Loading...
1997/05/20CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: MAYOR: Tom Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Shirley McCracken, Tom Tait, Bob Zemel, Lou Lopez COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 2:50 p.m. on May 16, 1997 at the City Hall Kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there were no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Close Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agency negotiator: Dave Hill Employee organizations: AFA, AMEA, Local #1877, IBEW, APA, Local #952, and non- represented employees. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case: Delmonico, et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al. (and 18 related cases) Orange County Superior Court Case No. 70-80-71. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case: Richter Farms and Richter Farms Trust dba Rancho La Paz v. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 77-63-35. By general consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. 4:01 p.m. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:14 p.m.) INVOCATION: Pastor David Koll, Anaheim Christian Refermod Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Tom Tait led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PRESENTATION - DONATION TO THE ANAHEIM FIRE DEPARTMENT'S "HEART SMART" PROGRAM: A representative from the Walnut Manor Retirement Community stated she was privileged to present a donation to the Anaheim Fire Department from the residents and staff of Walnut Manor. Carrie Tidus, Director of Marketing, Walnut Manor. In honor of the Manor's 50th Anniversary, they have chosen to honor the Anaheim Fire Department for all that they do for them. She then presented Chief Jeff Bowman with a plaque honoring the Department. She also explained that in addition, money was raised through Walnut Manor and their residents, enough to buy and present to the Fire Department "Resuscor Annie Dolls" for the "Heart Smart" program. Fire Chief, Jeff Bowman. On behalf of the Anaheim Fire Department, he expressed heartfelt thanks for the recognition and the wonderful donation. He then explained the "Heart Smart" program which, amongst other things, offers free of charge, an opportunity to learn CPR. He, in turn, presented a plaque to Walnut Manor and the residents in recognition of their many contributions made in making the department's programs a success. Mayor Daly, on behalf of the Council, thanked Walnut Manor for the recognition given to the City's Fire Department and for their generous donation 119: DECLARATIONS OF RECOGNITION: Declarations of Recognition were unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Kathy Cryer, Janis Farrell, Kristi Force, Carol Latham and Dorothea Stephenson, recipients of the Chamber of Commerce, Women's Division, 1997 Annie Anaheim Accolade Awards and recognizing each for their ongoing dedication and commitment to the citizens of Anaheim through their volunteer service in various organizations. Mayor Daly and Council Members personally congratulated each of the recipients for their commitment and dedication to the Anaheim community. 119: PROCLAMATION: The following Proclamation was issued by Mayor Daly and authorized by the City Council: National Public Works Week in Anaheim - May 18 - 24 - 1997 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Gary Johnson, Public Works Director and City Engineer. Accompanying him tonight to accept the Proclamation are Dora Monzon, Contracts Specialist/Streets and Sanitation, and Jack Plake, Engineering Contract Administration. As they celebrate NPWW, this year he brought with him two staff members from his department from two different divisions selected because of the amount of effort they put into their work and the quality of the work that they do. He then gave their background and elaborated upon their accomplishments since joining the Public Works Department. Mr. Johnson also thanked the Council, the City Manager and his staff for all their support in current, past and future programs. Mayor Daly and Council Members commended Mr. Johnson and his department. The Mayor noted that there is an enormously challenging list of public works projects taking place in the City in the next few years -- the downtown Community Center, the Convention Center expansion, the Resort Area Plan, and all the other major improvements that are coming up in the next few years. Mayor Daly then announced that one of the well-known citizen volunteers, Julie Mayer, a Planning Commissioner for the last five years and one who has been heavily involved in the City's Arts Program, had surgery a few days ago and is now recovering at Kaiser-Permanente Hospital in Anaheim. He extends their greetings and is certain she would appreciate hearing from her colleagues and friends in the community. RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME: 1. PROCLAMATION recognizing June 1, 1997, as Oak Canyon Heritage Day in Anaheim. PROCLAMATION recognizing June 1, 1997 as, Stand for Healthy Children Day in Anaheim (Cai State Fullerton). FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,042,629.04 for the period ending May 16, 1997, in accordance with the 1996-97 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5:35 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting ( 5:36 p.m.) ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to agenda items. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Dorothy Brown, 8245 Park Terrace Lane, Anaheim. She referred to and read the letter previously sent to the City Manager regarding Toyon Park and a lighting problem. She was aware the park was going to be built when she bought her home, but did not know it was going to be a "sports arena." She is appalled at the quantity and size of the lights for the ball fields. Hundreds of residents will be adversely affected. She is asking that they proceed with the construction of the fields but re-evaluate the lighting and the time frame for use of the fields. Everyone thought they were going to get a park in the traditional sense. The park sits in the bottom of a "bowl." She believes that there are 14 sports flood lights which are going to light up that whole section of brand new homes. She has spoken to Chris Jarvi (Director of Community Services) who told here there will be multiple fields and that lights would not go off until 10:30 P.M. It will be incredibly bright and noisy and a horrible situation to live in. She is present to find out what she can do about the situation now that she has brought the matter to the Council's attention. She asked if they will change the hours or the lights. Mayor Daly. They appreciate the input and did receive a copy of the letter. The Council will ask the City Manager to apprise them in the next few days about the history of the planning of the park and also what type of notice was given to buyers of the new homes. Mrs. Brown asked what she can expect in terms of a response; Mayor Daly. They will ask the City Manager to prepare a brief summary of the background of the park and the lighting and have the City Clerk make that report available to her. City Manager Ruth. They will be happy to share that information with Mrs. Brown and to get a report back to the Council. Mr. Exob Kebede, 212 Bluerock St., Anaheim. He is a taxicab driver in Anaheim. He leases his cab from Yellow Cab and was cited for picking up in Anaheim during a convention which brought 55,000 people to the City. Yellow Cab Company has two kinds of drivers -- commission drivers and lease drivers. He was told he had to be an employee driver to get a permit. It was unfair for him to get two misdemeanor convictions. He applied for a permit and became an employee driver or a commission driver. It was not working with his schedule and he became a lease driver again. He would like to have the citations removed because it is a big conviction, like robbing a bank, and it will be on his record. Mayor Daly. The cab company operates under certain guidelines and parameters and it is not a matter of whether the Council can waive those. It is all spelled out in an agreement they have with the cab company. He asked the City Attorney what jurisdiction the Council has. City Attorney White. He is not familiar with the facts but as he understands, either Mr. Kebede has plead guilty or has been convicted already of operating without a permit. Council is not in a position to interfere in a case that has been completed and gone through the court process. He further understands that Mr. Kebede does not or did not have a permit that would authorize him to pick up fares within the City and the City's ordinance requires that he have such a permit. He does not know how to further address the matter. That is what the ordinance says and he was apparently in violation at the time. Council Member Tait. Mr. Kebede also mentioned that one company is being treated differently than another. He asked staff to look into that; City Attorney White. They can look into the situation. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Mr. Kebede. The reason he plead guilty, it was either that or 30 days in jail. He is aware of all the ordinances and knows the rules, but it is not fair to give one company such a leeway. Mayor Daly. The City has not heard that from his employer who has been operating in the City for many years. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. In his Utility Bill was a nice brochure about Anaheim's lower electric rates than surrounding communities. The thought occurred to him that perhaps he was not the right audience where it could do the most good. Perhaps if they had extra brochures to distribute to the real estate and apartment communities it would be an opportunity to "catch" a market. He feels they are not getting the maximum out of the excellent brochures. Jeff Kirsch. He has noticed from a Los Angeles Times article that the upcoming deregulation market could have some serious effects on the City's Utility. The City does have an advantage. However, four undergrounding districts are to be considered later in the meeting. He feels the payments to support those districts will continually start to narrow the advantage. In view of the uncertain future environment, last week, the Council approved approximately $200,000 for a study to assist in undertaking a strategic analysis of the Public Utilities Department. He wondered if it might not be wise to impose a moratorium on future undergrounding until the results of the study are received in order to have a clearer picture of the future effects on ratepayers. Jessica Castro, Chairperson, United Neighborhoods, 221 N. Coffman Street, Anaheim. She submitted two letters dated May 20, 1997 to Mayor Daly and Council Members from United Neighborhoods (both signed by Ms. Castro). She read one of the letters. The essence of the concerns expressed revolved around the following: The present INS program in the City's jail and United Neighborhoods (U.N.) opposition to officers being deputized as INS agents. Even though Chief Gaston is opposed, ("Police Officers should do police work and INS officers should do immigration work."), Officer Martin has publically opposed that position and has taken a leading role in support of deputizing officers which they (U.N.) feel is blatant insubordination. Marilyn Whitman, United Neighborhoods, 603 N. Buttonwood, Anaheim. She read the second letter. Concerns expressed -- United Neighborhoods has come forward to make the Council aware of some of the crisis situations in the community involving Anaheim Police Officers but the Council has been non- responsive to the concerns raised diminishing their credibility in the community. United Neighborhoods will not continue to accept an attitude of indifference and denial of the problems. Ms. Whitman stated, as a professional Social Worker, she has had the opportunity to document and research first hand the fear and nightmares that children are experiencing due to post-traumatic stress syndrome because of actions of members of the Police Department. She urged the Council to attend the Civil Rights Commission Hearing on May 29, 1997 to be held at the Westin South Coast Plaza Hotel at 686 Anton Blvd., Costa Mesa as a first step in addressing the issue. Mr. Bob Ball, 1532 Laster, Anaheim. He is present again to speak on the shopping cart issue. He felt great disappointment and anger when he learned earlier this week that City Attorney White's proposed changes to State law regarding abandoned shopping carts were rejected by the State Legislative ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Committee. However, it may force the City to redirect its focus to the real problem -- the theft of the carts in the first place. He encouraged the Council to do so and he would like the matter placed on a future agenda so that there might be broader participation than just him complaining about the same subject. Mayor Daly. They will discuss the matter and make a decision as to how to proceed. The Council is still awaiting a report on the State Legislature's failure to incorporate the changes. Council Member Lopez. He will address the matter under the Council Comments portion of the agenda. Later in the meeting (under Council Comments), Council Member Lopez requested that the matter be agendized for the Council Meeting of June 17, 1997. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Public input was received on Items A26 and C1 (see discussion under those items). MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of May 20, 1997. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Tait, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolutions Nos. 97R-61 through 97R-64, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Al. 173: Receiving and filing a Notice of Filing of an application to provide passenger stage service by PCSTC, Inc., doing business as Pacific Coast Sightseeing Tours and Charters between an origin territory compromised of the Cities of Anaheim, Buena Park, Fullerton, Garden Grove, and Orange, and extending to San Clemente over specified highways. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission meeting held March 13, 1997. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Services Board meeting held April 10, 1997. 