2001/02/27
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FEBRUARY 27,2001
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Daly, Council Members Shirley McCracken. Frank Feldhaus, Tom Tait
and Lucille Kring.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Ruth, City Attorney Jack White, City Clerk Sheryll
Schroeder.
A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on February 23,
2001, at the north entrance and east entrance to City Hall and on the window outside of the
Council Chambers.
Mayor Daly called the regular meeting to order at 3:08 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the
Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard.
ADDITIONSIDELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Jack White said there was a need to agendize an additional Closed
Session Item, that the need arose after the posting of the agenda. The item was
conference with real property negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8, property was the Arrowhead Pond, 2695 E. Katella Avenue, negotiator was
James Ruth, parties were the City of Anaheim, Ogden Facility Management Corporation
and the Vancouver Grizzlies, under negotiation was the terms of facility lease.
Mayor Daly moved to add the negotiations to the Closed Session agenda, seconded by
Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
There were no public comments relative to Closes Session items.
Mayor Daly moved to recess to Closed Session, seconded by Council Member McCracken.
Motion carried unanimously. The Council recessed to Closed Session at 3:09 P.M.
1. ANNUAL EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
Titles: City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the
Government Code: one potential case.
3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS SPSURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8:
Property: Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim, 2965 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California
Agency Negotiator: James D. Ruth
Negotiating parties: City of Anaheim, Ogden Facility Management Corporation and the
Vancouver Grizzlies
Under negotiation: Terms of facility lease
AFTER RECESS:
"'-"" ~-~_._-_.__. '~'--'-----'-~"'--'-'-'--'-'~ -_...
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 2
Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of February 6, 2001 to order at 6:04 P.M. and
welcomed those in attendance.
INVOCATION: Pastor Dave Osborne, Anaheim Christian Vineyard Fellowship
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Tom Tait
119
PROCLAMATIONS AND DECLARATIONS:
Mayor Daly and Council Member presented Jerry Zomorodian on being selected Man of
the Year 2000 by the Women's Division of the Greater Anaheim Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Zomorodian accepted the declaration and thanked the City for their support.
At 6:11 P.M., Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency meeting.
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting at 6:13 P.M.
ADDITIONSIDELETIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions or deletions to the agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
James Robert Reade, 100 W. Midway Drive, Space 124, addressed concerns of harassment at
the Golden Skies Mobile Home Park and his unacceptable behavior of the Police Department.
Omar Arellano, 100 W. Midway Drive, told the Mayor and Council of incidents of disrespect by
the manager of the park.
Saul Nagera, 100 W. Midway Drive, Space 241, explained that he did not like the way the
manager treated the children at the park and that he did not repair things that they reported.
A resident of the park, space 235, explained that they did not have heat or air and that there
were large holes in her home and that the park was unsafe and unsanitary. She said they had
reported the problems and no one has repaired them.
Alma Ramirez, 100 W. Midway Drive, said the conditions were out of control and the
management had been terrorizing the residents and vandalizing vehicles. She said they had
called Code Enforcement and Building and Safety regarding the repairs and they said they
would call the State, no one was taking responsibility.
Mary Ann Mahoney, 2100 E. Katella, President of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees Union,
addressed Anaheim Municipal Code Section 4.30 which required employees who served or
dispensed alcoholic beverages, or worked for a dance studio, be identified with the Police
Department. She said the ordinance had been enacted in the 1960's but had not been enforced
until recently. She indicated that there were a number of legal issues regarding the issue and
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 3
she referred to a letter sent to the Council from the American Civil Liberties Union. She asked
that the ordinance be rescinded.
Mayor Daly thanked Ms. Mahoney for the helpful way she represented her membership. He
said the recent enforcement caught the Council by surprise and the City Manager and City
Attorney would review the ordinance, the legal issues, and consider the concerns.
City Manager, James Ruth, said staff had met with the representatives and would bring a report
to Council within the next two or three weeks.
City Attorney, Jack White, said they had met with Ms. Mahoney and other members of the
Union and staff had committed that within the next two to three weeks would review the
ordinance and come up with a plan for the ordinance, enforcement and application process. He
said there were changes that legally needed to be made and they would meet again with
representatives of the Union before making a recommendation to Council.
