2009/12/08ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR AND REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING
OF DECEMBER 8, 2009
The meeting of December 8, 2009 was called to order at 3:00 P.M and adjourned to 4:30
P.M. for lack of a quorum. Mayor Pringle called to order the regular adjourned meeting of
December 8, 2009 at 4:35 P.M. in the Chambers of Anaheim City Hall located at 200 South
Anaheim Boulevard. A copy of the agenda was posted on December 4, 2009 on the kiosk
outside City Hall.
PRESENT: Mayor Curt Pringle and Council Members: Lorri Galloway, Bob Hernandez,
Lucille Kring and Harry Sidhu.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Tom Wood, City Attorney Cristina Talley, and City Clerk
Linda Andal.
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM: None
City Council adjourned to closed session for consideration of the following items:
CLOSED SESSION
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code)
Name of Case: Priceline.com Inc., et al. v. City of Anaheim et al., Orange County
Superior Court, Case No. 30 -2009 00244120 and related cases
At 5:08 P.M., Council returned from closed session.
INVOCATION: Chaplain David Lazo, Anaheim Police Department
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Lucille Kring
ACCEPTANCE OF RECOGNITIONS (AT A LATER DATE):
Recognizing the recipients of 2009 Anaheim Chamber of commerce
Business Awards
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items):
A speaker representing the Community Benefits Coalition presented the coalitions
Community Vision for the Platinum Triangle, embracing a new plan for Anaheim. She
discussed the community organizations and the process involved in drafted this vision and
requested a dialogue with Council and staff on the plan.
Michael Baker, Boys and Girls Club of Anaheim, announced four children from the Club
would ride on the float at the Rose Bowl Parade, thanking Council for support of this
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 2 of 12
opportunity. He also thanked retiring Finance Director Bill Sweeney for his years of service
as treasurer on the board of the Boys and Girls Club.
Alan Serna, resident, discussed various safety issues and concerns regarding the
intersection of Loara and Eileen Street at Orangewood. Mayor Pringle remarked the City
was aware of the death of a young boy at that intersection noting there would be a full
investigation of safety issues identified.
At 5:21, Council session was adjourned to consider the Agency agenda and reconvened at
5:44 p.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Council Member Hernandez moved to waive reading in full of all
ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the consent calendar in accordance with the
reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each council member and as listed on
the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Kring. Roll call vote: Ayes 5; Mayor
Pringle, Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion
Carried
4. Receive and file the minutes of the Budget Advisory Commission meeting of May 20,
B105 2009; Senior Citizens Commission meeting of October 8, 2009; Library Board
meeting of October 12, 2009; Cultural and Heritage Commission meeting of October
15, 2009 and Public Utilities Board meeting of October 28, 2009.
5.
AGR -4957
6.
AGR -4989
AGR -4989
Determine, on the basis of the evidence submitted by Kaiser Foundation Hospitals,
that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of
Development Agreement No. 2007 -00003 for the 2008 -2009 review period for the
Kaiser Hospital Campus project at 3400 East La Palma Avenue.
Approve the transfer of California Environmental Quality Act Lead Agency
designation from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to the City and
approve the following agreements with OCTA for environmental clearance of Phase
1 of ARTIC: 1) Cooperative Agreement No. C -9 -0821 with OCTA to modify roles and
responsibilities and 2) Agreement No. C -9 -0802 for assignment of all rights and
responsibilities of Agreement No. C -9 -0230 between the OCTA and ICF International
(formerly known as Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc.).
7. Approve the acceptance of a Director's Deed from the State of California conveying
P124 to the City the real property located at 507 East Katella Avenue (Katella Substation),
approve a Grant Deed conveying to the State certain city -owned real property
located adjacent to Katella Avenue and the 1 -5 Freeway and authorize the City Clerk
to deliver the executed Grant Deed to an authorized state representative and the
Director's Deed, together with the City's Certificate of Acceptance, to a title insurance
company of the City's choosing for recordation in the Office of the County Recorder.
Approve the Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with KTGY
Group, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $325,000, for urban design services related
to ARTIC.