173: Receiving and filing Application No. 97-05-004 before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California for approval of Demand-Side Management Shareholder Incentives for 1996 program year accomplishments, and the second installment of shareholder incentives for the 1994 and 1995 program years. 117: Receiving and filing the Investment Portfolio Report Executive Summary for the month of April, 1997, as submitted by the City Treasurer. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 A2. A3. A4. 112: Receiving and filing a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Funds (SLESF) Report for the month of April, 1997, as submitted by the City Treasurer. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for nine months ended March 31, 1997, as presented by the Finance Director. 164: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Paulus Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $44,615 for I-5 Freeway Sewer Relocation Improvements - Segment B (Dickel Street/Cerritos Avenue); and in the event said Iow bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second Iow bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow and second Iow bidders. 164: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Majich Bros, Inc., in the amount of $526,800 for I-5 Freeway Sewer Relocation Improvements (Midway Drive/Manchester Avenue [B-2] and Palm Street [B-3]), and in the event said Iow bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second Iow bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow and second Iow bidders. 129: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, D.K.S. Contracting and Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $2,466,000 for Functional Replacement of Fire Station No. 3; and in the event said Iow bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second Iow bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow and second Iow bidders. Council Member Tait abstained on this Item. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. Al0. 164: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, KEC Engineering, in the amount of $3,786,574.75 for Ball Road Sewer Relocation and Storm Drain Improvements; and in the event said Iow bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second Iow bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow and second Iow bidders. 158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for 434 West Katella Avenue (R/W 5180-58 - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project); approving the Agreement for Right-of-Entry; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreements; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $97,201.39 to Zaby's Convention Way, Inc. 158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for 444 West Katella Avenue (R/W 5180-59 - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project); approving the Agreement for Right-of-Entry; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreements; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $49,179.22 to Zaby's Motor Lodge, Inc. 158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for 1800 Harbor Boulevard (R/W 5180-60 - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project); approving the Agreement for Right-of-Entry; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreements; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $173,500 to Angelo Zaby and Carl Zaby, Trustee. 123: Approving a street lighting Utility Agreement No. 12-UT-411 for the I-5 Freeway Widening Project, Segment A-2, in the amount of $74,250 for the installation and upgrading of 14 ornamental street light and 50 marbelite street light standards. 123: Approving Sewer Relocation Utility Agreement No. 12UT-454 for the I-5 Freeway Widening Project, Segment D. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 All. A12. A13. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 97R-61: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN TO THE CITY. (R/W 5180-58.) 160: Accepting the Iow bid of CST Environmental, Inc., in the amount of $37,800 for asbestos abatement for Building R-2 of the Anaheim Convention Center, in accordance with Bid #5672. 160: Accepting the Iow bid of Waxie Sanitary Supply, in an amount not to exceed $80,000 for janitorial supplies for warehouse stock as required for the period of one year, beginning July 1, 1997, through June 30, 1998, in accordance with Bid #5656. Council Member Tait abstained on this Item. A14. A15. 160: Accepting the Iow bid of Jones Chemical, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $70,000 for sodium hypochlorite, for a period of one year, commencing July 1, 1997, and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the option to renew for an additional three years, in accordance with Bid #5664. 160: Accepting the Iow bid of Waxie Sanitary Supply, in an amount not to exceed $60,000 for Scott paper towels and toilet tissue for the Anaheim Convention Center for the period of July 1, 1997, through June 30, 1998, in accordance with Bid #5662. Council Member Tait abstained on this Item. A16. A17. A18. A19. A20. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the second renewal of the purchase order to R.J. Noble Company, in an amount not to exceed $1,537,500 for asphalt concrete, for a period of one year commencing July 1, 1997, with the option to renew for an additional one year, in accordance with Bid #5383. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the second renewal option of: (1) Absolute Asphalt, in an amount not to exceed $44,188 for an estimated 180,000 pounds of #9078 asphalt sealant. (2) Koch Materials Company, in an amount not to exceed $31,719 for an estimated 165 tons of SS-1H sealant and ten tons of L.M.C.R.S. sealant, including an estimated sixty hours of spreading charges. These will be for a period of one year, beginning July 1, 1997, in accordance with Bid #5394. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the second renewal of the purchase order to Silvia Construction, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for a period of one year commencing July 1, 1997, with the option to renew for one additional year, in accordance with Bid #5392 for rental of asphalt recycling equipment. 123: Authorizing a First Amendment to Agreement with Jacobsen E-Z-Go Textron, in the amount of $249,253.20 to extend the period of performance to June 30, 2000, and to replace equipment, in accordance with Bid #5372. 137: RESOLUTION NO. 97R-62: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF VARIABLE RATE DEMAND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS FOR THREE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROJECTS TO BE DEVELOPED BY HAMILTON ANAHEIM ASSOCIATES L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, AND CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 A21. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 97R-63: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR THE URBAN FORESTRY GRANT PROGRAM UNDER THE CALIFORNIA WILDLIFE, COASTAL AND PARK LAND CONSERVATION BOND ACT OF 1988, FOR THE COMMUNITY RELEAF TREE PLANTING PROJECT. A22. 123: Approving the Second Amendment to Agreement with the County of Orange providing for an extension of time from June 30, 1997, until September 30, 1997 for the Southwest Anaheim Water Distribution System (Crestwood Lane Water Main Improvement); and authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager, on behalf of the City, to execute said Amendment to Agreement. A23. 123: Approving an Agreement with Americlean Environmental Services, Inc., to provide residential collection of used motor oil for the City of Anaheim; and authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute said Agreement, and any other related documents necessary to implement the Agreement. A24. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held May 6, 1997. A25. 124: Approving Addendum "B" to the Standard Anaheim Convention Center tenant agreement for use during the Convention Center Enhancement Project construction period. A26. 123: Approving the Renovation Agreement between the City and the Rams Football Company, Inc., dated as of April 1, 1997, relating to the required renovations of the Low School facility. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. He noticed that there is no comprehensive summary of the amounts involved in the different phases of the project and who pays for what. He feels a clear picture of what exactly the City is going to be paying would be in order before a decision on this item. He would like a better understanding before a vote is taken. Mayor Daly. This item has been on the agenda so many times and all the documentation has been available, i.e., the agreement between the City and the Rams. City Attorney White. This merely implements and is living up to a contractual agreement made in 1978 and all the documents have been available in the City Clerk's Office. A27. A28. 123: Approving the Consent to Assignment of the Amended and Restated Representation Agreement dated May 14, 1996, between the City and Spencer Sports Media, Inc., to Anaheim Sports, Inc., and the assignment of certain existing agreements with stadium advertisers relating thereto. 179: RESOLUTION NO. 97R-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION SUBMITTED BY THE HEARING OFFICER, VICTOR J. KALETA, ESQ., AND GRANTING THE APPEAL AS TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 1594 AND 3421, AND MODIFYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SETTLEMENT REACHED BETWEEN THE PARTIES (LA ESTRELLA RESTAURANT). Council Member Zemel. He asked the City Attorney what their options are in this case. City Attorney White. The Public Hearing was conducted by the Hearing Officer who prepared the record that has been made available to the Council. The Council's options tonight are to make a decision consistent with the record of the evidence elicited at the hearing. The Hearing Officer is recommending that the Council make a certain set of findings that would modify the existing CUP's. There are two at ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 issue that would allow this operation for an additional six months at which time it would be terminated unless an additional permit or extension of time is granted by the Council at that time. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the City Council is in a position to make the findings and adopt the decision recommended by the Hearing Officer. It is not to say that the Council could not make a different set of findings and modify or change that decision provided it is consistent with the evidence presented. At the hearing, City staff and the applicant agreed to submit the case with the proposed recommendations now before the Council thinking it was the best solution. There was no guarantee they would get an additional extension of time at the end of the six-month period. That is still staff's recommendation. Council Member Zemel. He asked for clarification that the City's legal position, at the end of six months if the applicant came back and asked, would be based on the findings the Council makes at that time. City Attorney White. This permit terminates six months from today if the Council adopts the recommendation. Near the end of that six-month period, if the applicant desires to seek more time, the City cannot preclude him from filing another application or seeking an extension. Staff's position is that this will expire in six months. Mayor Daly. He asked for confirmation that the burden will be on the applicant six months from now to reapply. City Attorney White. He answered, yes, as opposed to revocation proceedings where the burden is on the City. What this does by stipulation is provide that the two permits will expire six months from tonight and the burden is on the applicant. Mayor Daly. Regardless of what the Planning Commission does at that time, the applicant can still refile for a broader or different CUP. City Attorney White. The property owner cannot be 3recluded from filing for anything allowed by code but the burden will be on the property owner or tenant to justify the permit. The Planning Department was part of the stipulation agreeing to this. Joel Fick, Planning Director. Staff agrees with all the comments offered by the City Attorney. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 97R-61 throuqh 97R-64, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 97R-61 through 96R-64, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. Council Member Tait abstained on Items A4, A13 and A15. MOTIONS CARRIED. 10 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 A29. 5:00 P.M. - JOINT PUBLIC HEARING 123: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL: To consider a resolution approving the Third Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement by and between the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and Kaufman and Broad of Southern California, Inc., and Basic Concept Drawings for the Cypress Infill/Olive Infill Project. (Continued from the meeting of May 13, 1997, Item A25.) See Joint Public Hearing under Agency Item 2. on today's agenda. Input was received at that time and the following actions taken. Chairman Daly offered Resolution No. ARA97-5 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. ARA97-5: (AGENCY) A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. ARA97-5 for adoption: AYES: CHAIRMAN/AGENCY MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: CHAIRMAN/AGENCY MEMBERS: None ABSENT: CHAIRMAN/AGENCY MEMBERS: None The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA97-5 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Chairman Daly moved to approved the Basic Concept Drawings for the Cypress Infill/Olive Infill Project. Agency Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-65 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-65: (COUNCIL) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONSENTING TO THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, INC. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-65 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-65 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to approved certain environmental findings for the Disposition and Development Agreement. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 11 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Mayor Daly reconvened the City council meeting (5:49 p.m.). D1. 