Mayor Daly asked the status of the existing program and Mr. Ruth responded it would be placed
on hold pending the review and report back to Council.
Ms. Mahoney said she appreciated the assistance but it was their hope that the entire ordinance
would be rescinded. She asked if the item could be on the agenda next week and City Manager
Ruth said it would be two to three weeks, but staff would communicate with her.
Council Member Tait said he shared their concerns and he would ask that it be placed on the
agenda.
Council Member McCracken said she had wished Ms. Mahoney had called her before she
received a letter from an attorney. She said action could have been taken more promptly if
there had been personal contact.
The following people spoke in opposition of the ordinance and enforcement:
Carolyn Pelcak, Anaheim
Glynndana Shevlin, Santa Ana
Virginia Gonzales, Anaheim
Ariana Levinson, Los Angeles
Arleen Mejia, Anaheim
Robert Luna, Anaheim
Linda Lee Grau, 24 Morning Dove, Irvine asked the City to grant South Coast Cab Company
permits for 100 cabs.
MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions,
seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A20: On motion by Mayor
Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council
-.~_.._..., --.----,-.-.-.,.. .",.'._.".-....~,- _._.....,--,~;....,..-
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 4
Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Council Members Kring and Tait voiced a no
vote on Item A12, Ordinance No. 5755. Motion carried unanimously.
118 A 1. Reject certain claims filed against the City.
105
117
161
176
123
175
158
160
160
A2. Receive and file minutes of the Anaheim Redevelopment and Housing Commission
meeting held January 17, 2001; the Investment Portfolio Report for the month of
January, 2001, as submitted by the City Treasurer and minutes of the Investment
Advisory Commission meeting held November 21, 2000.
A3. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Benergy, Inc., in the amount of
$563,003 for the base bid and the additive alternates in the East Anaheim and Anaheim
Colony Neighborhoods - 1999/00 Community Development Block Grant Neighborhood
Street Light Improvements, and approve and authorize the Finance Director to execute
the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
A4. RESOLUTION NO. 2001R-47 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM declaring its intention to vacate certain public streets, highways and
services easements and setting a date and time to consider the abandonment of the
easterly portion of that certain alley extending from Hampstead Street to Michelle Drive,
located approximately 170 feet south of the centerline of Lynne Avenue (Abandonment
No. 2001-00027). (Suggested public hearing date: March 27, 2001 at 6:00 P.M.)
A5. Approve the Third Amendment to Agreement with Willdan and Associates to extend the
agreement for inspection services for City construction projects for an additional three-
month period.
A6. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-48 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM authorizing the submittal of a funding request for funds for beverage
container recycling and litter clean up activities.
A7.
170
RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-49 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM accepting certain offers of dedication and public improvements in
conjunction with the maps of Tracts Nos. 15345, 14076 and 14077.
A8. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-50 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying certain real properties or interests
therein to the City.
A9. Accept the low bid of Nobest, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $488,860 for the removal
and replacement of residential sidewalks for the Streets and Sanitation Division, in
accordance with Bid #6112.
A10. Waive Council Policy 306 and ratify the issuance of purchase orders to Air Power, Inc.,
for a not-to-exceed amount of $33,331 for a remanufactured helicopter engine for the
Hughes 300, N7414F helicopter and Rolls-Royce Engine Services, in a not-to-exceed
amount of $75,000 for the repair of the McDonnell Douglas 500 D, N11082 helicopter
engine and engine rental costs to maintain patrol service during the repair period.
"'""r' -
179
179
179
123
161
123
123
156
123
123
114
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 5
A 11. Appoint Victor Kaleta as hearing officer concerning the appeal regarding the denial of
the reinstatement of Conditional Use Permit No. 1043, Lincoln Inn, 2748 West Lincoln
Avenue.
A12. ORDINANCE NO. 5755 (REVISEDIINTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the definitions of "hotel" and "motel" as set forth in
Sections 18.01.090 and 18.01.140 of Title 1 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
(Introduced at the meeting of February 6,2001, Item A10 and continued from the
meeting of February 13, 2001, Item A 18.)