8.
AGR- 5089.III.2
9.
AGR- 3140.A
Approve a Memorandum of Understanding with the Anaheim Family YMCA for the
Anaheim Achieves After School Collaborative for the 21st Century Community
Learning Centers grant.
10. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the
AGR- 5478.A.1 Workforce Investment Act Vendor Agreement with KML Enterprises, Inc., increasing
the maximum subgrant amount from $25,000 to $75,000, for occupational skills
training.
11. Award, approve and authorize the City Manager to execute and administer the
AGR -6020 Workforce Investment Act Subrecipient Agreements with North Orange County
AGR -6021 Regional Occupational Program and Orange County Conservation Corps for
comprehensive youth services programs.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -172 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
D155 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating the Anaheim Recovery Zone for purposes of
Sections 1400U-1, 1400U-2 and 1400U-3 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the "Code
13. RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -173 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
D159 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the records retention schedule for the Planning
Department.
14. ORDINANCE NO. 6160 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
AGR -182 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code in its entirety relating to landscape water efficiency
(Introduced at Council meeting of November 17, 2009, Item No. 24).
15. ORDINANCE NO. 6161 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
C280 OF ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2009 00233; DEV2009-
00063; 507 S. Lemon Street).
17.
AGR- 3140.A
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 3 of 12
16. Approve minutes of the regular meeting of November 17, 2009.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
CEQA, CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, CLASS 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2008-05372 AND VARIANCE NO. 2009-04795
OWNER: Daniel Akarakian, 315 Rees Street, Playa Del Rey, CA 90293
APPLICANT: Dave Tanazaki, Tanazaki and Associates, Inc.
601 East Glenoaks Boulevard, Suite 201, Glendale, CA 91207
LOCATION: 5635 East La Palma Avenue
The applicant proposes to construct a 10,000 square foot commercial retail building
on the Cinema City movie theatre property with fewer parking spaces than required
by Code.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is Categorically Exempt from
the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Class 3 (New Construction).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved CUP No. 2008 -05372 and Variance No. 2009 -04795 with added
conditions pertaining to a security plan and modified the timing of conditions
pertaining to the parking management plans (PC2009 -089) (VOTE: 6 -1;
Commissioner Buffa voted "no
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 4 of 12
(Planning Commission meeting of September 30, 2009; Appealed by Bayport
Imperial Promenade Associates, LP on October 9, 2009)
MOTION: S/K Determine the proposed project is categorically exempt from
compliance with CEQA under Class 3, New Construction.
RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -174 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2008 -05372 and
Variance No. 2009 04795. (Approved Vote: 5 -0)
C. J. Amstrup, Planning Services Manager, reported the Planning Commission had
approved a proposal to construct a 10,000 square foot commercial building on Cinema City
movie theater property which required a conditional use permit for the shopping center and
a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by Code. The Commission's
decision was then appealed by Richard DeBeikes, Jr., owner of the Imperial Promenade
property. Mr. Amstrup explained the new building would be located on the west side of the
parking lot in front of the movie theater and would contain up to seven tenant spaces.
Approximately 1,500 square feet of outdoor dining area was also approved for the front of
the building and enhancements to the parking lot, including circulation improvements,
resurfacing and landscaping would be done. He noted the applicant anticipated about
5,000 square feet of full service restaurants and 5,000 square feet of retail and take -out
food uses pointing out that as of yet, no tenants were identified for the retail building.
Under Anaheim Municipal Code, Mr. Amstrup indicated 644 parking spaces for the existing
movie theater and proposed building were required; however, the applicant proposed 538
parking spaces including 190 spaces in the existing parking structure and 266 on -site
surface parking spaces. Additionally, there were 82 off -site parking spaces available by
agreement on the adjacent properties. He pointed out a parking study concluded there
would be a peak demand of 441 parking spaces for the theater and commercial building,
which included a 10 percent contingency. This demand could be accommodated on -site
with a surplus of 15 parking spaces. A surplus of 97 spaces would occur if the 82 spaces
available on the adjacent property were included in that count.
