? NoYesUnknown Date: Original Location:
*
B8. Related Features:
parking lot, roof-mounted signs, greenhouse
B9a. Architect:b. Builder:
Ulysses E. Bauer Unknown
*
B10. Significance: Theme:Area:
Tourism, Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth period (1950–1970) City of Anaheim
Period of Significance:Property Type:Applicable Criteria:
Circa 1964 Commercial NA
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
This 1960s vernacular commercial building does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources (CRHR) under any criteria. Because it was built outside the period of significance (1857–1949) of the ACHD,
it does not meet the City’s criteria for a district contributor. It is not a historical resource for purposes of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, because of its popularity with the community, it may warrant special consideration in
See Continuation Sheet
local planning.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
*
B12. References:
See Continuation Sheet
B13. Remarks:
Refer to Location Map
*B14. Evaluator:
Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa
Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, CA 92507
*Date of Evaluation:
April 2016
(This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 3 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
LSA: April 2016 X
*Date
*Recorded by Continuation Update
*P3a. Description:
(continued from page 1)
The original, two-story, vernacular building is rectangular in plan and has a flat roof with no eaves. The exterior walls consist of full-
height panels of small, square blocks (east and north elevations), bands of aluminum-framed windows atop a low wall covered with
mosaic tiles (south and east elevations), a partial height panel of mosaic tiles (east elevation), stucco (east elevation), and stucco
panels separated by vertical strips of painted wood or metal (second story). The south-facing façade features a wide metal canopy that
is mounted to the original flat canopy and wraps around a portion of the east elevation. A pole sign is mounted on top of the original
canopy and three signs are mounted to the south and east-facing sides of the metal canopy. The horizontal band of storefront windows
along the façade is punctuated by three, recessed, metal-framed glass doors. The east elevation includes a ribbon of four aluminum-
framed, louvered windows and a ribbon of four aluminum-framed fixed windows on the second floor and two doors at ground level.
The addition has a moderately-pitched, gable-roof. A flat canopy stretches the length of the south elevation above two narrow walls
made of small, square blocks and two bands of aluminum-framed windows atop low walls sheathed with mosaic tiles. The west
elevation is mainly made up of small, painted windows. A sign is mounted on the roof and there is a freestanding pole sign at the
western end of the building.
The original building appears to be in good condition, but has sustained alterations including the large gable-roofed addition and the
metal canopy.
This building is within the ACHD but was constructed outside the ACHD’s period of significance (1857–1949) and is not a contributor
to the district.
P5a. Photo or Drawing
(continued from page 1)
West and south elevations, view to the northeast (4/20/16)
Detail showing how metal canopy is
attached to the original flat canopy.
View to the west (4/20/16)
South and east elevations and greenhouse, view to the northwest (4/20/16)
*
B10. Significance:
(continued from page 2)
Historic Context:
Refer to the related report (P11 above) for a detailed historic context. The key element of the Tourism,
Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth period (1950–1970) in Anaheim is expansion. During this period, the population grew
significantly, the city expanded geographically, the industrial base increased considerably, and Anaheim became a regional hub for
ee Continuation Sheet)
recreation and tourism. Most of the remaining agricultural properties gave way to large housing tracts and (s
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
State of California - The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 4 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
: X
*Date
*Recorded by LSA April 2016 Continuation Update
*
B10. Significance:
(continued from page 3)
commercial strips. The majority of this growth occurred outside the original colony and historic commercial district. Small commercial
and office buildings were constructed throughout the city “to serve more of a neighborhood clientele” (City of Anaheim 2010:20).
Recognizing the enormous popularity of cars and auto travel during this period, many business owners installed eye-catching signage
intended to attract the attention of the motoring public. This signage was often pole or roof-mounted, brightly colored, and could take
any number of shapes and sizes. Along with the population boom came a demand for additional services and amenities, such as
schools, fire stations, churches, and parks. Many existing institutional and civic buildings were expanded and even more new ones
were constructed during this period.
People Associated with this Property:
The architect is listed as Ulysses E. Bauer and the original owner was Bill Visser. Ulysses
Orange County Register
Edward Bauer, also known as Ude, was born in Anaheim in 1926 (2013). In 1944, he graduated from Anaheim
High School and was in the Navy from 1944 to 1946 (Ibid.). He attended Fullerton Junior College and the University of California,
Berkeley, graduating in 1953 with a degree in Environmental Design/Architecture (Ibid.). He was a member of the American Institute of
Architects (AIA) from 1964 to 1967 (The American Institute of Architects 2016). He practiced in Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino
Counties for 53 years and had an office in Riverside (Ibid.; Department of Consumer Affairs n.d.). He was living in Forest Falls,
Orange County Register
California at the time of his death in 2013 (2013). No additional pertinent information was found.
William Peter Visser (aka Wilhelmus Petrus Visser) was born in Ter Aar, South Holland on April 23, 1926 (Ancestry.com var.). He was
an award-winning floral designer in Holland before relocating to California in 1951 (Visser’s Florist & Greenhouses n.d.). In 1952, he
worked at Cedric’s Florist in Los Angeles and in 1953, he married Joan F. Fries, whose father was a gardener (Ancestry.com var.;
Independent
1964). When he heard that Walt Disney selected Anaheim for Disneyland, he decided that Orange County was the place
to be and bought Macres Florist at 604 West Lincoln Avenue in Anaheim (Visser’s Florist & Greenhouses n.d.). In 1961, he moved
across the street to 701 West Lincoln Avenue where he built the current approximately 12,000-square foot facility that is Visser’s Florist
and Greenhouses (Ibid.). Bill and Joan had two daughters, Lynda and Lori, who they raised in an apartment above the florist shop and
who in 1986 bought the business from their father (Ibid.). Lynda and Lori ran the business with their husbands until 2004 when they
sold it to the Robinson family. According to their website, Visser’s has won numerous awards, been a top 100 member of FTD for
several years, and supports many civic groups and charities in the area. In addition, it “is the largest single flower shop and greenhouse
in Orange County” (Ibid.). Bill Visser died in Oregon in 2001 (Ancestry.com var.).
Significance Evaluation:
This property is being evaluated for significance using CRHR criteria and the City of Anaheim criteria for
contributors to the Anaheim Colony Historic District.
CRHR Criterion 1: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional
history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.
This building was constructed during a period of tremendous
growth in Anaheim and the region. It is relatively generic in appearance, has been altered, and is not uniquely representative of the
period. The Visser family established and owned the successful florist business here for approximately 40 years, making it somewhat of
a fixture in the area, but there is no indication that the business is connected with any innovations in the florist business or that it made
significant contributions to the broader community.
CRHR Criterion 2: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history.