A 13. ORDINANCE NO. 5756 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending Subsection .015 of Section 18.12.080 of Chapter 18.12 ofTitle 18
of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Zoning (waiver of fence height in front yard
setback). (Introduced at the meeting of February 13, 2001, Item A 15.)
A14. Approve an agreement to receive $39,769 from the Orange County Community
Development Council that will enable the City to provide a "Kids in Action" youth
development program site at Anaheim Independencia Family Resource Center and
increase the revenue and expenditure appropriations in the amount of $39,769 and
increase part-time work hours by 4,119 in Program 101-213-7287.
A 15. Approve the fiscal year 2001/2002 funding recommendations for federal Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funding
totaling $6,723,000 and authorize the Executive Director of Community Development to
prepare and execute all required federal documents, including individual subrecipient
agreements that are consistent with the approved funding recommendations and
substantially in the forms of the CDBG and ESG subrecipient agreements.
A 16. Approve an agreement with The Planning Center, in an amount not to exceed
$1,469,781 for consultant services related to the update of the City's General Plan and
Zoning Code and associated environmental impact report.
A17. RESOLUTION NO. 2001R-51 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM accepting reserve funds from the Orange County Transportation Authority
for the Anaheim Police Department Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program, and
amend the Fiscal Year 2000/2001 budget by increasing revenue and expenditure
appropriations in Agency 309, Program 2240, by $51,039.
A18. Approve a Joint Trench Agreement with Metropolitan Fiber Systems of California, Inc., to
permit joint trenching and to share construction cost for Underground District No. 37-2 -
State College/Katella Phase 2.
A 19. Approve a Joint Trench Agreement with MClmetro Access Transmission Services, LLC
to permit joint trenching and to share construction cost for Underground District No. 36-2
- Lincoln Avenue Phase 2.
A20. Approve minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held February 13, 2001.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
--^"...........,......~,.. .~-
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 6
OFF-CONSENT CALENDAR:
5:00 P.M. Public Hearina:
149 A21. RESIDENT ONLY PERMIT PARKING - AREA NO. 11 -12:
To consider approval of a resolution for "Resident Only Permit Parking" at (1) the north
and south side of Clearbrook Lane from Velare Street to the end of cul-de-sac (Permit
Parking Area No. 11), (2) the east side of Velare Street from 100 feet north of
Clearbrook Lane to Lorena Drive (Permit Parking Area No. 11) and (3) the north and
south side of Minerva Avenue from Loara Street to Gilbuck Street (Permit Parking Area
No. 12).
John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager, presented the staff report. He said the
residents had met and exceeded the required number of signatures.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing and asked those in support to speak.
Tracy Fullman, 2525 Clearbrook Lane, recited safety and trash issues and spoke in support of
the resident only permit parking.
Charles McBride, 638 S. Valare Street, cited lack of parking and his support of permit parking.
Chris Martindale, 1576 W. Minerva Avenue, spoke about trash and safety issues and said she
supported the resident only permit parking.
Mayor Daly asked if there was anyone opposed to the permit parking or anyone with questions.
Dan Leadbetter, 2506 W. Clearbrook Lane, spoke in opposition to the proposal. He said he
thought the issue was lack of policing not lack of parking.
Glen Coy, 2500 Clearbrook, objected to the cost of the parking permits. He said because he
was a renter, he was left out of the process.
John Lower explained the process of parking permits and visitor permits.
Mayor Daly closed the public hearing.
Mayor Daly asked how the program would be communicated to all the residents of the area.
John Lower said letters would be sent to each of the property owners indicating the action of the
Council and an opportunity to purchase the permits.
Mayor Daly said in the case of the apartment dwellers, the letter would go to the property owner
and it would be up to the property owner to communicate the program to the tenants.
Mr. Lower said consistent with each previous permit parking area, there was no formal
communication with the property owners that are not adjacent to the permit parking area. He
"-----
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 7
said signs would be erected and they would work with the Police Department to introduce
enforcement that would start with warnings.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution Nos. 2001 R-52 and 53 in support of permit parking.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-52 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM designating Clearbrook Lane and the east side of a portion of Velare Street as
"Permit Parking Only" streets.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-53 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM designating Minerva Avenue between Loara Street and Gilbuck Street as "Permit
Parking Only" streets.