The appeal of the Commission's approval on this application, Mr. Amstrup explained, was
based on four issues. The first issue pertained to the size of the new building. The
applicant's representative submitted a copy of a marketing brochure created by the broker
of the building that showed a site plan with modifications to the vehicular access on the
adjacent Imperial Promenade property and also showed an 11,000 square foot building,
which he pointed out, was not the plan submitted to the Planning Commission for approval.
The second concern argued that a Class 3 Categorical exemption would not be an
appropriate environmental determination because the 1,500 square feet of outdoor dining
area should have been considered as part of the structure for CEQA purposes. Mr.
Amstrup pointed out the Commission determined the recommended exemption was
appropriate because the proposed building would be 10,000 square feet, consistent with
CEQA, and CEQA did not contain any provision that would require outdoor dining to be
included in the area of the structure. The appellant also raised issues relating to parking
impacts of this project on the Imperial Promenade Center and the validity of the parking
study because it relied on parking counts from 2007 for its completion. Mr. Amstrup
remarked the traffic engineer who prepared the study visited the site the weekend before
the Planning Commission meeting and conducted parking counts to confirm the
assumptions in the parking study. The traffic engineer found that fewer parking spaces
were being used now than in 2007; this was also supported by citywide traffic numbers that
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 5 of 12
showed a 15 percent reduction in traffic since 2007, which was most likely due to changes
in the economy. Using the 2007 counts was deemed a more conservative approach to
analyzing the parking into the center and the Commission concluded the study adequately
analyzed parking demands for this project. The appellant also raised concerns about
conditions of approval regarding the parking structure pointing out that the structure was
historically underutilized due to its inconvenient location and the availability of more
convenient parking in front of the theater. Based on recommendations in the parking
analysis, Mr. Amstrup stated, the Planning Commission included conditions to increase use
of the parking structure: by having employees of the retail building required to park in the
structure; offering valet parking services, constructing an awning covering the walkway on
the east side of the building constructed between the structure and the front entrance of the
theater; and having patrons exit the theater on the east side of the building closest to the
structure with way- finding signs encouraging use of the parking structure. The applicant
also proposed to upgrade the appearance and accessibility of the parking structure to make
it more convenient and inviting to customers. Mr. Amstrup added the appellant did not
believe those conditions of approval were adequate or included appropriate monitoring
mechanisms, however, the Commission found the plans and improvements required by
these conditions would be effective in increasing the use of the parking structure and the
applicant would be required to comply with approval of the plans on an on -going basis. In
his concluding statement, Mr. Amstrup remarked the proposed retail building would be a
compatible land use with the surrounding commercial land uses and a complementary use
for the movie theater. He further added the parking analysis concluded there would be
adequate parking provided on site to meet the demands of the future retail building and the
Commission also determined the impacts of the project had been evaluated and
appropriate conditions of approval had been included and recommended Council uphold
the Planning Commission's decision and approve the project.
Mayor Pringle initiated discussion regarding the shared parking agreement between the
three property owners and access points to the properties on frontage roads. Additional
discussion was raised as to the feasibility of constructing a wall between each property with
separate entries into the businesses with staff providing input on access points and
property owner rights.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing.
Peter Mitchell, representing applicant Dan Akarakian, owner of Cinema City theatre, stated
his client had purchased the movie theater in 2002 and had installed theater stadium
seating, decreasing the amount of seats by 740. For its patrons, Mr. Mitchell stated it was
a flagship piece and an anchor tenant and key business for the surrounding area. He
stated the appellant's issue regarding a marketing brochure referring to the property as
11,000 square feet, was due to a broker's error over which his client had no control. He
emphasized the structure was 10,000 square feet as approved and that the Bank of
America had sent a letter supporting the project. He indicated his client intended to be a
good neighbor to the surrounding businesses and his marketing plan would play up those
businesses through coupons, flyers, signage and advertisements. Cinema City would also
be using incentives to better utilize the parking structure including covered walkways and
better egress, and they looked forward to having this project approved.