Based on the
information provided above, the Visser family does not appear to be important to local, California, or national history.
CRHR Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents
the work of a master or possesses high artistic values.
This building does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, region, or method. The design is modest in character and it has sustained alterations in the form of a large addition. No
indication was found that the architect, Ulysses E. Bauer, was a master and the building does not possess high artistic values.
Therefore, it is not significant for its architecture.
CRHRCriterion 4: Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local
area, California or the nation.
This building was built in the 1960s using common building practices and materials. It does not have
the potential to yield important information in prehistory or history.
See Continuation Sheet
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
State of California - The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 5 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
: X
*Date
*Recorded by LSA April 2016 Update
Continuation
*
B12. References: (continued from page 2)
Ancestry.com
Var. A variety of records were accessed online in May and June 2016 at: http://home.ancestry.com/. These include city
directories, voter registration records, and United States Census Data.
City of Anaheim
2010 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan. On file at the City of Anaheim.
Var. Building permits for 1024 W. Lincoln Avenue. Accessed online in March 2016 at: http://records.anaheim.net/building/
Welcome.aspx?dbid=0&cr=1
Department of Consumer Affairs
n.d. California Architects Board. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/
WLLQRYNA$LCEV2.QueryView?PLICENSENUMBER=2212&PLTEID=1010
Independent
1964 Fishin’ Around. October 15, page 51.
Orange County Register
2013 Obituary for Ulysses E. Bauer, published November 17. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://obits.ocregister.com/
obituaries/orangecounty/obituary.aspx?pid=168074614
The American Institute of Architects
2016 Ulysses E. Bauer. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://public.aia.org/sites/hdoaa/wiki/Wiki%20Pages/ahd1002522.aspx
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
Qsjnbsz!$
Tubuf!pg!Dbmjgpsojb!.!Sftpvsdf!Bhfodz
EFQBSUNFOU!PG!QBSLT!BOE!SFDSFBUJPO
ISJ!$
MPDBUJPO!NBQ
Usjopnjbm
Page 6 of 6
*Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder) 701-703 West Lincoln Avenue
*Map Name: USGS 7.5' Quad, Anaheim; Google Earth*Scale: 1:24000*Date of Map: 1981; 2015
}þ
|
·
91
APN: 2550530007, 008 & 009
701-703 West Lincoln Avenue
§
¨¦
5
I:\\KRE1601\\Reports\\Cultural\\DPR\\DPRlocation_255053007-08-09_701-703_W_LincolnAvemxd (6/16/2016)
*Required Information
DPR 523J (1/95)
From:Daniel Paul
To:Public Comment;City Clerk
Cc:Ellie Yazdani;Jane Newell;Christine Nguyen
Subject:ADDENDUM to DPAUL Public Comment letter, Lincoln Avenue Widening, 8/25/20
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 8:51:41 AM
Attachments:ADDENDUM to Lincoln Widening ISMND comment letter DPaul 082520.pdf
To Whom It May Concern at the Anaheim City Clerk's Office,
Please include the attached as an addendum to the public comment letter which I sent
yesterday for tonight's (8/25/20) City Council Hearing, Item 22.
Thank You,
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Glendale - La Crescenta, CA
91214
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Glendale, CA91214
August 25, 2020
Anaheim City Council
200S.AnaheimBoulevard
Anaheim, CA
92805
c/o Anaheim, via email:
publiccomment@anaheim.net
cityclerk@anaheim.net
Subject: ADDENDUM to 08/24/20 comment letter:LincolnAvenueWidening Project: cultural
resources aproperty: 701 W. Lincoln Avenue.
DearMayor Sidhu,MayorPro Tem Faessel, and Council Members Barnes,Brandman, Moreno, Kring,
:
Yesterday I submitted a comment regarding the Lincoln Boulevard WideningProject, and
specificallyaddressingorist.
Last night, apeer bought to myattentionthatin a Response to Commentsdocumentdated March 2020,
f November,
2016.did notrespondto theletter I sent January 29,2020,ofalaterpubliccommentperiod: of nearly
two monthsbefore their Response to Comments document.Though I wasnotawareofthisResponse to
Commentsdocument until last night, pages1 and 2of my January 2020 commentletteraddresstheir
rebuttals.Among them, that the addition of agreenhousesisasubstantialalterationwhich would
sareseamless,
integrated, and in-kind to the buildingsoriginaldesign,carryingoverthe original design features listed in
theattached January 2020letter. Though the greenhouses datefromthe 1970s, a property with
compatible (if not character-defining) elements lessthan 50 years oldcanstillbeconsidereda California
Register/ CEQA historicalresource.
Lastly, what I presume to bemost substantive portion oftheresponse to my letter (Responseto
commentspage64,Comment I-30-5) is acut-and-pasteoftheirargument,which,alterationsaside,
With its highdesignintegrityincludingmanysmaller-scaleperiod
exampleofPost-World War II Commercial Mid-Century Modern
Commercial Architecture. LSAasameans of dismissal implies that neither
local commercial architecture nor anything less thanHigh modernismfrom the postwar eracould be
historically significant. My attached January 2020 letter, onpage 2,addresses this, and thepreservation
precedentis farandwide for nullifying that argument.
Thank You andSincerely,
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
The LSA analysis claimed property had lost design integrity due to greenhouse addition, and therefore could
not be historically significant,but this argument is false. ThisGoogle StreetView capturepresents
compatibility between the greenhouse addition (left) and the original building (right). Bay system,glass
dimensions,scored concrete block, and mosaic base-are all continued from the original building.
Night image showing continuity of design between greenhouse addition and original building.
to Comments_2020_City of Anaheim.docx «03/04/20»
IS/MND that will be submitted to the City Council for analysis or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the The comment provides background and introduces the analysis or conclusions
contained in the IS/MND or the analysis or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the
the Proposed Project and that this segment of Lincoln
The comment states that there are concerns regarding
C .0 02
N
2
I
,
H
analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is
S
C
E
the environmental statements or questions about the environmental statements or questions about the environmental
R
This comment refers to attached comments and
T
All comments and responses will be part of the
omment does not contain any substantive
The comment does not contain any substantive The comment does not contain any substantive
A
A
I
M
C
O
Avenue retains the most original character.
S
S
A
A
S
L
Response
requests receipt confirmation.
statements or questions about
review and consideration.
comments to follow.
P:\\KRE1601\\Final ISMND\\Response to Comments\\Responses
necessary.
necessary.necessary.
The c
Part 61 Federally qualified architectural historian. widening at Lincoln Avenue from Harbor to West history for Anaheim. In the many years since the disheartened to hear that the City
may once again make the same mistake made all those years ago.