Roll call vote: Ayes - 5; Mayor Daly, Council Members McCracken, Feldhaus, Tait, Kring. Noes
- O. Motion carried.
A22. Nominate and appoint one Council Member to serve as Mayor Pro Tem for one year.
114 (Continued from meetings of December 12, 2000, Item A32, December 19, 2000, Item
A36, January 9, 2001, Item A27, January 23, 2001, Item A44, February 6, 2001,
Item A19, and February 13, 2001, Item A22.)
Mayor Daly moved for a one-week continuance, seconded by Council Member McCracken.
Motion carried unanimously.
105
A23. Review current assignments and make appointments to various Regional and State
Organizations. (Continued from meetings of December 12, 2000, Item A38, January 9,
2001, Item A28, January 23, 2001, Item A45, February 6, 2001, Item A20 and February
13,2001, Item A23.)
Mayor Daly suggested that all assignments be continued with the following exceptions:
Redevelopment Liaison Committee, Council Member Feldhaus would replace Mayor Daly,
making the composition Council Members McCracken and Feldhaus. The Audit Committee
would be Mayor Daly and Council Member Kring. He said he would suggest a new Parks
Liaison Committee, consisting of Council Member Tait and Mayor Daly. Regarding assignments
to outside agencies, Mayor Daly noted that Council Member Kring had expressed an interest on
serving on the Regional Airport Authority as an alternate, taking Council Member McCracken's
place, and he suggested that be approved.
Council Member Kring said she had requested to serve on the Sanitation. Council Member
McCracken said she had asked to remain on the Sanitation Board, serving as the active
alternate.
Mayor Daly moved approval of the appointments with the recommended changes, seconded by
Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
105 A24. Nominate and appoint a member to the Anaheim Housing and Redevelopment
Commission to fill the unexpired term of Thomas Holguin, term to expire June 30, 2004.
(Continued from the meetings of January 23, 2001, Item A42, February 6, 2001, Item
A21 and February 13, 2001, Item A24.)
Council Member Feldhaus nominated James Bandy.
. _~~__'__~h__'" _'__"_~~_'" -.-,__. ~_.,._...
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 8
Council Member McCracken nominated Lee Howard.
Council Member Tait nominated Bobby McDonald.
Council Member Kring nominated Gerald O'Keefe.
Mayor Daly closed the nominations.
Roll call vote on James Bandy: Ayes - 2; Council Members Feldhaus and Kring. Noes - 2;
Council Members McCracken and Tait. Abstain - 1; Mayor Daly.
Roll call vote on Lee Howard: Ayes - 2; Council Member McCracken and Mayor Daly. Noes-
2; Council Members Kring and Tait. Abstain - 1; Council Member Feldhaus.
Roll call vote on Bobby McDonald: Ayes - 2; Council Members Kring and Tail. Noes - 1;
Council Member McCracken. Abstain - 2; Council Member Feldhaus and Mayor Daly.
Roll call vote on Gerald O'Keefe: Ayes - 2; Council Members Kring and McCracken. Noes - 1;
Council Member Tait. Abstain - 2; Council Member Feldhaus and Mayor Daly.
Mayor Daly moved to continue Item A24 for one week, seconded by Council Member Kring.
Motion carried unanimously.
173
A25. Discussion of Centerline light rail project and request for vote on City's position whether
to support staff's recommendation to consider the No-Build Alternative. (Continued from
the meetings of February 6, 2001, Item A22 and February 13, 2001, Item A25.)
Mayor Daly said he knew that staff had discussions recently with the OCTA, with Mr. Art Leahy,
the CEO of OCTA, and he asked Mr. Leahy to share any recent developments and characterize
his discussions with the City staff.