Richard DeBaakis, Imperial Promenade property owner, believed Cinema City had not
reached out to its neighboring business as promised and asked that his consultants provide
comments on the project prior to his concluding statement.
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 6 of 12
Peter Colaba, Presiding Associates traffic engineer speaking on behalf of Imperial
Promenade owner, had provided written information for the record. With regard to the
traffic study, there were no criteria on how the study boundary had been determined and no
information on project trip generation numbers or how the indoor and outdoor seating
impacted the City's circulation system in the vicinity of the project had been provided. He
added there was neither data nor technical analysis in the report to justify the conclusion
that the project had no impact on operation of the site driveways and internal circulation.
He also stated the two year old survey data on which the traffic study was based did not
identify the site occupancy at that time nor whether there were any unusual activities
occurring, such as off -site construction of whether improvements were going on in either of
the sites. He pointed out the City's traffic engineering study before the Planning
Commission hearing was not provided to the public nor contained in the staff report to the
Commission. Regarding the parking structure, he stated the mitigation measures did not
address the full impact that the location of the structure had in relation to the rest of the
circulation and parking and that the removal of 136 parking spaces for the retail center,
would put an additional burden on Imperial Promenade parking.
Regarding earlier Council discussion of separating access points, he stated it would involve
taking the shared access and moving the access point for Cinema City to the west where
the currently ride -in /ride -out access was located and then providing a second access for
Imperial Promenade which would also have to be restricted to ride -in /ride out. In addition,
the closing of the median would provide additional operational concerns for the function of
Imperial Highway as well as La Palma. Mr. Colaba ending his statement that the proposed
project would have significant adverse affect on the operation and function of the site and
he did not feel the items covered in the parking and site access report thoroughly
addressed impacts of the 10,000 square foot expansion.
Mark Nitikman, Croudace Dietrich, representing Imperial Promenade, also provided
written information for the record. He summarized that the issue was this project would
directly interfere with his client's property rights. He indicated a recorded easement
agreement had been required by the City as a condition of approval when the theater was
built and was required to eliminate one of the access points that would have gone through
the Imperial Promenade property. This easement set forth the parking spaces, including
the shared parking spaces. Regarding reference to an 11,000 square foot building, Mr.
Nitikman stated it was their feeling that the applicant was attempting to chop up the project,
which was a violation of CEQA. Once the CEQA exemption was approved, there was a
concern that the applicant would request a minor variance and increase the size of the
project to the 11,000 square feet mentioned in the brochure.
The second major issue related to the conditional use permit and he did not believe Council
could make the finding that the project would not adversely affect neighboring properties.
He added the proposed mitigation measures or suggestions staff and the applicant
mentioned could not be judged as to whether they were successful and there were no
enforcement mechanisms included and no way to revisit the issues.
Ridchard DeBaakis, remarked he had purchased the property in 1990, and when the
Cinema City property was bought and a two year project with site plans and access points
was developed, both parties agreed they would receive the approval of the other party if the
site plan was modified. Cinema city, he added, was in violation of that agreement, and the
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 7 of 12
only way he had been provided information on the expansion was by retrieving information
from the City.
In 1990, Mr. DeBaakis expressed the concern that the parking structure in the rear of the
property would not be convenient and therefore not utilized. He added Cinema City had
owned this property for seven years and if they had been a good neighbor, improvements
and incentives to use the parking structure would have been done earlier. He further
added that the loss of 136 parking spaces for the expansion would impact parking for
Imperial Promenade patrons.
Vanessa Manez, student, remarked that both properties complemented each other and she
hoped a resolution could be found. She supported the parking structure, however, pointed
out she did not use it due to lack of lighting and safety concerns. Mayor Pringle discussed
lighting and safety issues with staff. Mr. Amstrup stated lighting would be a component of
the site plan that would return for Planning Commission approval, if the project went
forward.
A Canyon High School parent, resident, remarked at times, dropping off and picking up
teens from the theater was difficult as well as egress from the theater.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Pringle closed the hearing.