Please see attached, and please confirm that this
I have concerns regarding the proposed Lincoln
Building, this segment of Lincoln Avenue, now
nd it is a City that I
retains the most original character and the most
Avenue widening project. More than any other
My name is Daniel D. Paul, and I am a 36CFR
still love. A friend of mine who is an Anaheim
Though I am presently based in Glendale, CA,
residential street, the segment of Lincoln
citizen recently informed me of the proposed
telling resources near or over 50 years old. I’m
City decided demolish the entirety of the old
Avenue from the Interstate 5 freeway east to
Anaheim Boulevard is rich in character and
downtown except for the Samuel Kraemer
D
R
Comment
A
V
E
Anaheim is my hometown a
L
U
letter has been received.
O
Table B: Responses to 2016 Public Review Comments
B
R
O
B
R
A
H
O
T
T
E
E
Street.
R
T
N-
S
non
O
T
I
S
T
E
A
W
R
A
Comment Number
M
L
I-30- 1
O
C
I-30-2I-30-3
R
E
F
D
T
E
C
V
I
E
J
T
A
O
R
G
P
E
N
G
N
SD
I
E
T
N
T
N
Respondent
E
A
E
Glendale, CA 91214
D
November 19, 2016
G
M
I
I
MW
T
I
O
E
M
Daniel D. Paul
C
/
U
Y
N
O
DE
T
V
U
S
A
T
E
S
S
N
L
L
N
A
O
O
I
P
C
I-30
T
62
S
I
N
E
I
N
RIL
63
The comment states that there are two resources in the Chase Bank). The comment requests that the City treat 3 and Section ND that will be submitted to the City Council for analysis
or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the
Savings and Loan (now
T SO NR D
Resources eligible and discusses the background and
NI
A
E
T
V
ia Register or Historical
3.5 a) of the IS/MND regarding the analysis of and
AE
M
analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is
L
R
M
statements or questions about the environmental
A
U
this resource as a historical resource for CEQA
O of the
s not contain any substantive
L
O
C
s to historical resources.
C
B
E
O
R
D
T
O
E
-2-
S
B
All comments and responses will be part
V
E
R
I
S
A
ent I
T
N
H
A
O
G
PO
E
S
T
N
E
omm
T
Response
R
D
E
E
E
T
R
A
Please refer to Response to C
architectural nature of Home
T
G
S
study area that are Californ
I
review and consideration.
T
T
I
S
E
M
/
W
Y mitigation for impact
D
M
U
O
doe
T
R
S
F
L
The comment
T
A
C
I
E
T
J
I
necessary.
O purposes.
N
I
R
P
G
N
IS/M
I
N
E
D
I
W
Area of Potential Effects are two resources that I The first is Home Savings (Chase) Bank, 1970. I source to which the City “possesses high artistic values,” as per California architect,
presents a distinctive expression of Neo-Home Savings company, but that has now become the early 1980s. Even though this resource is not By resolution, The City of Anaheim may choose
Sheet’s designs through the lense of history, and
the property appears to be CRHR eligible under
California architecture dating from the 1960s to
who also served as the building
achieving significance within the past 50 years.
Criterion 3, with Title 14 CCR Section 4852(d)
to treat this property as a historical resource for CEQA purposes and I would hope that the City
Register Criterion 3; in no small part due to the
E Aside from those identified by LSA, within the
commend the City in
Anaheim that is now an iconic resource for the
to Comments_2020_City of Anaheim.docx «03/04/20»
U this regard. The Home Savings Bank building
50 years old, enough time has passed to view
picting the history of
Formalism: one historically associated to the
iated with a historic chapter in
N special consideration for historical resources
believe are California Register or Historical
City. Additionally, in the building’s design,
E
V
A
N
L
O
C
N
I
L
Comment
understand that this is a re
is already sensitive, and I
Millard Sheets mural de
Table B: Responses to 2016 Public Review Comments
Resources eligible.
-
Millard Sheets
a design assoc
might do so.
P:\\KRE1601\\Final ISMND\\Response to Comments\\Responses
Comment Number
I-30-4
Respondent
.
C
N
I
,
S
E
T
A
0
I
2
C
0
O
2
S
SH
A
C
R
A
A
S
LM
to Comments_2020_City of Anaheim.docx «03/04/20»
Visser’s Florist and states that Visser’s Florist appears nt (HRA) was prepared is included in Appendix E under Criterion 3. The finding on Page 38 of the HRA The design is modest in
character and the building has No indication was found that the architect, Ulysses E. Bauer, was a master, and the building does not possess IS/MND that will be submitted to the City
Council for analysis or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the
C .0 02
N
This building does not embody the distinctive
rm of a large addition.
2
I
it was found that it is not , period, region, or method.
orical Resources eligible orical Resources eligible
,
H
The comment describes the architectural nature of
of the IS/MND. Visser’s Florist was evaluated for
high artistic values. Therefore, the building is not
ein. Therefore, no further response is
S
C
E
statements or questions about the environmental
R
T
e part of the
s not contain any substantive
A
A
I
M
C
O
S
S
A
A
S
L
All comments and responses will b
Response
e
.”
significant for its architecture
A Historic Resources Assessm
sustained alterations in the fo
for the Proposed Project and
historical significance and
California Register of HistCalifornia Register of Hist
review and consideration.
characteristics of a type
under Criterion 3.
doe
The comment
P:\\KRE1601\\Final ISMND\\Response to Comments\\Responses
analysis ther
necessary.
states “
The second resource of concern is Visser’s Florist. World War II commercial Modernism. The perty type. Among its character defining features are: a long expanse of in sidewalk frontage;
a continuous band of entries having original metal and glass shop doors, original neon signage; scored concrete blockwork; le articulated bays; a distinctive greenhouse that continues
the streetside
driver and the pedestrian, to the latter by certain
Visser’s has a presence that responds equally to
admittedly is not high
shaped planters
concrete barrier walls at the parking lot having
program Visser’s now appears to be the City’s
length
roofed and prominent
scale display windows set in protruding defining features of the store building; scored
most highly intact and expressive example of
splay area behind these windows, recessed
akin to those seen on much smaller,
suspended atop freestanding metal columns.
-length decorative mosaic tile base and
design Modernism, more than embodies the
Chicken Pie Shop signage, as a total design
-
at the parking lot
-length corrugated metal eave having
frontage and many of the period character
the postwar
-
aluminum mullions; the continuous, full
walkable Main Streets across the U.S.