Mr. Leahy, OCT A said at the last meeting of the City Council there was a request made
that the OCTA Board defer the scheduled Board action. He aid he promised to
recommend such a delay to the board and he said he was pleased to report that OCTA
had delayed their decision pending the receipt of advice and input from Anaheim. He
added that if the project moves forward, there would be need for input for a long period
of time, for a period of years, so it was important to begin to establish the partnership in
which they work with the City and listen to the City and hear their concerns and have
those concerns reflected in the project. Over the past few weeks, he explained, they
had worked hard to respond and to be flexible and creative with regards to the concerns
which had been raised. He said he could acknowledge that important concerns had
been raised and he said he thought those discussions had been valuable. He reported
that they have had some great discussions, very difficult and prolonged with City staff,
addressing a variety of issues. For example, he said, the Historic District. Mr. Leahy
said he understood a concern had been raised about the Centerline going into the
Historic District on Anaheim Blvd. He reported they had agreed that they would not do
that, they would truncate the line short of any neighborhood of that sort, adding it was
not their goal to cause that sort of concern which was being expressed, adding they
.T.-------
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 9
would be pleased to work with City staff to resolve that issue finally and completely.
With regard to the STIF funds, he said concern had been raised about the consumption
of STIF funds for a prolonged period of time for the entire life of the project. He said they
had heard those concerns and as a consequence have committed that they have an
economic plan, a financial plan for the project that allows them to do the minimum
operable segment without use of any future or additional STIF funds.
Mr. Leaky said they had looked forward to hearing the concerns and they had tried to
build on those concerns in a positive and constructive way. He said they wanted to build
and maintain their partnership with the City. He noted that they wanted to approach the
debatelissue in a very business like and professional fashion. Concern had been raised
about what did it mean to come to an agreement and they had offered the idea that
maybe some kind of cooperative agreement might be negotiated between the City and
the OCTA Board that might be reviewed at some future date by the OCTA Board and the
City Council. By having the endorsement of those two policy boards would bring
significant weight and significant durability into those agreements, he added. He said
they were currently planning on going forward to the OCT A Board on March 5, 2001. He
said they had not yet concluded what their recommendations would be but he expected
that what they would recommend was what was called a locally preferred alternative and
to initiate the beginning of the preliminary engineering and environmental impact
assessment work. He said that he believed this project offered a great benefit to Orange
County, a great benefit to Anaheim. It offered mobility, economic development and
access to jobs in markets, which was important for the kind of economic activity and
quality of life that everyone enjoyed. It offered connectivity to the major destinations in
Orange County as well as connectivity with the Metrolink system, adding that some of
the most successful Metrolink lines operate in Orange County and with the bus system.
Mr. Leahy said OCTA would commit indeed to work on improved roads and highways on
the 22, on the 91 and improved bus service. He noted this was not a one size fits all
solution, Centerline would not solve all transportation problems, it was only one tool
among many to address the mobility challenges facing Orange County. He finalized by
saying they looked forward to continuing their partnership with Anaheim regardless of
how this project might go and appreciate the time of the various members and City Staff
working with them on the project.
Council Member Kring asked Mr. Leahy if it was correct that he said they would not go
through the Historical District, that they would truncate the line. She asked where they
would put the line, noting that she knew the ultimate goal is to get it to Fulllerton.
Mr. Leahy responded that the ultimate goal was to have partners to improve mobility.
He said they had heard loud and clear the concerns from the people who live in the
historic district, adding that was an issue that they simply did not want to confront. So,
he said, they were offering their word that they were not going to attempt to go into those
districts, that was not part of their plan at the current time, they were not considering
making such a recommendation to the OCTA Board.
Council Member Kring said she understood, but felt he was avoiding the question about
where it would be located. She noted if it was to go up Harbor Blvd., it would also
impact a residential neighborhood, State College Blvd. would have less of an impact for
residential. She noted that Mr. Leahy said they would not use any STIF funds in the
__.__._.._~~. .__. ._-_.--.._.___...._..0<.'._______........_. '___~".__'______,__
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 10
minimum-operating segment to start, but was not saying that STIF money would not be
used for future generations of segments.
Mr. Leahy responded, regarding going north of the terminal, wherever they put that they
look forward to working with the City as to where the terminal will be, whether at the ball
park or some other location in that vicinity. He noted there was no attempt to have
wiggle room to go north on Harbor or on Anaheim or on State College.
Council Member Kring asked if they would be content forever to just stop at the stadium.