Peter Mitchell offered rebuttal, stating that with a new drop off zone and valet parking, the
congestion should be alleviated. He added with better lighting, better signing, a security
plan and improved stairwells, over time, he believed the parking structure would be a
success.
Mayor Pringle discussed the relocation of handicapped parking spaces and requested staff
revisit the design and consider placing the spaces against the building rather than in the
new parking area. Additional discussion was held regarding the 82 shared parking spaces
and the fact it was an agreement between two private parties, and not a City issue if either
of the two parties was not conforming to the agreement. Ted White, Senior Planner, stated
the reason the parking agreements were put in place was to compensate Cinema City who
had lost parking spaces when the shared driveway was constructed.
Council Member Hernandez discussed various access point options with City staff as well
as the findings of the traffic study. He pointed out there did not appear to be a problem
unless the study was not accurate, to which Mr. Amstrup responded staff considered the
findings of the traffic study to be accurate.
Council Member Galloway thanked the public for offering comments. She supported
building the covered walkway to the parking structure in such a way as to encourage its
use, by being aesthetically pleasing, having good lighting and places where seniors could
rest and possibly locating automated ticket booths closer to the rear of the theater. Mr.
Mitchell indicated Cinema City would be open to suggestions.
Council Member Sidhu supported this expansion which would create more jobs and new
retail prospects for the City and moved to determine the proposed project was categorically
exempt from compliance with CEQA under Class 3, New Construction and to approve
RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -174 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use
Permit 2008 -05372 and Variance #2009 04795, seconded by Council Member Kring.
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 8 of 12
Council Member Kring also supported this expansion, and for bringing new business to the
city at a time when other commercial centers were going out of business. Mayor Pringle
requested Council be provided and briefed on the proposed Site Improvement Plan which
would subsequently be submitted to the Planning Commission to insure the plans
discussed are fully activated in the parking structure, including lighting, benches, movie
posters, signage or whatever was necessary to encourage its use. Council Member Sidhu
suggested giving an incentive, possible $1 off ticket price, for patrons to use the parking
structure.
Roll Call vote: Ayes 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring
and Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion Carried.
18. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED)
C350 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS.: DAG 2005 00001, DAG
2005 -00002 and DAG2005 -00003
OWNERS: Bob Linder, BRE Properties, Inc., 5141 California Avenue, Suite 250
Irvine, CA 92614
Bert Haboucha, 1515 E. Katella Avenue Anaheim, LLC, 5 Park Plaza
Suite 1640 Irvine, CA 92614
APPLICANT: Nicolle Ferrier, Huitt- Zollars, 430 Exchange, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
LOCATION: 1515 East Katella Avenue, 1761 and 1781 South Campton Avenue
and 1551 East Wright Circle.
The applicant proposes to modify Section 9.5 of the Development Agreement and
conditions of approval relating to the required relocation of an adjacent vehicular
driveway.
Environmental Determination: A Mitigated Negative Declaration, which was
previously approved, has been determined to serve as the appropriate
environmental documentation for this project in accordance with the provision of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved and recommended City Council approval of Amendments to Development
Agreement Nos. DAG2005- 00001, DAG2005 -00002 and DAG2005 -00003 (VOTE:
7 -0)
(Planning Commission meeting of September 30, 2009)
MOTION: K/G Find and determine that the previously- approved Mitigated
Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental
documentation for these requests.
ORDINANCE NO. 6162 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No.
2005 -00001 by and between the City of Anaheim and BRE Properties, Inc.
pertaining to the relocation of an adjacent driveway (ii) making certain findings
related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the Mayor to execute said amendment for and
on behalf of the City.
ORDINANCE NO. 6163 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No.
2005 -00002 by and between the City of Anaheim and 1515 E. Katella Avenue
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 9of12
Anaheim, LLC pertaining to the relocation of an adjacent driveway (ii) making
certain findings related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the Mayor to execute said
amendment for and on behalf of the City.
ORDINANCE NO. 6164 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No.