With the recent loss of the La Palma
D
R
-
Comment
numerous highly distinct bowl
A
boxed upper portion of multip
V
distinctive characteristics of
E
commercial architecture pro
L
U
Visser’s building, which rounded corners; and also
O
mosaic clad bays; a flat
Table B: Responses to 2016 Public Review Comments
B
R
O
B
R
A
H
O
T
T
E features
E
R
-
-
T a fulla full
-
close
large
N
S post
O
T
I
di
S
T
E
A
W
R
A
Comment Number
M
L
O
C
I-30-5
R
E
F
D
T
E
C
V
I
E
J
T
A
O
R
G
P
E
N
G
N
SD
I
E
T
N
T
N
Respondent
E
A
E
D
G
M
I
I
MW
T
I
O
E
M
C
/
U
Y
N
O
DE
T
V
U
S
A
T
E
S
S
N
L
L
N
A
O
O
I
P
C
T
64
S
I
N
E
I
N
RIL
65
IS/MND that will be submitted to the City Council for analysis or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the
T SO NR D
NI
A
E
T
V
resource for CEQA purposes.
AE
M
analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is
The comment requests that the City treat Visser’s
L
R
M
statements or questions about the environmental
A
U
O All comments and responses will be part of the
ontain any substantive
L
O
C
C
B
E
O
R
D
T
O
E
S
B
V
E
R
I
S
A
T
N
H
A
O
G
PO
E
S
T
N
E
T
Response
R
D
E
E
E
T
R
A
T
G
S
I
review and consideration.
T
T
I
S
s not c
E
M
/
W
Florist as a historical
Y
D
M
U
O
The comment doe
T
R
S
F
L
T
A
C
I
E
T
J necessary.
I
O
N
I
R
P
G
N
I
N
E
D
I
W
character defining features are many of ephemeral a publically accessible truly expressive of a past historical era. For these Though I’m aware that the City of Anaheim does nance, it
would be my hope, not just as an architectural historian but as a one who still considers esolution to declare Visser’s a historical
such variety of these features is exceptional and ular\] property type.”
design Modernism; but it need not be. A virtual
time capsule, Visser’s is the embodiment of the
E
operty type. Among its
commercial property over 50 years old retains to Comments_2020_City of Anaheim.docx «03/04/20»
U
As previously mentioned, Visser’s is not high
“embodies the distinctive characteristics of a
and smaller scale details, remarkable in their
N Anaheim my hometown, that Council would
reasons, in my professional opinion Visser’s
resource for CEQA purposes. Anaheim City Council has it in their power to do under the
E
V
California Public Resources Code Section
A
Resources eligible under Criterion 3 as it
gister of Historical
N
L
O
C
N
I
L
Comment
\[postwar commercial vernac
not have a preservation ordi
continued existence. That
—
post war commercial pr
Table B: Responses to 2016 Public Review Comments
former Anaheim citizen
appears California Re
support a r
5020.1(k).
P:\\KRE1601\\Final ISMND\\Response to Comments\\Responses
Comment Number
I-30-6
Respondent
.
C
N
I
,
S
E
T
A
0
I
2
C
0
O
2
S
SH
A
C
R
A
A
S
LM
to Comments_2020_City of Anaheim.docx «03/04/20»
3 regarding IS/MND that will be submitted to the City Council for analysis or conclusions contained in the IS/MND or the 3 and Section
The comment requests that the City adjust the Project
4 regarding 3 regarding
C .0 02 the evaluation of level of service for Lincoln Avenue
N
2
I
3.5 a) of the IS/MND regarding the analysis of and
the purpose of the project and consistency with the
,
H
analysis therein. Therefore, no further response is
S
C
personal background and
E
statements or questions about the environmental statements or questions about the environmental
R
T
responses will be part of the
ent does not contain any substantive ent does not contain any substantive
A
gs be
A
I
M
mitigation for impacts to historical resources.
C
O
-22-
S
-3--4--2-
S
requests that remaining historical buildin
A
o Response to Comment Io Response to Comment Io Response to Comment Io Response to Comment I
A
S
L
to avoid impacting Visser’s Florist.
ResponseCity’s General Plan designation.
alternative alignments studied.
with and without the Project.
review and consideration.
The comment provides
ents and
P:\\KRE1601\\Final ISMND\\Response to Comments\\Responses
fer tfer tfer tfer t
necessary.
preserved.
ommomm
All comm
Please rePlease rePlease rePlease re
The cThe c
I was born and raised in Anaheim California and 3 from Indiana on eim for a better life in Grandmother. Was raised at Anaheim Methodist
generation of my family was raised at 125 East
ily fought with other neighbors to save Anaheim, but a hidden agenda with
Greed leading the way to the demolition of the
adjustments and alternative approaches to this
true heart of Anaheim overnight, with a little
might
preserve this beloved and highly distinctive
ndmother and
I hope that the City may study engineering
portion of the proposed widening that
research you will find to be true.
D
ily took the long journey
R
Comment
A
my Great Gra
V
Church and loved my home.
Route 66 to relocate in Anah
E
L
U
O
Table B: Responses to 2016 Public Review Comments
B
R
O
B
R
A
a better climate.
Wilhelmina St.
H
I was raised by
O
T
downtown
T
resource.
E
E
fam fam
R
T
N
S
O
MyMy
T
I
S
T
E
A
W
R
A
Comment Number
M
L
O
C
I-30-7I-31-1
R
E
F
D
T
E
C
V
I
E
J
T
A
O
R
G
P
E
N
G
N
SD
I
E
T
N
T
N
Respondent
E
A
E
D
November 19, 2016
G
M
I
I
MW
T
I
oothe
O
E
M
C
/
U
Y
N
O
DE
T
V
U
Brandon B
S
A
T
E
S
S
N
L
L
N
A
O
O
I
P
C
I-31
T
66
S
I
N
E
I
N
RIL
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Glendale, CA91214
August 24, 2020
Anaheim City Council
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim,CA
92805
c/oAnaheim , via email:
publiccomment@anaheim.net
Subject: Lincoln Avenue Widening Project: cultural resources a
property,701 W. Lincoln Avenue.
DearMayor Sidhu, Mayor Pro Tem Faessel, and Council Members Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, Kring,
:
My name is Daniel D. Paul, and Iam a former Anaheim resident,having been raised here. I consider
Anaheim my hometown. Presently I ama 36 CFR Part 61 Federally Qualified Architectural Historian.
,located at 701 W.Lincoln Avenue. Isent this
analysis as a Lincoln Avenue Widening Project comment letter on January 29, 2020, and ittiersoff an
earlier comment letterIsent for the Widening Project from November19, 2016, also attached.
Ifthe Lincoln Avenue WideningMND is adopted as-is,the Vissers Florist propertywillbeformally
identifiedashavingno historic significance. The preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise. Though
features of the propertywithits ephemeral, rare detailsand associated design elements.