Mr. Leahy said they had no plans to go forward with anything going north. Regarding
the question about STIF funds, he said the commitment that he would make was that
they would not use future STIF funds to fund the minimal operable segment.
Council Member Kring asked what happened with the other segments.
Mr. Leahy said all he could deal with was what he was going to recommend and what
OCT A staff was going to recommend to its board at this time. He said he did not know
what future Anaheim City councils may ask for, he did not know what future OCTA
boards would do, but they were not asking Council to approve that, not asking to have
carte blanc to go north. He said they were not suggesting that they had the ability to do
that, what they were committing to was to not plan and to not propose such a project.
Council Member Kring asked if it was the STIF funds that were coming to the City of
Anaheim or STIF funds for all of Orange County.
Mr. Leahy responded that the discussions they had had have been with the City of
Anaheim and they certainly wanted to be responsive to those concerns. He said he
guessed that if another city were to have a different view on the use of STIF funds, he
was sure they would have a discussion with them and if that resulted in STIF funds,
maybe they would do that, saying again, they were not trying to find wiggle room. They
were trying to make a commitment to the City, which had meaning and significance.
Council Member Kring said they would still have to have a funding source for this and
some of that money was going to come from STIF funds, so if it did not come from
Anaheim or Orange or Santa Ana, it would take money away from the other Orange
County cities.
Mr. Leahy reported that their financial plan that they were developing called for no
additional STIF funds to build the MOS, no future STIF funds. He clarified that they
believed that they could deveiop a financial plan that would allow them to do the
operable segment without any future STIF funds.
Council Member Kring said she had a concern, they were talking about one segment.
Their ultimate goal was to run this 87 miles throughout all of Orange County and the one
segment that they are proposing with no STIF funds did not take into account the rest of
Orange County and using STIF funds for that.
.- -~->.."...,.--..-.--.".<~-.. '-"-'-~-"-~".- -+-... "....----........-
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 11
Mr. Leahy answered that what he was committing to the City was the recommendation
that he would make to the OCTA board, in response to the concerns made to the City
staff.
Council Member Feldhaus said he was glad Council Member Kring brought up the fact
that Mr. Leahy made a commitment to him that there would be no intent to put it down
Harbor Blvd., down Anaheim Blvd., or State College Blvd. There was also a
commitment to him that Mr. Leahy would immediately look into the express bus on the
91 Freeway to try to move people from the inland desert into a transportation center
located somewhere around or in the Anaheim stadium area and that he was going to put
that in writing, referring to it as an MOS, a memorandum of understanding, that it would
be cast in concrete. He said he kept hearing people say that they thought he was
against it and the truth of the matter was, he said, he was against it, he thought it was a
boondoggle right from the start. He noted that he was also the kind of person who
believed you don't just close the door on something, particularly when your enemy has
the over-riding authority, it was better to go to the table and talk and see what benefit
can be extracted from the project for the City of Anaheim.
Council Member Feldhaus said the City has had on the plate for over twelve years the
multi-modal transportation center to be able to accommodate and move people around
the technical center on La Palma, the resort area, etc. He said they also had talked
about the relief of using express bus service and using the HOV lanes going from point a
to point B which would be the City's transportation center. He noted the scenario was
that people can afford housing in the Inland Empire but Orange County had the jobs and
that was what clogged the 91 and 57 freeways. Council Member Feldhaus noted that
Mr. Leahy had also said that he would recommend to his board that they put that in the
form of a MOS, in writing, which would be in perpetuity until someone wanted to change
it.
Mr. Leahy replied yes.
Council Member Feldhaus said he appreciated the fact that Mr. Leahy continued his
activity on yesterday and did what he said he would do, defer any movement in that
regard in selecting that MOS. Because of that, he said, he had discussions with the City
Staff and he was going to ask them to negotiate with Mr. Leahy all of those points
brought up, so no one in Anaheim was going to be impacted by this now or in the future.
Council Member Feldhaus said there was a benefit to having somewhere in the area of
the stadium or near by, an area that was big enough to actually build that multi-modal
hub for the City, so the City could bring people there and immediately get them off on a
feeder line to where they were going. He felt the existing bus lines, express lines were
already there, they may have to put a few feeder or express buses in the entire area, but
when compared with the $2.8 billion planning to be spent on Centerline that went no
where, he said that was where the boondoggle comes in. It was taxpayer dollars no
matter how you look at it, he noted and said he believed in keeping the door open for
that conversation, see the benefit to Anaheim, and how it would address all the concerns
of the City.