2005 -00003 by and between the City of Anaheim and BRE Properties, Inc.
pertaining to the relocation of an adjacent driveway (ii) making certain findings
related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the Mayor to execute said amendment for and
on behalf of the City.
C.J. Amstrup, Planning Services Manager, reported the Planning Commission had
recommended Council approve a modification of three development agreements relating to
a requirement to relocate an existing driveway at the Bank of America site located at
Campton Avenue and Katella Avenue. The properties covered in these development
agreements were situated west of an existing Bank of America building with driveway
access on Katella Avenue. Each development agreement contained a requirement for the
developer to use its best efforts to relocate the driveway from Katella Avenue to Campton
Avenue, necessary because the Bank of America driveway was too close to Campton
Avenue and would result in conflict between vehicles exiting the bank and vehicles entering
and exiting Campton Avenue and Katella. Mr. Amstrup stated the developer contacted the
Bank of America property owner but was unable to acquire the right to relocate the
driveway and since the agreements contained a provision that required the applicant to
request Council initiation of eminent domain proceedings in the event the developers were
not able to relocate the driveway, the applicant then followed this requirement and
requested Council initiate eminent domain proceedings. He pointed out that staff then
worked with the applicant to identify an alternative to eminent domain that would address
the circulation issues until the driveway could be relocated as part of the future Katella
Avenue Street Widening and Beautification efforts. An interim circulation improvement plan
for Campton Avenue was completed which allowed a right turn only from Campton Avenue
to westbound Katella Avenue and prohibited right turns from Katella Avenue onto Campton
Avenue. The interim condition would be set in place until the driveway relocation was
completed with the street widening project by the City as part of the Platinum Triangle
community facilities district improvements. Based on efforts made by the applicant to meet
the obligations of the development agreements, in recognition that the interim intersection
improvements were adequate and the proposed modifications provided for the
reimbursement of costs incurred by the City, staff recommended approval of the request.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing for comments.
Robert Sostrum, Huitt- Zollars, authorized agent for both BRE properties and 1515 Katella
Anaheim, stated he had worked with staff in attempting to meet the condition of the
development agreement and concurred with the final findings by staff for this amendment to
all three of the development agreements attached to Tract 16831.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Pringle closed the public hearing.
Council Member Kring moved to find and determine that the previously approved Mitigated
Negative Declaration was adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation
for the requests and to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6162 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005 -00001
by and between the City of Anaheim and BRE Properties, Inc. pertaining to the relocation
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 10 of 12
of an adjacent driveway (ii) making certain findings related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the
Mayor to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City; and to introduce
ORDINANCE NO. 6163 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) approving
Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No. 2005 -00002 by and between the City of
Anaheim and 1515 E. Katella Avenue Anaheim, LLC pertaining to the relocation of an
adjacent driveway (ii) making certain findings related thereto, and to introduce
ORDINANCE NO. 6164 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) approving
Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No. 2005 -00003 by and between the City of
Anaheim and BRE Properties, Inc. pertaining to the relocation of an adjacent driveway (ii)
making certain findings related thereto; seconded by Council Member Galloway. Roll Call
Vote: Ayes 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and
Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion Carried.
19. This is public hearing to consider approval of a resolution creating Underground
T107 District No. 57 located at Lincoln and Dale.
RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -175 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM creating Underground District No. 57 (Lincoln /Dale).
MOTION: K/S (Approved Vote 5 -0)
Dukku Lee, Public Utilities Department, reported the City's underground conversion program
was in its 19` year and the Utilities Department had undergrounded 98 circuit miles
throughout the City, helping to improve the reliability of the electric system as well as
beautify the City streets. Item No. 19 would create Underground District No. 57, proposed
to be formed on Lincoln Avenue from Knott Avenue (the west City limit) to west of Magnolia
and on Dale Avenue from Crescent Avenue to Ball Road. This was a 3.5 mile stretch of
roadway and included electric distribution as well as communication facilities on the utility
poles. The project was to be issued as a design /build project with construction anticipated in
mid -2011. He added this district was included in the five year plan to coordinate with
Southern California Edison (SCE) that had an obligation to remove 15 percent of its pole
lines within the City. SCE had facilities along Lincoln and that section would be combined
with an existing Dale Avenue project which had been in a previous plan and by
undergrounding SCE's facilities on Lincoln, including the 0 line which was recently removed
from the south portion of the City, Edison would be able to meet 13 percent of its 15 percent
obligation. Mr. Lee added the remaining two percent would be identified when a mutual
location was identified.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing for comments and receiving none, closed the
hearing.