Please note that concurrent with adopting the MND, under PRC 5020.1(k), just as Council did with the
Anaheim Colony and Historic Palm Districts, through aresolution,you can
historical resource for CEQA purposes, thereby affordingitsome protection, and alocalstatusmore
reasonable and true than theMNDstates. It is my hope that youmight please consider themotion,for
thisproperty already perceived asan Anaheim landmark.
Please see attached.
Thank You and Sincerely,
Daniel D. Paul, Architectural Historian
Attachments:
1.D.Paul, Nov.19, 2016 Lincoln Blvd Widening comment letter
2.
3.California Historical Resource Status Codes, Dec. 8, 2003
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD
Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
6L
Other Listings
Review CodeReviewer Date
PageofResource Name or #:
1 6 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
P1. Other Identifier:
Visser’s Florist; 115 N. Resh Street
*P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County:and
Orange
(P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a
Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad:Date:T RB.M.
Anaheim, CA
1981 ; ; San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana land grant;S.B.
c. Address:City:Zip:
701–711 West Lincoln Avenue Anaheim 92805
d. UTM: Zone:
11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.)
e. Other Locational Data:
APN 255-053-07, -08, and -09;
(e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) :
located on the north side of West Lincoln Avenue and spans the block between North Resh Street and North Citron Street in
the locally designated Anaheim Colony Historic District (ACHD)
*P3a. Description:
(Descrbe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The buildings associated with this property are on three parcels (255-053-07, -08, and -09) and related parking lots are on three
adjacent parcels (255-053-05, -06, and -10). The only building that is currently 50 years of age or older is the building at the
See Continuation Sheet
northwest corner of North Resh Street and West Lincoln Avenue.
nd
*P3b. Resource Attributes:
HP6-Commercial Property (1–3 stories); HP2-Single-family residence (2
(List attributes and codes)
floor apartment)
*P4. Resources Present:
Building StructureObject SiteDistrictElement of District Other
(Isolates, etc.)
P5a. Photo or Drawing
(Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.)
P5b. Description of Photo:
(
View,
Top: Original
date, accession #)
building, façade, view to the
northwest; Bottom: East elevation,
view to the west (4/20/16)
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources:
Historic
Prehistoric Both
Circa 1964 (HIstoricaerials.com)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Unknown
*P8. Recorded by:
(Name,
affiliation, and address)
Casey Tibbet, M.A.
LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, CA 92507
*P9. Date Recorded:
April 20, 2016
*P10. Survey Type:
(Describe)
Intensive-level CEQA compliance
See Continuation Sheet
*P11. Report Citation:
Historic Resources Assessment for the Lincoln Avenue
(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.")
Widening Project, City of Anaheim, Orange County, California 2016. Prepared by Casey Tibbet, M.A. (LSA Project No. KRE1601)
*Attachments:
NONELocation Map Sketch MapContinuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record
Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record
Artifact RecordPhotograph Record Other
(List):
DPR 523A (1/95)*Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
*
PageofNRHP Status Code
26 6L
*Resource Name or #
701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
(Assigned by recorder)
B1. Historic Name:
Visser’s Florist; Visser’s Macres Florist
B2. Common Name:
Visser’s Florist
B3. Original Use:B4. Present Use:
Florist Florist
*
B5. Architectural Style:
Vernacular
*
B6. Construction History:
(Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Although a permit for this building was issued in 1960, historic aerial photographs reveal that the building was not constructed
until sometime between 1963 and 1972 (Historicaerials.com 1963 and 1972). Similarly, a permit was issued in 1967 for an
addition to this building, but the addition was not constructed until sometime between 1972 and 1980 (Historicaerials.com
1972 and 1980). The greenhouse, which is located north of the original building, was permitted in 1973.
1960 - permits issued to William P. Visser to erect a two-story commercial building at the northwest corner of Resh and
Center (701–703 W. Center) and for sewer connections. Architect listed as U. Bauer (Ulysses E. Bauer on later
permit).
1960 – permit issued to Macres Florist for a neon sign projecting 8.5 feet from the building wall about 12 feet above the
sidewalk.
1963 - permit for double-faced, projecting, neon wall sign at 701 W. Lincoln.
1967 - permits issued to William P. Visser to demolish a residence at 705 W. Lincoln, construct a two-story commercial
addition to 701–703 (architect Ulysses E. Bauer), and for sewer connection.
1968 – permit for canopy sign (707 W. Lincoln)
1973 – permits issued to Visser for a greenhouse addition (architect listed as Swint) at 701 W. Lincoln and to Visser’s Macres
Florist for electrical
1974 – permit for addition to greenhouse
1977 – permit for addition to greenhouse
1998 – permit to remove and replace fascia and awning for a sign. Visser listed as owner, Linda Nath listed as applicant.
2003 – permit for alteration to free-standing sign
2006 – permit to reroof issued to owner David A. Nath TR
*
B7. Moved? NoYesUnknown Date: Original Location:
*
B8. Related Features:
parking lot, roof-mounted signs, greenhouse
B9a. Architect:b.Builder:
Ulysses E. Bauer Unknown
*
B10. Significance: Theme:Area:
Tourism, Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth period (1950–1970) City of Anaheim
Period of Significance:Property Type:Applicable Criteria:
Circa 1964 Commercial NA
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
This 1960s vernacular commercial building does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources (CRHR) under any criteria. Because it was built outside the period of significance (1857–1949) of the ACHD,
it does not meet the City’s criteria for a district contributor. It is not a historical resource for purposes of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, because of its popularity with the community, it may warrant special consideration in
See Continuation Sheet
local planning.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
(List attributes and codes)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
*
B12. References:
See Continuation Sheet
B13. Remarks:
Refer to Location Map
*B14. Evaluator:
Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa
Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, CA 92507
*Date of Evaluation:
April 2016
(This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 3 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
LSA: April 2016 X
*Date
*Recorded by Continuation Update
*P3a. Description:
(continued from page 1)
The original, two-story, vernacular building is rectangular in plan and has a flat roof with no eaves. The exterior walls consist of full-
height panels of small, square blocks (east and north elevations), bands of aluminum-framed windows atop a low wall covered with
mosaic tiles (south and east elevations), a partial height panel of mosaic tiles (east elevation), stucco (east elevation), and stucco
panels separated by vertical strips of painted wood or metal (second story). The south-facing façade features a wide metal canopy that
is mounted to the original flat canopy and wraps around a portion of the east elevation. A pole sign is mounted on top of the original
canopy and three signs are mounted to the south and east-facing sides of the metal canopy. The horizontal band of storefront windows
along the façade is punctuated by three, recessed, metal-framed glass doors. The east elevation includes a ribbon of four aluminum-
framed, louvered windows and a ribbon of four aluminum-framed fixed windows on the second floor and two doors at ground level.