Council Member McCracken asked if there had been decisions made on the technology
or was that the next step on the engineering proposal that had to take several years.
-_.--~..
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 12
Mr. Leahy reported that decisions had not been made and that would be part of the next
step. He said one concern has been overhead wires and they would look at alternative
technologies for providing energy to the trains without overhead wires.
Council Member McCracken noted a couple of workshops on the various new
technologies that have evolved, from monorails to duo rails that were not the overhead
wire trolley. She wondered if this was part of the engineering that had to be addressed
before they could even make the routes.
Mr. Leahy responded she was absolutely right and it all had to make sense when taken
as a whole. He added that they wanted to make sure they had a system that was
reliable, which provided for high-speed, high capacity transit environmentally friendly and
pleasing to the whole city. He said they would include all those issues that were
identified which will be addressed as part of the preliminary engineering and EIS activity.
Council Member McCracken wondered if, after that was completed, were there other
steps of decision making at the OCTA.
Mr. Leahy said yes, they would recommend in all likelihood, going to the board with the
preliminary engineering segment. At a future time they would go back to the OCTA
board and ask them to identify a minimum operable segment. Later on they would ask
them to approve a request to the federal government to go into final design and then
after that, they would request to go into a full funding grant with the federal government
to move into construction. That period, he reported, would take several years. There
would be opportunities for input from all the cities and communities up and down the line
all during the time period, he added.
Council Member McCracken asked if once the technology was selected, would there be
opportunities for residents and business people to examine or have samples of the kinds
of vehicles on display someplace.
Mr. Leahy said certainly, they would insure adequate out reach so that when they looked
at alternative technologies, they would share that with the cities and get their input on
how that might work.
Council Member Tait said he had to respectfully respond to Council Member Feldhaus'
statement that he thought this was a boondoggle. He said he would agree with that but
if it was a boondoggle, he did not understand why the City would want to keep the door
open for discussion. He felt the City needed to be clear with their recommendation back
to OCT A. He expressed his appreciation to Mr. Leahy for attending and said he
appreciated his requesting that OCTA delay this and he asked Mr. Leahy to express his
appreciation to them. He said what he was confused about was the statement that it
would not go through the Colony District or that there were no plans for it, adding that he
did not understand how you would get to Fullerton train station without going through the
Colony District or going through some of the main corridors in Anaheim. He asked if Mr.
Leahy was saying that the Centerline would not go to Fullerton.
Mr. Leahy responded that he had not made that specific commitment. There was an
obvious problem getting to Fullerton and at this point they were seeking partners for a
project that had merit and benefit, that was where they were to date.
"---. '"---r-- --~--,_. ,,--." ..
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 13
Council Member Kring said, going back to Council Member Feldhaus' statement about
inter- modal, that OCTA should be looking at the high-speed transportation, explaining
that City staff did not want to be naysayers to the Centerline, they wanted to come up
with solutions to help the regional transportation needs, not just the Orange County
corridor of 28 miles, high speed buses on the HOV lane, which would mimic the
Centerline. She asked why there could not be a circulator route, with Measure M
money, going through the resort area without the need to put in Centerline. She noted
that the Centerline was supported by the Building Industry Association until recently
when they said that the cost of the project, certain cost estimates, appeared to be
understated. She felt an economic study should be done before anything else.
Regarding the ridership, Council Member Kring said OCTA predicted in 2020 that 80,000
people would be riding the Centerline, which was less than 1 % of the traffic absorbed
on the freeway, she added. She said no one had defined where the Centerline riders
were coming from. She believed they would be bus riders going to rail for the most part,
not car drivers. She explained that the suggestions by Council Member Feldhaus and
staff could be done with Measure M money without Centerline. She noted that Tustin
voted unanimously for a no build, Irvine Unified School District said they did not want it in
their neighborhoods, there were neighborhoods in Irvine who were now realizing the
impact and saying they could not support it. Finalizing, she said she thought there were
a lot of loose ends and she wished OCTA would think in another arena instead of
Centerline.