175: PUBLIC HEARING -CREATION OF UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 26: To consider approval of the creation of Underground District No. 26 (Euclid Street) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. LOCATION: The proposed Underground District No. 26 is created to provide for the undergrounding of overhead utilities on Euclid Street from north of Broadway to south of Crescent Avenue as shown on the Underground District No. 26 - Euclid Street map. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 8, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 9, 1997 Posting of property - May 6, 1997 STAFF INPUT: Submitted was report dated May 20, 1997 from the Public Utilities General Manager recommending that the Council create/designate Underground District No. 26 in accordance with the Public Utilities Department Underground Conversion Program 5-year Plan approved by the Council on April 8, 1997. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. As previously stated, the City (Utilities) faces an uncertain deregulatory environment which at this time has unknown effects to the ratepayers and taxpayers. He has never seen an advantage to the ratepayers in undergrounding projects. The cosmetic benefits of undergrounding could be more than outweighed by using that money to lower rates and attract more jobs and economic development to the County or to keep rates Iow. There has never been at any of the previous public hearings that he has been to (on undergrounding) any requests from residents to have their lines undergrounded. Whether or not they do, the payments are spread over every ratepayer. If costs are to be passed on to the ratepayers, there are much better programs such as the future telecommunications systems and other programs that could improve service or decrease commodity costs. Susan Klaren, Executive Director, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. She is pleased to support this item, D1., as well as items D2., D3., and D4. The Chamber has reviewed the Resort Plan as well as staff reports in the agenda packet. They recognize that undergrounding of utilities is a financially significant portion of the plan. It is impossible to separate less desirable elements of the plan from its overall positive impact without deconstructing the entire plan. These undergrounding projects are essential to the overall beautification and completion of the Anaheim Resort Area. She urged the Council to proceed with the plan now and complete Anaheim's own history in the making. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-66 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-66: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 26 (EUCLID STREET). Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-66 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-66 duly passed and adopted. 12 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D2. 175: PUBLIC HEARING -CREATION OF UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 27: To consider approval of the creation of Underground District No. 27 (Anaheim Resort Area Phase IV - West Street) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. LOCATION: The proposed Underground District No. 27 is created to provide for the undergrounding of overhead utilities on West Street from north of Katella Avenue to Ball Road as shown on the Underground District No. 27 - Anaheim Resort Area Phase IV - West Street map. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 8, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 6, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: Submitted was report dated May 20, 1997 from the Public Utilities General Manager recommending that the Council create/designate Underground District No. 27 in accordance with the Public Utilities Department Underground Conversion Program Five-Year Plan approved by the Council on April 8, 1997. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing. City Attorney White. For purposes of expediency, the Council can determine that comments received under D1. be incorporated under D2., D3., and D4. Mayor Daly. It was determined that the previous comments by Mr. Kirsch and Ms. Klaren would be so incorporated for the remaining Public Hearings designating additional Underground Districts (D2., D3. and D4.). Bill Edwards, 1215 W. Laster (resident 22 years). He has been the owner of a business in Anaheim for the last 15 years. The proposed undergrounding would add to the beautification of Anaheim. In their area, they have gone through a tremendous amount of construction. Disneyland has been forthright with them. Many of his neighbors would agree that this would be in their best interest and he would appreciate the Council's favorable consideration. Mayor Daly Closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-67. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-67: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 27 (ANAHEIM RESORT AREA PHASE IV - WEST STREET) Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-67 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-67 duly passed and adopted. 13 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D3. 175: PUBLIC HEARING -CREATION OF UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 28: To consider approval of the creation of Underground District No. 28 (West Street - north of Ball Road to I-5/South Street) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. LOCATION: The proposed Underground District No. 28 is created to provide for the undergrounding of overhead utilities on West Street - north of Ball Road to 1-5/South Street as shown on the Underground District No. 28 - West Street - north of Ball Road to 1-5/South Street map. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 8, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 7, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: Submitted was report dated May 20, 1997 from the Public Utilities General Manager recommending that the Council create/designate Underground District No. 28 in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing. The comments made by Mr. Kirsch and Ms. Klaren under Item D1. are incorporated and made a part of this Public Hearing. There were no additional public comments on this item. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-68. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-68: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 28 (WEST STREET NORTH OF BALL ROAD TO I-5). Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-68 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-68 duly passed and adopted. 14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D4. 175: PUBLIC HEARING -CREATION OF UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 29: To consider approval of the creation of Underground District No. 29 (Walnut Street) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. LOCATION: The proposed Underground District No. 29 is created to provide for the undergrounding of overhead utilities on Walnut Street as shown on the Underground District No. 29 - Walnut Street map. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 8, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 7, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: Submitted was report dated May 20, 1997 from the Public Utilities General Manager recommending that the Council create/designate Underground District No. 29 in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing. The comments made by Mr. Kirsch and Ms. Klaren under Item D1. are incorporated and made a part of this Public Hearing. Joseph Wade, 1747 S. Walnut, Anaheim. They are right in the middle of Disneyland work. He has talked to all his neighbors who live in that area. They are all in favor of undergrounding the utilities along Walnut and also the beautification and other aspects of the Disneyland project. This is a multimillion dollar total project which has a great deal of future benefit for the City and the residents. He feels it would be a waste of time if they don't complete this project and underground the utilities in that area. He would also like to go on record that Disneyland has been a very good neighbor. They have kept the residents aware of all the construction and have bent over backwards in attempting to control dust and noise. He also understands Walnut Street will be torn up for additional work such as a large drainage pipe. While they are doing all that work, it would be unwise if they do not do the rest. They are in favor and request an affirmative vote of the Council. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-69 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-69: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 29 (WALNUT STREET). Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-69 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-69 duly passed and adopted. 15 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D5. 179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3726 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: VINEYARD MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL, 5300 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: FAIRMONT SCHOOLS, INC., Attn: David Jackson, 1557 West Mable Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION: 5310 East La Palma Avenue (Fairmont Private School). Property is approximately 23.08 acres, having an approximate frontage of 1,238 feet on the on the south side of La Palma Avenue, located approximately 2,370 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway. Petitioner requests review and approval of revised plans (Revision No. 1) to permit the conversion of an approximate 8,292 square-foot area of an existing auditorium into a total of nine additional classrooms, to convert a portion of an existing parking lot area into an approximate 12,475 landscaped play area for students and modification or deletion of a condition of approval to increase the maximum student enrollment from 450 to 650 students for a previously-approved private educational institution (an accessory use of an existing church). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED revised plans for CUP NO. 3726 (PC97-26) (4 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 2 absent). Negative Declaration previously approved. Review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by Council Member McCracken and Council Member Lopez at the meeting of 4/8/97, Item B3. Continued from the meeting of May 13, 1997, Item D1. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Member McCracken and Council Member Lopez at the meeting of April 8, 1997, Item B3. Public Hearing was continued from the meeting of May 13, 1997, Item D1 to this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 1, 1997. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 24, 1997. Posting of property - April 25, 1997. STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated March 17, 1997. Mayor Daly asked staff to summarize the request. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission which outlined the details of the project. He also referred to the May 7, 1997 memo to the Council prepared by staff providing information pertaining to the property as well as to other schools in the City. Staff is available to answer any questions. Council Member Lopez. This is an industrial area and an exception has been made to allow a church and a school at the subject location. Joel Fick, Planning Director. The existing designation on the General Plan is industrial. It is covered by the Specific Plan and generally has industrial uses both on the property and adjacent properties. As Mr. Hastings previously mentioned, there was an approved CUP for a permanent church on the site and for the two schools that presently exist. Council Member Lopez expressed his concern over the industrial type uses that could be allowed adjacent to the school and the safety of the children. 16 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Joel Fick. He explained that Development Area 2 within the Specific Plan has a number of both permitted uses and also conditional uses that could apply. He gave examples of permitted uses. All the uses were reviewed by the Planning Commission. One of the questions was the size of the property. It is 23 acres in size and as a result does have some protection just because of its size. Council Member Lopez asked if they approve this request, is the City liable if there is a disaster next door or some kind of traffic problem. City Attorney White. The answer is no. The California Tort Claims Act provides that any public entity that has discretion to issue a permit, if there is any damage or injury that occurs as a result, the entity is immune from any liability. Council Member McCracken. She thought the zone which the school is on and the property across the street is one zone and the property west of that is a different zone; Joel Fick. The zoning is the same. This particular property or the adjacent property is outside the Redevelopment Project Area but is within the Specific Plan zoning area. Council Member McCracken. It is indicated even taking 33 parking spaces, there would be sufficient parking for a long-range development of the church. She has travelled by the churches in the area that are 15 and 20 years old and does not think any one of them has sufficient parking. She is concerned that CUP after CUP is taking a little bit of parking every single time and in time with all the play areas will not have sufficient parking for the church. Additional questions were posed by Council Members McCracken, Tait and Zemel for purposes of clarification which were answered by Mr. Fick. The Mayor opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. David Jackson, Executive Director, Fairmont Schools, 1557 W. Maple Street, Anaheim. The school has four other locations in Anaheim. The next item on the agenda (D6.) also pertains to the Fairmont Schools and some of the background information he will give pertains to both. He then gave the historical background on Fairmont School which was established in Anaheim 44 years ago. They do not receive any public funding and are strictly a private school. They pay over $60,000 in property taxes and City licensing fees along with other State and Federal taxes. There are approximately 1,550 students and, along with their families, contribute a great deal of revenue to local businesses. With respect to the planned expansion at 5310 LaPalma, they are not expanding any buildings or adding square footage but converting some of the square footage already there. They have found being in an industrial area, there is a greater degree of safety with no vandalism, graffiti, or problems with neighbors. The facilities are unique for an industrial area. The property is quite beautiful and the grounds are well kept. What they are doing there will enhance the education process. Safety is their top responsibility along with education. The location is quite accessible to all of the parents that live in and around the Anaheim Hills and Yorba Linda area. As a private school, funding is extremely difficult -- to purchase the property and then to build schools is prohibitive. Industrial areas are prime areas because there is enough property to be used for parking and play areas and it is much less expensive to convert into classrooms. The school has already accepted enrollment based upon the Planning Commission's approval. Any delay will cause a problem in having the facility ready to open on August 19, 1997. Stephen Behrens, 625 Rockridge Plaza, Anaheim. He has three children attending Fairmont Private School at the subject site and is very happy to date with the facilities. It is the best location he has seen for a private school. Academics at Fairmont are outstanding. He shares the viewpoints relative to safety of the children which is a primary concern. He encouraged the Council to approve the request to enable the Fairmont experience to be shared by other students. 