The addition has a moderately-pitched, gable-roof. A flat canopy stretches the length of the south elevation above two narrow walls
made of small, square blocks and two bands of aluminum-framed windows atop low walls sheathed with mosaic tiles. The west
elevation is mainly made up of small, painted windows. A sign is mounted on the roof and there is a freestanding pole sign at the
western end of the building.
The original building appears to be in good condition, but has sustained alterations including the large gable-roofed addition and the
metal canopy.
This building is within the ACHD but was constructed outside the ACHD’s period of significance (1857–1949) and is not a contributor
to the district.
P5a. Photo or Drawing
(continued from page 1)
West and south elevations, view to the northeast (4/20/16)
Detail showing how metal canopy is
attached to the original flat canopy.
View to the west (4/20/16)
South and east elevations and greenhouse, view to the northwest (4/20/16)
*
B10. Significance:
(continued from page 2)
Historic Context:
Refer to the related report (P11 above) for a detailed historic context. The key element of the Tourism,
Suburbanization, and Industrial Growth period (1950–1970) in Anaheim is expansion. During this period, the population grew
significantly, the city expanded geographically, the industrial base increased considerably, and Anaheim became a regional hub for
ee Continuation Sheet)
recreation and tourism. Most of the remaining agricultural properties gave way to large housing tracts and (s
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
State of California - The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 4 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
: X
*Date
*Recorded by LSA April 2016 Continuation Update
*
B10. Significance:
(continued from page 3)
commercial strips. The majority of this growth occurred outside the original colony and historic commercial district. Small commercial
and office buildings were constructed throughout the city “to serve more of a neighborhood clientele” (City of Anaheim 2010:20).
Recognizing the enormous popularity of cars and auto travel during this period, many business owners installed eye-catching signage
intended to attract the attention of the motoring public. This signage was often pole or roof-mounted, brightly colored, and could take
any number of shapes and sizes. Along with the population boom came a demand for additional services and amenities, such as
schools, fire stations, churches, and parks. Many existing institutional and civic buildings were expanded and even more new ones
were constructed during this period.
People Associated with this Property:
The architect is listed as Ulysses E. Bauer and the original owner was Bill Visser. Ulysses
Orange County Register
Edward Bauer, also known as Ude, was born in Anaheim in 1926 (2013). In 1944, he graduated from Anaheim
High School and was in the Navy from 1944 to 1946 (Ibid.). He attended Fullerton Junior College and the University of California,
Berkeley, graduating in 1953 with a degree in Environmental Design/Architecture (Ibid.). He was a member of the American Institute of
Architects (AIA) from 1964 to 1967 (The American Institute of Architects 2016). He practiced in Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino
Counties for 53 years and had an office in Riverside (Ibid.; Department of Consumer Affairs n.d.). He was living in Forest Falls,
Orange County Register
California at the time of his death in 2013 (2013). No additional pertinent information was found.
William Peter Visser (aka Wilhelmus Petrus Visser) was born in Ter Aar, South Holland on April 23, 1926 (Ancestry.com var.). He was
an award-winning floral designer in Holland before relocating to California in 1951 (Visser’s Florist & Greenhouses n.d.). In 1952, he
worked at Cedric’s Florist in Los Angeles and in 1953, he married Joan F. Fries, whose father was a gardener (Ancestry.com var.;
Independent
1964). When he heard that Walt Disney selected Anaheim for Disneyland, he decided that Orange County was the place
to be and bought Macres Florist at 604 West Lincoln Avenue in Anaheim (Visser’s Florist & Greenhouses n.d.). In 1961, he moved
across the street to 701 West Lincoln Avenue where he built the current approximately 12,000-square foot facility that is Visser’s Florist
and Greenhouses (Ibid.). Bill and Joan had two daughters, Lynda and Lori, who they raised in an apartment above the florist shop and
who in 1986 bought the business from their father (Ibid.). Lynda and Lori ran the business with their husbands until 2004 when they
sold it to the Robinson family. According to their website, Visser’s has won numerous awards, been a top 100 member of FTD for
several years, and supports many civic groups and charities in the area. In addition, it “is the largest single flower shop and greenhouse
in Orange County” (Ibid.). Bill Visser died in Oregon in 2001 (Ancestry.com var.).
Significance Evaluation:
This property is being evaluated for significance using CRHR criteria and the City of Anaheim criteria for
contributors to the Anaheim Colony Historic District.
CRHR Criterion 1: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional
history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.
This building was constructed during a period of tremendous
growth in Anaheim and the region. It is relatively generic in appearance, has been altered, and is not uniquely representative of the
period. The Visser family established and owned the successful florist business here for approximately 40 years, making it somewhat of
a fixture in the area, but there is no indication that the business is connected with any innovations in the florist business or that it made
significant contributions to the broader community.
CRHR Criterion 2: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history.
Based on the
information provided above, the Visser family does not appear to be important to local, California, or national history.
CRHR Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents
the work of a master or possesses high artistic values.
This building does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,
period, region, or method. The design is modest in character and it has sustained alterations in the form of a large addition. No
indication was found that the architect, Ulysses E. Bauer, was a master and the building does not possess high artistic values.
Therefore, it is not significant for its architecture.
CRHRCriterion 4: Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local
area, California or the nation.
This building was built in the 1960s using common building practices and materials. It does not have
the potential to yield important information in prehistory or history.
See Continuation Sheet
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
State of California - The Resources Agency
Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Resource Name or #
Page 5 of 6*: (Assigned by recorder) 701–703 West Lincoln Avenue
: X
*Date
*Recorded by LSA April 2016 Update
Continuation
*
B12. References: (continued from page 2)
Ancestry.com
Var. A variety of records were accessed online in May and June 2016 at: http://home.ancestry.com/. These include city
directories, voter registration records, and United States Census Data.