Council Member Kring moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -175 OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM creating Underground District No. 57, seconded by
Council Member Sidhu. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members:
Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion Carried.
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 11 of 12
20. This is public hearing to consider approval of a resolution creating Underground
T107 District No. 58 at Imperial and the SR -91.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing. No public comments. Mayor Pringle
closed the public hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -176 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM creating Underground District No. 58 (Imperial /SR -91).
MOTION: G/H (Approved Vote 5 -0)
Dukku Lee, Public Utilities Department, reported Underground District No. 58 was created
for Imperial Highway and SR 91. CALTRANS had a planned project in 2011 to add east
and westbound lanes along the 91 freeways and there were utility poles along the north and
south side of the freeway impacted by this project. CALTRANS' project would be to add one
general purpose lane eastbound from the 55 freeway to Weir Canyon Road and westbound
from the 241 to Imperial Highway. Undergrounding had been proposed to coordinate with
the CALTRANS project in order to remove the poles in lieu of relocating them. Mr. Lee
remarked that if approved, the District would be scheduled for design in 2010 and
constructed in 2011, to coordinate with CALTRANS schedule.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing for comments and hearing none, closed the
hearing.
Council Member Galloway moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -176 OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM creating Underground District No. 58, seconded by Council Member
Hernandez. Roll Call vote: Ayes 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway,
Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion Carried.
Report on Closed Session Action: NONE
Council Communications:
Mayor Pro Tem Hernandez expressed his condolences to State Senator Marian Bergeson
on the death of her daughter. He announced that the 1 3 th MEU would be home for the
holidays and gift card donations were being accepted for the families. He further announced
the Metrolink Holiday Toy Express would be held on December 12
Council Member Galloway commended Frank Garcia for the success of the "We Give
Thanks" Thanksgiving Feast which provided over 15,000 meals to the homeless. She
reported that she attended the Nutcracker Ballet performed by Anaheim Ballet on December
5 and then recognized City employee, Denise Silberman with the City Attorney's Office.
Council Member Kring commended Frank Garcia for the success of the "We Give Thanks"
Thanksgiving Feast. She requested City Manager, Tom Wood review water usage at City
facilities, specifically the Honda Center and reported on various scams and thefts, urging
residents to be vigilant during their holiday shopping. She also encouraged volunteers to
participate in decorating the Anaheim Rose Parade Float and provided information on the
December 13, 2009 CIM home auction. Ms. Kring further expressed her condolences to the
Vela family for the loss of their son.
Council Minutes of December 8, 2009
Page 12 of 12
Council Member Sidhu commended Frank Garcia for the success of his Thanksgiving Feast.
He commented on St. Boniface's 150 Anniversary celebration, the Orange County Special
Olympic Committee's basketball competition empowering individuals with disabilities and the
promotion of breast cancer awareness hosted by Canyon High School's basketball team on
December 10
At the request of Mayor Pringle, Public Utilities General Manager, Marcie Edwards, reported
on the City's efforts and success in water conservation. She indicated a recently completed
water audit of City use in parks, golf courses, medians and facilities had been made and
found the City had been reducing water usage over nine percent.
Mayor Pringle expressed his condolences to the Vela family and commended Anaheim's
response team for their efforts during this tragedy. He spoke about Disneyland's
Candlelight Ceremony and extended an invitation to his annual holiday reception to be held
on December 15, 2009, City Hall.
ADJOURNMENT; At 8:04 P.M., with no other business to conduct, the December 8, 2009
Council meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda N. Andal, CMC
City Clerk