17 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Dr. Mark Grossman, 1080 S. Taylor Court, Anaheim. He has two children attending the school (7 and 4). If he thought there was any danger to them, they would not be attending the school. He is incredulous that this is even an issue and pointed to the other uses in the area -- across the street, the Yellow Brick Road School and KIPS Gymnastics which caters to children. He does not find any problem in this campus as far as exposure to unnecessary risk. One of the reasons he moved to the area was to be close to the school. He urged the Council to allow them to expand. Vince Pergoso, 2630 Tundra Circle, Corona. He is speaking as a concerned parent and his experience as a professional planner. Relative to the compatibility issue, when the Specific Plan zoning was approved, it was determined school uses were compatible provided they obtained a CUP. These uses have operated harmoniously in the past and they do not expect any problems in the future. He hopes the Council will consider the actual needs of the community and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission. Charlotte Russell, 1012 E. Miramar Place, Fullerton. She has been a Fairmont "Mom" for the last eight years. They love their campus at Anaheim Hills. It has grown from 175 students to 400 plus. She has a child in second and fifth grade, the two grades they need to add to keep up with the demand. She asked that the Council give serious consideration to the request and think about the families and students of those attending the school. Summation by Applicant: David Jackson. They are asking for approval of the proposed expansion which will occur over the next several years. He knows that one of the issues is the proposed playground closest to the building. He does not see any detriment in that use. They would discontinue using any playground or anything else that might be in jeopardy dependent upon the use. He hopes that if any other issues arise, he will have an opportunity to answer any questions. He requested that the Council vote in favor. Extensive discussion followed wherein the Mayor and Council Member Lopez also posed questions and/or expressed concerns which were addressed by Mr. Jackson. Relative to the plans for the school in the next 5 to 10 years, Mr. Jackson stated if they are able to work things out with both Vineyard Church and City Planning and Zoning, they envision expanding Fairmont through Junior High School. Council Member Lopez reiterated that his main concern, as a parent and former School Board Member, is the play area on the west side and the uses that might be adjacent to that area. He would feel more comfortable if in the immediate future the school would consider moving the play area to the north or somewhere away from the west side of the property. Also, if a business wanted to locate adjacent to the west side, they should not have to face concerns relative to children next to their business. Mr. Jackson. They will continue to work with Vineyard to improve every area they can. He assured Council Member Lopez that they will monitor that situation closely. They would discontinue using any playground or anything else that might be in jeopardy or any possibility of contamination. Council Member McCracken. The history of that property is that the zone was created for the church and its associated school. The ordinance was written for that particular entity. If the property is divided and there is a private school by itself, that is a whole different issue. She is concerned that the school will be investing money in the property depending on the fact that the church still exists and also the safety of the youngsters -- is it safe either from an environmental or social impact. They are now looking at two schools with almost 1,100 kids and if eventually there is a Junior High, about 1,500 youngsters. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Council Member Zemel. He agrees that they need to be concerned but this situation is one of the business of education and the parents decide where their kids go. It is a place of choice. It would be different if what was being asked was totally irresponsible. The customer should decide. It is a simple issue for him. 18 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Council Member Lopez. He has expressed his concerns and hopes that Mr. Jackson will take them into consideration. Apparently the parents feel it is safe. He urged that everything possible be done to make sure it is a safe environment for the students. He will support the expansion. Council Member McCracken. She moved that they accept the report of the Planning Commission for the approval of the CUP but with a five-year time limit; Mayor Daly asked that she explain the rationale. Council Member McCracken. Her concern is if that particular area continues to get more and more industrial, that in five years, it has changed. She still has concerns for the safety of the youngsters, for Fairmont School, the parents, and the investment in the property when it may not be something that can be a permanent home. They would have to come back in five years and the Council at that time would have to look at it again and be assured it does not continue to grow where youngsters may not be safe. Council Member Zemel. If there is a five-year limitation, the investment that they make in the property will be less than substantial not having enough time for a return. The safety factors they want built into the school could not be there. He would prefer to let the parents decide six years from now. Council Member McCracken moved that there be a 5-year time limit on Conditional Use Permit No. 3726 covering the requested expansion. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. (Council Member Lopez stated he was going to second the motion as well.) Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly asked if the church is not the exclusive use, what is the status of the permit for the Vineyard Church and for the permanent use of the 23 acres. City Attorney White. Reading all of the past actions together, what currently exists, there is a CUP without a time limit for the church notwithstanding the limitation that requires the church to be the exclusive use of the property. It is necessary to consider that with the existing CUP for the Fairmont School as well as the CUP for the Vineyard School. The issue tonight is the Fairmont School. His opinion is that the school is legally in existense because of the CUP that it has, again notwithstanding otherwise limiting language in the CUP for the church itself. Under the existing law, the Fairmont School has a right for 450 students to remain in perpetuity so long as it complies with the conditions of approval or the permit is not otherwise revoked. If the Council places a time limit on the additional approval, the only way they can legally do that is to apply that five-year time limit only to the request under consideration tonight -- the expansion of 450 to 650 and conversion of the building and play area. At the end of that time, the most onerous thing would be to revert back to what exists today. The City Council does not have the legal ability tonight to convert a 450 student permit that can last indefinitely to a 650 CUP that could be gone in five years. He confirmed for the Mayor that the Council action only deals with the 200 student addition. Council Member Tait then posed questions that were answered by the Planning Director relative to the Planning Commission approval at the conclusion of which he stated that he has a problem with a time limit since the applicant is looking at investing a substantial amount of money. To limit it would be impractical and basically be a denial. He feels it does not make sense. With the safety issues already having been addressed by professional staff, he would not support a five-year time limit but an unlimited CUP. Council Member Lopez. He appreciates Council Member McCracken's concerns but he agrees with Council Member Zemel. The school is there permanently so they are only talking about the addition. It makes sense to him that they should go ahead and let them stay more than five years. Mayor Daly. He intends to support the motion to put a time limitation on the permit. He recognizes it could create a hardship on the operation. Considering all the permits on the property already and the question marks that exist about the ongoing uses makes the five-year time limit reasonable. The larger issues they are dealing with -- one of Anaheim's most prestigious assets is this 1,000 acre commercial zone in Northeast Anaheim which is a job center for all North Orange County. It is part of their mandate to preserve and protect the City's economic assets. The challenge is when legitimate uses want to enter what is a commercial-industrial zone. He was one of the Council Members to allow Vineyard Church. 19 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 It was not an easy vote and at the time, there was a three-year limit. This is one of the largest master planned business areas in Southern California. It is an important economic asset not just for Anaheim, but also for surrounding communities. There is more to this decision than simply what may be appropriate for this year or the year following. It is necessary to take a long-term view. Industrial zoning is precious because it is part of the City's economic backlog. They owe it to the citizens to preserve as much industrial property that is appropriate for the City. Preserving and protecting the General Plan for the City has to be balanced against legitimate requests and this is one. It is not an easy decision for him because of the great operating track record of Fairmont Schools. He will be supporting a time limitation for the reasons explained. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Tait, the City Council finds that the Negative Declaration previously approved in connection with C.U.P. No. 3726 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation, that it has considered the previously approved Negative Declaration together with any comments and evidence received during the public review process and that there are no additional impacts in connection with the subject action. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member McCracken thereupon offered Resolution No. 97R-70 for adoption subject to the findings of the City Planning Commission but including a five-year limitation on the expansion under Conditional Use Permit No. 3726. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-70: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3726 AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. PC94-147. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-70 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Lopez, Daly MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Zemel MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-70 duly passed and adopted. Council Member Zemel. He believes there could be some confusion relative to the vote. He explained that if a Council person did not support the five-year limitation, the vote should have been no. The final vote is inconsistent with the comments made by a majority of the Council Members. Council Member Lopez. He stated this is what is great about being on the Council. Members can make decisions right up to the last minute. The bottom line is, the school will be there for another five years and in five years when the Council looks at it again, they can make a decision based on the circumstances at that time. 20 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D6. PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3924 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: VERNON W. MONROE, TRUSTEE OF THE VERNON W. MONROE REVOCABLE TRUST, 5209 Seashore Drive #100, Newport Beach, CA 92663. AGENT: DAVID JACKSON, 1557 W. Mable Street, Anaheim, CA 92802. LOCATION: 2212 West Sequoia Avenue, Fairmont Private School. Property is 0.89 acre located on the south side of Sequoia Avenue, 165 feet east of the centerline of Siesta Street. To construct a gymnasium/auditorium and classroom for a private educational facility with waivers of minimum parking lot landscaping, minimum number of parking spaces, maximum structural height and minimum landscaping adjacent to residential zones. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3924 GRANTED (PC97-41) (7 yes votes). APPROVED waiver of code requirement. Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Members McCracken and Lopez at the meeting of May 6, 1997, Item B6, and Public Hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Orange County Register- May 10, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 9, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated April 14, 1997. Mayor Daly. He asked Council Members McCracken and Lopez if their concerns relative to this item had been addressed. Council Member McCracken. She still has concerns. While she supports a gymnasium for the high school, it seems that private schools have been converting warehouses to classrooms and now it looks like they are building a warehouse. This is a metal building with no air conditioning, rest rooms or showers and it is to be a gymnasium. Those are her issues. The gymnasium is to be adjacent to the existing high school; it is not the property, it is the design of the gymnasium. Her questions have not been sufficiently answered. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager then briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission and also the conditions imposed by the Commission on the proposal. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Mr. David Jackson, Executive Director, Fairmont Private Schools. He understands one issue of concern is relative to the bathrooms. He referred to the booklet previously submitted to the Council and referred to Drawing No. 1 (see booklet entitled, Fairmont Private Schools - Pre-School through High School - which included information on the school and also three drawings relative to the proposed gymnasium). A primary consideration is that there is an existing facility 25 feet away that is very accessible to the gymnasium with enough bathrooms for approximately 650 - 700 students. There are currently 175 students and the facility is limited to 350 maximum. The bathrooms are closer than in many gymnasiums he has visited that are part of the same building. It does not make financial sense to add bathrooms when more than are needed are available. He has an architect present who has built many 21 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 buildings for both public and private schools who can address the concerns. He would also like to invite the Athletic Director of Anaheim High School to speak. Don Gillis, Gillis and Associates, Architects. He is not the architect on this project but has been on other Fairmont projects in the past. They deal with both public and private schools. He is present as much as a friend of Fairmont than as an architect. As far as the quality of construction of the building, it is a gymnasium for a private school which means it should meet the 1.15 importance factor as a type of building despite the fact that it is a private school. The fire and safety requirements for this building are exactly the same as for public schools. Relative to the adequacy of the bathrooms, there are twice as many as are required for the students. Council Member McCracken. This is the first time she has seen the plan submitted. There is a distance between the gymnasium lockers and restrooms. There was an indication from Mr. Jackson that there would also be athletic competition not just for Fairmont students, but also other schools, and other students will be using the gymnasium. It makes it difficult if the facilities are in the classroom building. Youngsters have to have restrooms when they are playing games or they will find a place to use if there are none. It also looks like there are no drinking fountains in the building and she feels some kind of liquid refreshment is necessary for youngsters when they are in athletic competition. Health and safety issues are of concern to her. Mr. Gillis. Mr. Jackson works closely with the people who are going to be responsible for the health of the children. They are decisions he has made that are well within the code. The building does not have all the "bells and whistles" he (Jackson) would like, but it meets the requirements of his constituents. Council Member Lopez. He feels it is necessary to have drinking fountains inside the building, not outside; Council Member Zemel. He agrees. He asked where the drinking fountains are located. David Jackson. Working from the drawing, he noted that the drinking fountains are between the existing gymnasium and the existing building. There are at least two sets of fountains. One of the issues is if the drinking fountains are inside, it is not advisable to have water where there is a wooden floor. He also clarified for Council Member Zemel that the restrooms will be left open while the kids are playing. They will not be closed at any time during activities. There is a live-in caretaker on the property for security purposes and maintenance. They do not lock the bathrooms. Council Member Lopez. Every basketball court has wooden floors and they all have water fountains in them. Council Member Tait asked where did the students play basketball at present and did Mr. Jackson know the cost of drinking fountains and restrooms; Mr. Jackson. The existing gymnasium is at their Jr. High on Mable. For P.E., the students play on outside courts. The cost of drinking fountains and restrooms is between $75,000 and $150,00. They would have to charge more for tuission for no real purpose. Angel Sidel, student at Fairmont. She has been involved in many different types of sports for over 10 years and has played in hundreds of gyms. Some have included bathrooms and water fountains and some have not. Gymnasiums with bathrooms located just off the floor can actually cause a danger to players from the doors. Walking 25 ft. to a bathroom is not too far. Dan Miller, Athletic Director, Anaheim High School. He visited the facility in order to address some of the concerns. He found that there are two sets of restrooms, one on each end of the facility. He has been to many facilities where restrooms are much farther away and also where locker rooms are separate. There are many facilities around the U.S. where it is necessary to leave the facility to go to the shower room. The drinking fountains at Anaheim High gymnasiums were shut off because of damage to 22 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 the floors. Most schools bring water containers and water bottles. across the U.S. are comparable to what Fairmont is trying to do. Facilities around this facility and No one spoke in opposition. Summation by Applicant: David Jackson. In order for Fairmont to grow, it is necessary to make sure that their students are getting all that they need and not just academics. Sports are a very important issue along with education. Even though they presently do not have the numbers to build a gymnasium at this time, before getting any larger, they want to add everything that they need to facilitate the expected growth. He would be very much opposed to putting drinking fountains inside the gymnasium. All the recommendations from professionals advise that they not do so. Most bring their own bottles and other liquids. Relative to the bathrooms, where they are located is closer than in gymnasiums that are currently being built. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Council Member McCracken posed questions relative to entrances and exits and accessibility issues which were answered by Mr. Jackson who also briefed additional plans for the property. He also emphasized that timing is of the essence on this project. Mayor Daly. He feels this is a sensible request, is consistent with previous actions of the Council, and will work based on some of the expert testimony. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Tait, the City Council does hereby approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration on the subject project and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code on the basis that the Planning Commission/City Council has considered the proposal with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Monitoring Program, together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-71 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-71: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3924. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-71 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-71 duly passed and adopted. 23 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 D7. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 4302, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11: OWNER: JAS PARTNERSHIP, Attn: Jim Shab, 1990 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: LEON ALEXANDER, 558 South Harbor Boulevard, #100, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1985 South Santa Cruz Street. Property is 2.44 acres located at the northwest corner of Santa Cruz Street and Stanford Court. Waiver of permitted type of sign and permitted size of freestanding sign to construct a 50-foot high double-faced, 299 square foot freestanding pole sign including a 70 square foot electronic readerboard. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: GRANTED, IN PART, VARIANCE NO. 4302 for a 50-foot high double faced, 215 square foot freestanding pole sign (PC97-40) (6 yes votes, 1 no vote). HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Members McCracken and Lopez at the meeting of May 6, 1997, Item B5, and Public Hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Orange County Register- May 10, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 9, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated April 14, 1997. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission outlining the request. He also noted that the applicant is now asking that the reader board sign be raised in height to 50 ft. and that an approximate 200 ft. of additional signage be allowed to be added to the existing reader board sign for a total of approximately 300 sq. ft. The Commission on a 6-1 vote approved the request at a height of 50 ft. but restricted the sign to the existing 70 sq. ft. reader board plus 145 sq. ft. of additional signage to identify only one tenant. The Commission also conditioned that the electronic reader board portion of the sign be removed at such time as the cellular business ceases to operate at the site and limited the reader board copy to the time, temperature, date, and on-site business service. There was one nearby property owner who expressed opposition to this request. Mayor Daly. He asked for staff to summarize the difference between the staff recommendation and the action of the Planning Commission. Greg Hastings. Staff recommended denial of the increase of the sign area and the Planning Commission approved 145 sq. ft. of additional signage. The applicant had asked for 200 sq. ft. He clarified for Council Member Tait that the applicant is requesting additional signage. The current sign is 100 sq. ft., 70 sq. ft. of which is reader board. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Leon Alexander, on behalf of Global Cellular Company. They have been in economic turmoil for the past four years because of the displacement of the business. The company will be relocating to the building directly behind the current building which is an increase from 22,000 square feet to 35,000 square feet. The new building has been vacant for over three years. It has been a depressed area. They were also informed that the freeway will be elevated approximately 15' and there will be a carpool lane approximately 40-45' high. Once again, the area will have some hindrance in terms of visibility. There is a need to increase the current sign from 100 sq.ft, to 299 sq.ft. The Planning Commission has allowed for 215 sq.ft. With about four years of anticipated construction in the area, it will be a tremendous hardship. Global Cellular is coming in on a hardship basis in their request for increased signage. They have been a long-standing business in Anaheim and want to stay in the City. 24 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Jim Shab, Global Cellular. He assumed since the Planning Commission understood their hardship and the situation, their request would be acceptable. They were going to lease the new building originally but the deal fell through. They then purchased the property. In doing so, they have taken on a major project which he is trying to bring to life. He referred to the posted rendering of what the building will look like after they beautify it. They minimized the amount of signage on the building from what they had recently proposed and are going to relocate the existing signs on their building to the new facades on the frontage of the building. The actual size of the reader board will not change. The reason for adding their name to the sign is for recognition. The freeway carpool lane will be higher than the building itself. People will not see the building which is 24' tall. Also, southbound traffic will not see the building. They are losing basically one half of their visibility from southbound traffic which is an important factor to consider. Council Member Zemel. In his (Shab's) dealing with Caltrans, he asked if it was an amicable agreement on the price that he got or did he go to court. Jim Shab. They are currently in court. They have not settled on a price yet. To relocate his business is extremely costly and is costing substantially more to equal what they now have. Council Member Zemel. He asked if they are arguing with Caltrans that they are losing their sign; Mr. Shab answered, no. The sign was approved originally to be a reader board at 35'. The City allows for 50'. They decided to take the sign to 50' which is allowed and simply put their name on the sign. That is all they are doing. Council Member Tait asked if he was seeking compensation from Caltrans for the taking of the existing sign. Mr. Shab answered no. They are buying the sign with the property. It is called loss of business good will and it is something other than the sign. If the Council votes against their request, it will be a big blow and create more hardships. He reiterated they are simply putting a name on a sign. Every reader board has a name on it and that is all they are trying to do. Leon Alexander. In their request to the Planning Commission, they asked that the sign run with the land and the Planning Commission determined it will only be with Global Cellular. Their additional request is that Mr. Shab maintain the ownership of the sign in fee. Therefore, they are requesting a modification. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Daly. He wants to make clear what the staff recommendation is, referring to Page 4 of the staff report. Staff is recommending denying the variance, denying the waiver of the permitted sign type and also the waiver of the permitted size. He asked under staff's recommendation what type of sign would be allowed. Greg Hastings. With a denial of both of the waivers, the applicant is still entitled to a CUP with a waiver which allows the existing sign to be moved as is to the other property -- a 70 sq. ft. reader board with a 30 sq. ft. phone number. He clarified it was the existing sign code at the time it was approved but the reader board portion was not. However, since the Council already approved a CUP, staff recommends that the reader board remain in effect. Mayor Daly. His understanding then is that staff recommendation is to allow the property to reinstall a replica of the existing sign at the new adjacent property; Mr. Hastings answered that is correct. He also clarified that the owner will be allowed to put signage on the facade of the building separate from the sign. Any additional signage could go back to the Planning Commission under a Report and Recommendation item. 25 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Mayor Daly. If they deny the variance, then the applicant will be able to proceed to move the existing sign or create a replica of the existing sign which will be supporting the Planning staff recommendation; Mr. Hastings answered that was correct. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion By Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Zemel, the City Council determined that the proposed activity fall within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 11, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, Categorically Exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 97R-72 for adoption denying Variance No. 4302. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-72: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 4302. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Zemel stated that there were six yes votes on the Planning Commission. He asked the thought process and the reasoning that went into the Planning Commission decision. Greg Hastings. He believes, at the time, they were concerned about visibility into the property. There was a compromise on the amount of square footage. The Planning Commission did not allow the full 300 sq. ft. being requested but were going to allow the reader board plus an additional sign that could be used for either tenant and the reader board could be used to flash the other tenant. Mayor Daly. At this stage in the development of the neighborhood around the Anaheim Stadium area which happens to be across the freeway from the Anaheim Resort Area, they have been very careful in setting much higher standards for design and signage. He feels it is important to set a consistent tone in the entire area. Planning staff has made a clear recommendation as to what is advisable. Council Member Zemel. It is not often they get a pro-business recommendation from the Planning Commission. He is going to be voting against the resolution because of the recommendation of their appointed Commissioners. Council Member McCracken. She will be voting for because along that portion of I-5, Caltrans has made a concerted effort to make some positive environmental changes. She does not think this is the time to be adding signs the size of billboards on the I-5 through Anaheim. The widening has taken down many signs and has added landscaping and design factors to change the whole image of the I-5 through the City. Council Member Tait. He understands and does agree that the business has gone through a hardship. In trying to find some equity, the existing sign would not be approved if it were not for searching for equity. To him, the sign is going beyond what a reasonable sign would be. He is going to support the resolution but he would support additional waivers on the building to make up for it or maybe something that is not so great a sign as this one. Leon Alexander. This is a tremendous hardship for the business. They decided to stay in Anaheim. Redevelopment staff has indicated that a great number of businesses have been lost in Anaheim. He then reiterated the concerns previously expressed emphasizing the hardship that they have endured. Mayor Daly. This is strictly a land use planning decision and there are all kinds of extraneous issues that could be debated. The Public Hearing has been closed and more than adequate time has been given to the proponents with a number of issues having been repeated several times. 26 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Council Member Tait. He would support something lesser than this but cannot go to this extent. He clarified he is supporting the resolution offered but realizes the business is also experiencing a hardship and some sort of equity would allow more than what they have. He would support additional waivers on the building; Co. Lopez stated he agrees. Mayor Daly. He noted that was not the issue in front of the Council tonight; Council Member Tait. The only advice would be to start over and go back through the Planning Commission which is unfortunate. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 97R-72 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Lopez, Daly MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Zemel MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 97R-72 duly passed and adopted, denying Variance No. 4302. Refer to Resolution. Mayor Daly. As a follow up, the existing sign on the property was a waiver and an exception made to the particular business owner. It is the only exception on that side of the freeway. He feels the City has been very reasonable in this respect. Anything else would be favorable treatment and inconsistent with what they are doing on that side of the freeway. D8. 134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 344 - ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2, AMENDMENT NO. 1 WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3917 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: ADVANCED GROUP 96-63, 22994 El Toro Road, Lake Forest, CA 92630 AGENT: MICHAEL J. OGDEN, 2324 Caddie Court, Oceanside, CA 92056 LOCATION: 465 West Oran.qewood Avenue - Emerald Springs Apartments. Property is approximately 4.67 acres located on the north side of Orangewood Avenue, approximately 298 feet east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard. Proposal to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to redesignate the subject property from the Medium Density Residential to the Commercial Recreation land use designation; and to reclassify the subject property from the RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple- Family) Zone to the SP92-2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) Zone; to permit the conversion of an existing 139-unit apartment complex to a 136-unit Vacation Ownership Resort with waiver of minimum structural setback and yard requirements adjacent to Orangewood Avenue and the side and rear property lines, permitted encroachments into required yard and setback areas, and minimum screening requirements adjacent to a residential zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended adoption to the City Council for GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 344 (PC97-51) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2, AMENDMENT NO. 1 APPROVED (PC97-52). CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3917 GRANTED (PC97-53). APPROVED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Planning Commission Item from the meeting of April 28, 1997, Item #13. 27 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - May 8, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 9, 1997 Posting of property - May 9, 1997 STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated April 28, 1997 Mayor Daly. The proposed project is self evident by the written materials submitted. He asked to hear from the applicant. Mike Ogden, 2324 Caddie Court, Oceanside. This will be a quality project changing from a 139 unit dilapidated building to a 136-unit vacation ownership building. Winter Circle Resort International is the developer. Jim Watkins is President and will be speaking. He then gave some facts on the company and the work they have done. They develop and manage their projects which do enhance the community. It meets the goals of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area. He introduced Mr. Watkins. Jim Watkins, President, Winter Circle Resorts International, P.O. Box 99, Del Mar. He first complimented staff on the job they had done. Winter International has been in business for over 40 years and the last 17 years have concentrated on and specialized in first class resorts on the Southern California coast. He briefed some of the projects in which they have been involved. In this case, they are planning on taking an old facility and investing $6 million in it to develop a first-class vacation ownership resort. The benefits to the community are significant which he explained. It will be an extremely attractive resort at the immediate entrance of the south gate to the Anaheim Resort Area. There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council does hereby approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration on the subject project and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code on the basis that the Planning Commission/City Council has considered the proposal with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Monitoring Program, together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution Nos. 97R-73 through 97R-75, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-73: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 344, EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO. 97R-74: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-2 FOR THE ANAHEIM RESORT AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NOS. 94R-236 AND 94R-237 ACCORDINGLY. RESOLUTION NO. 97R-75: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3917. 28 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 97R-73 throuqh 97R-75, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, 7emel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 97R-73 through 96R-75, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 5599: (INTRODUCTION) Amending ordinance no. 5454 relating to the Anaheim resort specific plan no. 92-2 (chapter 18.48 of the Anaheim Municipal Code). Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5599 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 5599: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 5454 RELATING TO THE ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN No. 92-2 (CHAPTER 18.48 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE). ITEMS B1 - Bll FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 28, 1997: INFORMATION ONLY- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MAY 20, 1997: B1. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3921 DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-05 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: F. J. HANSHAW ENTERPRISES, INC., 1092 Westminster Avenue, Garden Grove, CA 92843 AGENT: DESAPRIYA JINADASA, 1112 North Brookhurst Street, #1, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 1112 North Brookhurst Street, Suite 1 (Cheers Market). Property is 0.91 acre, located north and east of the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue. To permit a 2,200 square-foot convenience market with sales of alcoholic beverages for off- premises consumption within a commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. To determine Public Convenience or Necessity for retail sales of alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3921 GRANTED, IN PART, alcohol portion of the CUP was granted for two years, to expire on 4/28/99 (PC97-42) (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1 absent). Waiver of code requirement DENIED. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-05 APPROVED on the basis that there are no other liquor stores in close proximity to subject property (PC97-43) (4 yes votes, 2 no votes, and 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. Council Member Lopez. He noted there is already a liquor store on the subject corner. 29 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Greg Hastings. This is in place of it. The liquor store closed down. The proposal is taking the exact same floor area. The City is now requiring a CUP for a convenience market with alcohol sales. Mayor Daly. He shares the concern about liquor at this location. However, the action of the Planning Commission is a two-year time limit. He asked what would happen at the end of two years and is the burden on the operator to reapply. Joel Fick, Planning Director. The CUP expires in April of 1999 and the burden will be on the applicant to reapply and reconfirm there are no difficulties with the permit. They are also required to clean up the landscaping as well as remove the wing wall and that area would have to be relandscaped. There was no action taken by the Council on this item. B2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2199, VARIANCE NO. 1229, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 21: OWNER: City-Initiated, City of Anaheim (Code Enforcement Division/Police Department), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 823 South Beach Boulevard - Covered Wagon Motel. Property is 1.3 acres, with 190 feet on the west side of Beach Boulevard and is located 975 feet north of the centerline of Ball Road. City-initiated (Code Enforcement Division and Police Department) request to consider revocation or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 2199 (to permit a cocktail lounge in an existing motel with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) and Variance No. 1229 (to construct and operate a 70-unit motel and coffee shop). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Revoked CUP NO. 2199 on the basis that the use for which such approval was granted has ceased to exist and has been suspended for one year or more (PC97-44) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Continued Variance No. 1229 to a Planning Commission hearing to be held July 21, 1997. B3. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3926, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: GEORGE M. KUBO, 23361 Villena Street, Mission Viejo, CA 92692 AGENT: DENNIS R. VON LOSSBERG, 11870 Beach Boulevard, Stanton, CA 90680 LOCATION: 721-725 South Beach Boulevard. Property is 1.13 acres located on the west side of Beach Boulevard, 1,000 feet south of the centerline of Orange Avenue. To permit a trailer sales lot and repair facility with waivers of minimum landscaping adjacent to residential zone boundaries, permitted encroachments into setback areas and required site screening. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3926 GRANTED, IN PART, with modification to Condition Nos. 18 and 21 (PC97-45) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Waiver of code requirements DENIED. Approved Negative Declaration. 3O ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 B4. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3724 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Diocese of Orange, 2811 East Villareal Drive, Orange, CA 92667 AGENT: Bissel Architects, 446 Old Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 LOCATION: 412 North Crescent Way. Property is 5.01 acres located on the east side of Crescent Way, 380 feet north of the centerline of Penhall Way. To amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to signage requirements and review and approval of sign plans for a previously-approved church. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Amendment to CUP NO. 3724 APPROVED (PC97-46) (5 yes votes, 2 absent). Negative Declaration previously approved. B5. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3927 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: LAKEVlEW BUSINESS PARK, 2615 South Orange Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92707 LOCATION: 1480 North Lakeview Avenue. Property is 0.84 acre located at the northeast corner of Lakeview Avenue and Eisenhower Circle. To permit an automobile repair facility within an existing 10,585 square-foot industrial building and construction of 1,600 square-foot of mezzanine storage area with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3927 GRANTED (PC97-47) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement for 27 spaces. Approved Negative Declaration. B6. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2973 - DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-06 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: ORKIN INCORPORATED/THRIFTY OIL COMPANY, 10000 Lakewood Boulevard, Downey, CA 90240 AGENT: DAVID A. ROSE III, 10000 Lakewood Boulevard, Downey, CA 90240 LOCATION: 304 South Magnolia Avenue -Thrifty Oil Company. Property is 0.49 acre located at the southeast corner of Magnolia Avenue and Broadway. To amend or delete a condition of approval to permit retail sales of beer and wine for off- premises consumption in an existing service station convenience market. To determine public convenience or necessity for retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 2973 APPROVED with the added condition that this approval shall terminate in one year if the applicant has not been able to purchase an active and operating ABC license existing within the same census tract (PC97-48) (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1 absent). Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 97-48 WITHDRAWN. Approved Negative Declaration. An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was submitted by Harry Bisla, Franchise 7-Eleven Store, 240 S. Magnolia, Ca. 92801, in letter dated May 19, 1997 and, therefore, a Public Hearing will be scheduled at a later date. 31 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 B7. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3922 - DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-07 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: CARL N. & MARGARET M. KARCHER TRUST, 1200 North Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY, 4 Center Pointe Drive, La Palma, CA 90623 LOCATION: 1244 North Harbor Boulevard. Property is 1.16 acres located on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, 240 feet north of the centerline of Romneya Drive. To permit a 2,944 square-foot service station with an accessory convenience market with retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption with waivers of (a) minimum distance between signs and (b) minimum required landscaping adjacent to interior property lines and to determine public convenience or necessity for retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3922 GRANTED, IN PART, denying the retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption (PC97-49) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED, IN PART, waiver (a) was denied on the basis that it was deleted following public notification, and waiver (b) was approved. DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 97-07 DENIED (PC97-50). Approved Negative Declaration. An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was submitted by Thomas Riggle, RHL Design Group, 1201 S. Beach Blvd., Ste. 207, La Habra, Ca. 90631, in letter dated May 16, 1997 and, therefore, a Public Hearing will be scheduled at a later date. B8. 134: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 344 ANAHEIM RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92- 2, AMENDMENT NO. 1; WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3917 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: ADVANCED GROUP 96-63, 22994 El Toro Road, Lake Forest, CA 92630 AGENT: MICHAEL J. OGDEN, 2324 Caddie Court, Oceanside, CA 92056 LOCATION: 465 West Orangewood Avenue - Emerald Springs Apartments. Property is approximately 4.67 acres located on the north side of Orangewood Avenue, approximately 298 feet east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard. Proposal to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to redesignate the subject property from the Medium Density Residential to the Commercial Recreation land use designation; and to reclassify the subject property from the RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple- Family) Zone to the SP92-2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan) Zone; and to permit the conversion of an existing 139-unit apartment complex to a 136-unit Vacation Ownership Resort with waiver of minimum structural setback and yard requirements adjacent to Orangewood Avenue and the side and rear property lines, permitted encroachments into required yard and setback areas, and minimum screening requirements adjacent to a residential zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: GPA 344 recommended adoption to City Council (PC97-51) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Recommended adoption of Anaheim Resort Specific plan No. 92-2, Amendment No. 1 to the City Council (PC97-52). Approved waiver of code requirement. GRANTED CUP NO. 3917 (PC97-53). Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration. See Public Hearing Item D8 on today's agenda. Action taken at that time. 32 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS. B9. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3902 - REVIEW OF SIGN PLANS: LOCATION: Property is located at 520 West Ball Road. Greg Hohn (representing property owner), 1300 South Beach Boulevard, Building 4516, La Habra, CA 90632, requests review and approval of sign plans for a previously-approved service station. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED the submitted sign plans for a previously approved-service station. B10. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3851 - REVIEW OF FINAL PLANS: LOCATION: Property is at 3731 East La Palma Avenue. Scott Peotter (representing Unocal), 1 Corporate Park, Suite 101, Irvine, CA 92714, requests review and approval of final building elevation and canopy plans for a previously-approved service station. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED the final building elevation and canopy plans including the two 1.7 square foot logo signs. Bll. 179: CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061 (b) (3) CODE AMENDMENT NO. 97-04 - PERTAINING TO HOME OCCUPATION, REGISTRATIONS AND RECONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, IN THE ML (LIMITED INDUSTRIAL) ZONE: Staff-initiated request for a code amendment to allow for the reconstruction of single-family residences in the ML zone and to allow Home Occupation Registrations for ML-zoned single and multiple family residential properties. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended adoption of the ordinance to the City Council. ORDINANCE NO. 5598 (INTRODUCTION) Adding subsections 18.61.020.255 and 18.61.030.015 to sections 18.61.020 and 18.61.030, respectively, of Chapter 18.61 of title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Zoning. Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5598 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 5598: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SUBSECTIONS 18.61.020.255 AND 18.61.030.015 TO SECTIONS 18.61.020 AND 18.61.030, RESPECTIVELY, OF CHAPTER 18.61 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. 33 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 ITEMS B12 - B14 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 12, 1997: INFORMATION ONLY- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MAY 22, 1997: B12. 134: DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED SALE OF COUNTY PROPERTY: LOCATION: Property is located at 1000-1010 South Harbor Boulevard. County of Orange, County Executive Office, Real Estate Division, Attn: Carolyn C. Ansari, Sr. Real Property Agent, 14 Civic Center Plaza, 34th Floor, Santa Ana, CA 92701, request for determination of substantial conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for the proposed sale of County-owned property. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Determined to be in substantial conformance with the Anaheim General Plan (5 yes votes, 1 abstained, and 1 absent). B13. 179: CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS II FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97-08 - REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN: LOCATION: Property is located at 1650 South Harbor Boulevard (Saga Inn). Saga Inn, c/o Bill Hormath, 1650 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92802, request for review and approval of a final site plan to install one (1) wall-mounted sign. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED Final Site Plan Review No. 97-05 (6 yes votes, 1 absent). B14. 155: EIR NO. 311 (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 - FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 97- 10 FOR HOTEL AND PARKING DISTRICT (WEST PARKING AREA) SETBACK AREAS ADJACENT TO THE EAST SIDE OF WALNUT STREET: The Walt Disney Company, Attn: Douglas M. Moreland, Vice-President, Walt Disney Imagineering, 700 Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92503, requests review and approval of a Final Site Plan for landscaping in the Hotel and Parking District (West Parking Area) setback areas adjacent to the east side of Walnut Street between Katella Avenue and the northern Specific Plan boundary. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED Disneyland Resort Specific Plan no. 92-1 Final Site Plan Review No. 97-10 for hotel and parking district (West Parking Area) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. 34 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 ITEMS B15 - B16 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF MAY 8, 1997 DECISION DATE: MAY 5, 1997 INFORMATION ONLY- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MAY 30, 1997: B15. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4304 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: RAMADA ANAHEIM PARTNERSHIP, 1331 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805. AGENT: JERRY CALLIHAN, 1331 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1331 East Katella (Ramada Inn). Property is approximately 4.8 acres located on the north side of Katella Avenue and approximately 1315 feet west of the centerline of State College Boulevard. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to convert eight (8) guest rooms into one (1) meeting room within an existing motel. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: APPROVED Variance No. 4304 (ZA Decision No. 97-05). Approved Negative Declaration. B16. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4305, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 1: OWNER: DONALD J. and HILDA J. HOSMER, 1461 Damon Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION: 1461 West Damon Avenue. Property is approximately 0.17 acre located approximately 460 feet west of the centerline of Pythias Avenue with a frontage of 79 feet on the north side of Damon Avenue. Waiver of minimum front yard structural setback to construct a 105-square foot front addition. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4305 APPROVED (ZA Decision No. 97-06). END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS. C1. 