City of Anaheim
2010 Citywide Historic Preservation Plan. On file at the City of Anaheim.
Var. Building permits for 1024 W. Lincoln Avenue. Accessed online in March 2016 at: http://records.anaheim.net/building/
Welcome.aspx?dbid=0&cr=1
Department of Consumer Affairs
n.d. California Architects Board. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/
WLLQRYNA$LCEV2.QueryView?PLICENSENUMBER=2212&PLTEID=1010
Independent
1964 Fishin’ Around. October 15, page 51.
Orange County Register
2013 Obituary for Ulysses E. Bauer, published November 17. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://obits.ocregister.com/
obituaries/orangecounty/obituary.aspx?pid=168074614
The American Institute of Architects
2016 Ulysses E. Bauer. Accessed online in June 2016 at: http://public.aia.org/sites/hdoaa/wiki/Wiki%20Pages/ahd1002522.aspx
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
6/27/2016(R:\\KRE1601\\DPR forms\\701-703 W. Lincoln Ave.docx)
Primary #
State of California - Resource Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
HRI #
LOCATION MAP
Trinomial
Page 6 of 6
*Resource Name or# (Assigned by recorder) 701-703 West Lincoln Avenue
*Map Name: USGS 7.5' Quad, Anaheim; Google Earth*Scale: 1:24000*Date of Map: 1981; 2015
}þ
|
·
91
APN: 2550530007, 008 & 009
701-703 West Lincoln Avenue
§
¨¦
5
I:\\KRE1601\\Reports\\Cultural\\DPR\\DPRlocation_255053007-08-09_701-703_W_LincolnAvemxd (6/16/2016)
*Required Information
DPR 523J (1/95)
From:Root, Jennifer
To:Public Comment
Subject:Public Comment for the August 25th City Council Meeting
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 10:19:48 AM
Attachments:Lincoln Street Widening Public Comment - Jennifer Root.docx
Hello. On behalf of Anaheim Union High School District I would like to submitthe attached
public comment for the August 25th City Council Meeting. It is regarding Item 22 on tonight's
agenda.
Thank you!
--
Sincerely,
Jennifer Root, Ed.D.
Assistant Superintendent, Business
Anaheim Union High School District
(714) 999-3556
root_j@auhsd.us
Apply for Free and Reduced Price Meals athttp://bit.ly/Lunch20
FR_QR.png
________________________________
Anaheim Union High School District
E-mail Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail communication and any attachments, including documents, files, or previous e-mail
messages, constitute electronic communications within the scope of the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq. This e-mail communication may contain non-public, confidential or
legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unauthorized
and intentional interception, use, copy or disclosure of such information, or attempt to do so, is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful under applicable laws. 18 U.S.C. § 2511. If you have received this e-mail
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original e-
mail from your system.
Good Evening Mayor Sidhu and City Council Members. My name is Jennifer Root and I am the
Assistant Superintendent, Business for Anaheim Union High School District. Iam sending this
public comment on behalf of the Anaheim Union Board of Trustees to speak to item 22
regarding the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Lincoln Avenue
Widening Project from West Street to Harbor Boulevard. First, we recognize that staff has
recommended that the project is ceased until community support for the project is garnered
and we are grateful for that recommendation. Back in November I stood before the Council and
voiced our concern as a school district with the project. It is our belief that the adoption of the
mitigated negative declaration again is not in concert with the sentiments of the school district
nor with the community members of Anaheim.
This shift would require a dedication of 16.5 feet, increased from the current 8.25 foot
dedication, in front of Anaheim high school and our newly acquired property adjacent to the
high school. When this project was initiated, there was a lack of transparencyto community
members. At our request, two town hall meetings were conducted…one at Anaheim High
School and one at our District Office. We provided notification to our families so that they could
become aware of the project.
At the request of a city council member, the Public Works department presented the project to
our Board of Trustees and asked for their support on the project. Based upon concerns from
the community regarding the project, our board of trustees voted unanimously to not support
the city moving forward with this project. Not one community member who spoke at the board
meeting that evening was in support of the project. Our Board of Trustees represent their
community and felt that their vote represented the community’s lack of support with not only
the project but specifically with the change of alignment.
The community stated the following reasons for not supporting the change in the alignment:
1.Student Safety – there is a concern that when the project occurs building a median in
the street would encourage students to dart out into the street and cause potential
harm to the students
2.Preservation of an Iconic Feature of the City of Anaheim – Anaheim High School is the
oldest of our schools and our flagship high school. It would impact the aesthetics of the
school as well as create less space between the front of the school and the street; again
a safety issue.
3.Increased Traffic Flow – the widening could increase the flow of traffic in front of the
school thereby increasing the danger to students.
The recommendation to change the alignment allows the City of Anaheim is to recoup money
from OCTA for the study conducted on the area. It is our belief that had public input been
sought prior to initiating the study that it may not have been undertaken and the city would not
be obligated to OCTA to change the alignment to receive the funding for the study. Another
reason stated for changing the alignment was the cost of acquiring the property on the south
side of the street versus the cost of acquiring property on the north side of the street. It is our
belief that the school district and our students should not be negatively affected because of the
failure of the city staff to have accurately assessed the support of the community for this
project prior to accepting funding from OCTA for the project.
The change of the alignment represents the first step in allowing this project to go forward in
the future. In a vote the city conducted of community members, the community did not
support it, and our Board of Trustees, upheld the voices of the community in voting to not
support the project. On behalf of the Anaheim Union High School District Board of Trustees,
and especially Trustee Al Jabbar who represents Anaheim High School directly, we would like to
respectfully ask the City Council to consider rejecting item 22 and to abandon changing the
alignment from a center alignment to a northern alignment.
From:Neely, Patricia
To:Public Comment
Cc:Ellie Yazdani;Carlos Castellanos;JENNIFER ROOT
Subject:AUHSD Comment - Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) - Lincoln Ave. Widening Project
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 12:00:03 PM
Attachments:Ellie YazdaniAUHSD CommentsLincoln Widening 08-25-2020.pdf
To whomit may concern,
Attached please find the Anaheim Union High School's comments for the subject project.
Thank you.
¦¦
Patricia Neely AIAArchitect
Director ¦ Facilities Planning Design Construction
Anaheim Union High School District
501 Crescent Way ¦Anaheim ¦CA¦ 92803-3520
714 999 3505 ¦neelyp@auhsd.us
Apply for Free and Reduced Price Meals athttp://bit.ly/Lunch20
FR_QR.png
________________________________
Anaheim Union High School District
E-mail Confidentiality Notice
This e-mail communication and any attachments, including documents, files, or previous e-mail
messages, constitute electronic communications within the scope of the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq. This e-mail communication may contain non-public, confidential or
legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unauthorized
and intentional interception, use, copy or disclosure of such information, or attempt to do so, is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful under applicable laws. 18 U.S.C. § 2511. If you have received this e-mail
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original e-
mail from your system.
From:Krista Nicholds
To:Public Comment
Cc:Daniel Paul;ccruze
Subject:Public comments re. City Council Agenda item 22
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 1:29:47 PM
Attachments:ATT00001.htm
MNDPOC08252020.pdf
Please find attached public comments addressing item 22 on the City Council agenda today,
August 25, 2020.
Please add the comments to the administrative record.
Sincerely,
Krista Nicholds
President
Preserve Orange County
Preserve Orange County
206 W Fourth Street
Santa Ana, California 92701
Anaheim City Council Monday, August 24, 2020
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
By email publiccomment@anaheim.net
Attention: Mayor Harry Sidhu, Mayor Pro Tem Stephen Faessel,
and Council Members Barnes, Brandman, Moreno, andKring
Re. Visser’s Florist and Adoption of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (item 22)
Dear Mayor Sidhu and Members of City Council,
On August 25 you will consider adoption of aMitigated Negative Declaration(MND) concerning the
Lincoln Avenue Street Widening Project as well as approval of the project.This letter combines and
revises a previous letter from our organization, addressed to Ellie Yazdani with comments made during
the public review on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated February 5, 2020.
Preserve Orange County is a county-wide non-profit with the mission to work through education and
advocacy to promote conservation of our county’s historic and cultural resources. Our board members are
experts in preservation law, architecture, historic resource management, city planning and architectural
history. We provide subject-matter expertise and technical advice to individuals and groups across
Orange County.
The Historic Resource Assessmentdelivered to the City in April 2016 andon which the MND is based
concluded thatVisser’sFlorist-alegacy businessandrare intact example in Orange County of a postwar
commercial building type-does not qualify as a historic resource and thus is not subject to environmental
review. It is our expert opinion that this conclusion is wrong and reflects an anachronistic interpretation of
the standards used to determinea building’s eligibility for theCalifornia Register of Historical Resources.
It is –on the contrary-the prevailing view of our profession that buildings that are “vernacular,” that are
not designed by master architects or reflect high artistic achievement but that effectively convey their
historic context by representing their typeshould be recognized and protected for theirhistoricvalue.
Visser’s exemplifiesatime when suburbs and social mobility were expanding on an unprecedented scale
and construction reflected thisin Orange County in the building, for example, of large scale aerospace
manufacturingandthemeparks,as well as family-owned flower businesses.
Visser’s may at first appear to lack a special qualitycompared to the nearbyproperties in the Anaheim
Colony Historic Districtor to Anaheim High School, but context is everything. As Richard Longstreth,
architectural historian and expert on America’s commercial architectureand roadside vernacular,said in
2015 of the nature of the building stock in the booming years after the Second World War:
The physical record in all its dimensions makes very clear that neither
aristocratic nor parvenu splendor was pursued, as it frequently was in
popular culture before the war… The new environment was decidedly
not uptown, but it was not the old neighborhood either. Like wartime
Qsftfswf!Psbohf!Dpvouz!!318!X/!Gpvsui!Tusffu-!Tboub!Bob-!Dbmjgpsojb!!:3812!
xxx/qsftfswfpsbohfdpvouz/psh!!jogpAqsftfswfpd/psh!):5:*.593.1236!
production, it was straightforward, no-nonsense, efficient, and exuded
modernity. (from Longstreth, “Nonconforming Modernism,” in Looking
Beyond the Icons, 2015)
Yet Visser’s is also so much more as our own Daniel Paul has eloquently pointed out, after years of close
inspection of the building, he reveals to us the detail that the Anaheim architect, Ulysses Bauer (who was
also the award-winning architect of Carl Karcher’s Googie style restaurant, pre-Carl’s Jr.) worked into the
building taking it a step beyond its utilitarian purpose. Paul, an Anaheim boy and federallyqualified
architectural historian,provided a list of character defining features of the buildingin one of his
submissions to the City of Anaheim during the 2016 public reviewandwent on to sum up that Visser’s is:
Avirtual time capsule, Visser’s is the embodiment of the post war
commercial property type. Among its character defining features are
many of ephemeral and smaller scale details, remarkable in their
continued existence. That a publicly accessible commercial property over
50 years old retains such variety of these features is exceptional and
truly expressive of a past historical era. (Daniel Paul, letter to Carlos
Castellanos, City of Anaheim, November 19, 2016)
We join DanielPaul and others in Anaheim in encouraging City Council to reject the resolution that would
ultimately pave the way for the demolition of Visser’s Florist. We encourage the City to re-evaluate
Visser’s based on current precedentand preserve what is left of Anaheim’s mid-twentieth century
architecture. Anaheim’s growth in this period drove growth throughout Orange County. Visser’s is a
monument to this defining period in our county history.
Sincerely,
Krista Nicholds, MHC
President, Board of Directors
Qsftfswf!Psbohf!Dpvouz!!318!X/!Gpvsui!Tusffu-!Tboub!Bob-!Dbmjgpsojb!!:3812!
xxx/qsftfswfpsbohfdpvouz/psh!!jogpAqsftfswfpd/psh!):5:*.593.1236!
From:Scott Preston
To:Public Comment
Subject:Question for 8/25/20 Meeting
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 1:03:42 PM
Attachments:Anaheim City Council Question.pdf
Hello,
Please see attached question for todays Council meeting.
Thanks,
Scott Preston
Sales Manager
AtlasSpecialtyProducts
From:Isabella Dixon
Subject:police violence
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:34:02 PM
To the Anaheim City Council:
My name is Bella Dixon, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater
Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community
health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and
Brown residents and that must come to an end.
The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some
of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020
budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.
Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed
33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related
deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average
for police in California.
I demand that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on
surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.
I also demand that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles.
Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global
pandemic.
I am calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community
refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.
Thank you,
Bella Dixon
Sent from my iPhone
From:Aidan Halderman
To:Public Comment
Subject:Question to Anaheim City Council
Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:38:42 PM
Good Evening!
I am a Boy Scout from Troop 811 of Brea. I am currently working toward the Citizenship in
the Community Merit Badge.
May I ask what the current situation is for opening school campuses from the city's
perspective? Does the city have its own special goals to meet before preparing to send students
back on campus? Does the city plan at all to open up campuses, or would it prefer to stay
online for a large remainder of the current pandemic?
Sincerely,
Aidan Halderman
Young Adult Programs $12.00 Entertainment/program admission fee - estimated average per
Attended youth
Children's Programs Attended $7.00 [Entertainment/program admission fee - estimated average per
child
Museum Passes Borrowed $20.00 Museum admission fee - estimated average for two adults
Computer Use (per hour) $12.00 FedEx/Kinkos price
Database Searches $19.95 Average cost for online article search -
Reference Assistance j $7.00 Average library cost
AUDREY A. LUJAN
City Librarian I Anaheim Public Library
500 W. Broadway, Anaheim, CA 92805
P: 714.765. 1810, Cell
anaheim.net/libraryI facebook.com/cityofanaheim
3
PM
fli- 14 r
0 -las Y6
[ rw
oil.1,
A
LLAM-A �C ION