105: REVISED COUNCIL POLICY - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: To consider the adoption of a Resolution which presents a revised Council Policy No. 117, and is a strong guideline for limiting terms to two four-year terms for members of the Boards and Commissions. (Continued from the meetings of March 18, 1997, Item C1, and May 13, 1997, Item C1 .) RESOLUTION NO. - .... A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 117 RELATING TO BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. Also see minutes of March 18, 1997 and May 13, 1997 where the issue was previously discussed. Public input was given on this item at the beginning of the meeting as follows: 35 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Miriam Kaywood, Anaheim resident (former Council Member). She was a Planning Commissioner for three years and a member of various boards and other committees. When she was on the Commission, Mel Gauer, a retired Superintendent of the School District was serving and had served on the Commission for 40 years with great distinction. She feels it is necessary to have members who have a historical perspective and are willing to work and devote the time necessary to serve. She recounted the great deal of expertise and longevity on the Planning Commission by prominent members of the community emphasizing that kind of expertise is needed on the Redevelopment Commission as well. It is not just the time spent at the actual meetings, but also the additional time and effort that is required over and above that. There should also never be an appointment made that is politically motivated. She feels it is important to keep people on boards and commissions who have served well. She does not favor term limits. Floyd Farano, President, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber has filed a letter with the Council supporting term limits for members of boards and commissions. He then addressed the complexities and reasons in justifying their position. He agrees with Mrs. Kaywood relative to service on the Planning Commission which is extremely complex having served as a Commissioner for 11 years. He does not know if the same term limit must apply in that case since there is a longer learning curve. His personal point of view is that a 12-year term would be sufficient for the Planning Commission. Overall, term limits are appropriate because there are many capable people in the City who would like to serve and who could provide fresh ideas. It is a privilege to serve and term limits would give that opportunity to a great number of people. Council Member Zemel. The resolution proposed to amend Council Policy No. 117 would do no more than the policy in place right now which has commissioners serving at the Council's pleasure for one term, two terms, or whatever they wish. He then explained how the situation came about relative to the idea of setting term limits for board and commission members. He then emphasized that he feels it is important that the City's Boards and Commissions be able to change with the times. The Council changes every eight years. It seems inconsistent with the public view and the public's concept that they want change. It does not make sense that board and commission members can serve in some instances 20 or 30 years when during that time there are newly elected Councils that may have a whole different opinion of public policy. After two months of meetings of the Liaison Committee, what was devised was a two-page revision of Council Policy #117 which states strongly in most paragraphs that there shall be two four-year terms, just as with the Mayor and Council Members, but the one paragraph that in essence takes that all away is the one he is going to read into the record again, "Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to prohibit the City Council from reappointing any person to serve upon any board or commission for a period in excess of two consecutive terms where circumstances so warrant as determined at the sole and absolute discretion of the City Council." Therefore, he could not support the proposed resolution. He is more supportive of an ordinance that would bring term limits to boards and commissions. There are a lot of people in the City who would like to serve. The population has grown to 300,000 people and the City has become more diverse. MOTION. Council Member Zemel thereupon moved that the Council by resolution put forth an ordinance that would bring term limits to boards and commissions with the following guidelines: that they be limited to two terms with a two-year hiatus or be appointed to another and different board and then be able to go back to the former board or commission for another two terms. All appointments will be made by a majority of the Council as the Charter provides. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. Before action was taken, Mayor Daly noted that Council Member Zemel proposed a motion that would lead to an ordinance placing term limits on advisory commissions. Having reviewed what other Orange County cities do, and also having talked to many Anaheim citizens about this subject as well as citizen volunteers who serve on advisory commissions, they generally do not see a need for strict limits on service. He also does not feel they should place a limitation on the ability of volunteers to serve their City. He will be opposing the motion. 36 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 Council Member McCracken. She asked the City Attorney relative to the three commissions created by the Charter -- Parks and Recreation Commission - Library Board and Planning Commission -- if service on those commissions can be limited. City Attorney White. The Charter provisions that create and set forth the manner of service of those three commissions specify four-year terms with members appointed and removed by the Council. It does not place any limits on how long they serve. In his opinion, it would not be inconsistent with the Charter to have either a policy or an ordinance limiting the number of terms. They could not change the terms, which are for four years, but could by policy or ordinance limit how many terms the Council could consecutively appoint those people to. Council Member Zemel. About 20% of the people did vote against the City Council/Mayor term limits, but the rest thought it was a good idea. What he is proposing is consistent with the public view. He urged the Council to support term limits. Mayor Daly. Council Member Zemel has at least one vote on the Council consistent with his suggestion. When the time comes to appoint, he (Zemel) can simply cast his vote accordingly. If he thinks someone has exceeded an appropriate number of years, he would not vote for that person. He believes anything else is extraneous. If he wants to reach out and nominate new people, that is his prerogative. If he wants to suggest a 4, 6, 8 or 12-year limit, he can do so. He does not think it is necessary to pass a law in order to have the ability to do that. Council Member Lopez. They now have the ability to remove any individual on any board. Since he has been on the Council, there have been several appointments. Recently, they honored Vivian Englebrecht who is now 90 years old and had been on a board for over 20 years. She had done a great job and was not replaced because of the work she had done. If a person is not doing a good job, it is also the Council's prerogative to remove that person. He does not see any purpose to a specific time limit and the present procedure is working well. Council Member Tait. The Mayor and Council Member Lopez stated that Council always has the prerogative to vote which is the classic argument against term limits. However, the people of California have overwhelmingly supported terms limits and when the people of Anaheim, when asked directly, said they wanted terms limits for Council Members. It is inconsistent not to have the same for secondary or advisory bodies. Mayor Daly. He feels there is a distinction between elected officials and volunteer citizen advisors; Council Member Tait. He feels it should be even moreso with volunteer citizens. Mayor Daly called for a vote on the motion by Council Member Zemel: Ayes: Tait, Zemel - No: McCracken, Lopez, Daly - Motion failed to carry. Council Member Zemel. He thanked the President and the Chamber for considering the issue and the resolution of the entire Board opposing by a 30-1 vote. 37 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 C2. 114: APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TO COUNCIL LIAISON COMMITTEES: Requested by Mayor Daly at the meeting of May 6, 1997, Item C2. This item was continued from the meeting of May 13, 1997 to this date. Mayor Daly. The Council has a memo from staff suggesting some housekeeping regarding Liaison Committees. City Clerk Sohl. The City Manager's office in February prepared a review for the Council as requested. They recommended the following committees be discontinued on the basis that no meeting had taken place: Anaheim Stadium, Legislative, Chamber of Commerce, Arena, Library and Convention Center. The recommendation was to continue the following: INS, Redevelopment, Audit, Transportation, and the Telecommunications Policy Advisory Committee. Mayor Daly. He asked the rationale for continuing the Telecommunications Committee since his understanding was that staff recommended it was no longer necessary. Dave Morgan, Assistant City Manager. He clarified that was correct. The report to the Council regarding the Telecommunications Committee was submitted Febaruay 5, 1997. It was recommended that it continue until the deal was done. Since the work of the Committee has now been completed, it is no longer necessary. Council Member Zemel. He had sent a memo to the City Manager and City Clerk advising that the Chamber of Commerce Liaison Committee had been meeting. He and former Council Member Feldhaus were meeting with the Chamber but since Cuncil Member Feldhaus has been gone, he has been doing so alon and they are doing good work. However, the recommendation to eliminate that committee remains the same. Also, relative to the Legislative Committee, he made a strong recommendation that he would not want to see it discontinued when it is needed now more than ever. City Clerk Sohl. A copy of Council Member Zemel's memo was given to all Council Members. The recommendation came from the City Manager's Office. Dave Morgan. It was their awareness that meetings for those committees had not been taking place and thus the recommendation that they be discontinued. If it is the wisdom of the Council to continue the committees, that is a Council prerogative. Mayor Daly. He recommends that they add the Chamber of Commerce to the list of ongoing committees and delete the Telecommunications Committee. This will leave them with the Chamber of Commerce, INS, Redevelopment, Audit, and Transportation. On the Legislative Committee he would like the City Manager to report back as to the suggested format for those liaison meetings. As he recalls in the past, there have been questions whether all five Council Members should be involved simultaneously or a liaison on legislative matters. He is suggesting that they defer action on creating or continuing a Legislative Liaison Committee but act on the other five. Council Member Tait. Since the electric utility restructuring is in the forefront, he would suggest that they develop another liaison committee on restructuring and that the Mayor serve on that as well as himself. 38 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 MOTION. Mayor Daly moved that there be six liaison committees INS, Redevelopment, Transportation, Audit, Chamber of Commerce and Electric Utility - and that these committees are to exist until further notice. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly. On the INS Liaison Committee, he recommends that they continue with Council Members Zemel and Tait; on Redevelopment, Council Members Lopez and McCracken; Transportation, himself and Council Member Lopez; Audit, himself and a volunteer - Council McCracken volunteered; Chamber of Commerce, Council Members Zemel and McCracken, and on the Electric Utility, himself and Council Member Tait. Council Member McCracken. She ended up with three and, therefore, would like to forego the Chamber; Council Member Zemel suggested Council Member Tait. It was determined that the liaisons to the Chamber would be Council Members Zemel and Tait. Council Member Zemel. He agrees with all the recommendations/suggestions with the exception of the Transportation Committee. He does not wish to be removed since he has done some good work on that with the Public Works Director, Gary Johnson. Mayor Daly. The rationale is that Council Member Lopez is on the Transportation Corridor Agency. Council Member Zemel. He was on the Transportation Corridor Agency for two years until he was removed. He is again requesting that he not be removed as liaison to the Transportation Liaison Committee. Mayor Daly. He noted that Council Member Zemel was already on two committees and that would the the thrid; Council Member Lopez conceded that Council Member Zemel could be the liaison to the Transportation Committee. Final Assignments: INS Committee - Bob Zemel, Tom Tait Redevelopment - Lou Lopez, Shirley McCracken Transportation - Tom Daly, Bob Zemel Audit - Tom Daly, Shirley McCracken Chamber of Commerce - Bob Zemel, Tom Tait Electric Utility - Tom Daly, Tom Tait MOTION. Mayor Daly moved that the foregoing be the assignments to the Liaison Committees. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly. They will look forward to feedback from staff on the Legislative Liaison Committee. He is inclined toward figuring out a way to communicate with all five Council Members rather than first two and then all the others. Lately they have been seeing legislative matters come to the Council agenda and that has worked pretty well. C3. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: City Attorney Jack White Stated that there are no actions to report. 39 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 20, 1997 C4. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Zemel. He would like to update the Council relative to his trip to Washington, D.C. last week with Police Chief Gaston on the INS issue. Congress is intending to emulate the City's INS pilot project and make it available to 100 locations nationwide. Chief Gaston gave testimony in front of Congress on the project and did a great job. The program started in Anaheim and will now become "America's program" in dealing with illegal alien criminals. They met with several legislators and received a lot of support. He is concerned and Council should be aware that the INS pilot project expires in June. They will be working hard to get it continued. They just received a letter from Congresswoman Sanchez to clarify her position. She is supportive of the program although there is still an issue concerning whether or not there will be an audit of the program. They will be dealing with that and will need all the help they can get. The new law, if it goes through, cannot go through in time for their program to be continued. It will be necessary to get a continuance of the program prior to that. They will be working with all the City's legislators hoping to do so. Council Member Lopez. Relative to the shopping cart issue (see comments by Mr. Ball under Items of Public Interest at the beginning of the meeting), he would like to agendize the matter for a Council discussion and possible action. He requested that the City Attorney and staff provide the Council with the material brought forward or discussed in the past. It was determined that the shopping cart issue will be placed on the Council Meeting Agenda of June 17, 1997. Council Members McCracken and Lopez reported on their attendance at recent City activities. ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting of May 20, 1997 was adjourned (9:45 P.M.). The next scheduled Council Meeting is Tuesday, June 3, 1997. LEONORA N. SOHL CITY CLERK 40