Mr. Leahy thanked the Mayor and Council for their time and thoughtful comments and
suggestions and said he looked forward to working with the City on all the solutions. He
said he wished to note two things in closing; there were very successful rail projects in
auto- dominated cities today such as Dallas and Salt Lake City. He pointed out that the
BART system opened in 1972 and for 5 or 10 years it was seen as a white elephant.
Today there was no one in the Bay area that would say that. He said they were looking
forward to working with the City and he hoped that in the future they were not looked at
as the enemy but rather as a partner of the City of Anaheim.
Mayor Daly asked for public input in support of Centerline, adding that the next step
would be for those who were opposed or had questions to speak.
Paul Bostwick, 8105 Woodsboro, suggested Council keep an open thought to the project,
saying he felt it was good for the City.
Sherry from the Dale Mcintosh Center for the Disabled spoke in support of the Centerline
project.
Phyliis Boydtun, 728 N. Jan Street, encouraged Council to stay in the loop on the Centerline
project, adding that the City needed to look to the future for transportation needs. She said she
thought the rail coming to the stadium transportation center would be a good idea.
John Koos, 435 E. S. Chathan Circle, submitted a list of 2001 Regional Transportation Plan of
projects in or near the City. He said some people say other projects would be sacrificed in order
to build the Centerline project and explained that the list of projects submitted were already in
the draft Regional Transportation Plan and would not be sacrificed by the Centerline project.
'--"^~"'---'-~--' '-
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 14
He said the MOU idea brought up this evening was a very good idea and that the proposal to
bring it to the stadium was another good idea.
Daniel Walker, Los Angeles, spoke about his use of the Green Line in Los Angeles and he
supported a balanced system and felt Centerline was a part of that.
Jane Reyford, representing the Orange County Citizens Bus Restructuring Task Force, spoke
the organization was in favor of Centerline. She said her group was recommending to OCTA
that the minimum operable segment be between the University of Irvine and the Anaheim
Resort. She noted that there was already a train that went to Fullerton, Amtrak. She
commented favorably about the new bus stops in the resort area.
Alex Mincer, Orange, said all public transportation was subsidized, that was how the freeways
were built.
Kirk Snyder, Board Member of the National Association of Railroad Passengers and Train
Riders Association of California, La Habra said when the project was complete; there would be
criticism because it did not go to Disneyland.
John Snyder, Anaheim, submitted a written report and expressed his support of the project.
Speakers in opposition or with questions to the Centerline Project:
Robert Sechler, Cypress, encouraged a vote for the no build alternative on Centerline and that
Council recommend that the Orange County Transportation Authority commence work on a bus
rapid transit system based upon the advances made in the mode in the last ten years.
Linda Lee Grau spoke in opposition to the project.
Cristine Peltzer-Condon, 629 N. Clementine Street, asked Council to vote in opposition to the
Centerline project.
Alone Larsen, 607 N. Lemon Street, said if the OCT A put the Centerline to the stadium, they
would want to continue the line and the historic district would once again be at risk.
Bill Ward, Costa Mesa, Drivers For Highway Safety, urged Council to listen to the City's
professional staff, which was not supporting the project.
Bob Renzo, 114 E. Wilhelmina Street, said to hear that the Centerline was not coming down
Anaheim Blvd. or Harbor Blvd. but not to see it in writing concerned him. He addressed safety
issues.
A resident of the Colony Historic District spoke in opposition to the project.
Arvita Spieda, 805 N. Arlena, Vice Chair of the East Anaheim Neighborhood Council, said she
canvassed the area streets and there was a resounding reaction. She said she did not think
there was a benefit for the citizens of Anaheim.
Bob Schmall, West Fullerton, referred to the following documents: the Orange County Major
Investment Study in 1997, the Orange County Grand Jury Report of 1999 and the Public Works
--'-r--
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 15
staff report, February 2001. He asked how the Centerline approached the problem of people
living in the Inland Empire getting to south county, staring in Fullerton or Anaheim would not
solve the problem of getting people to their jobs in south county. He said the light rail system
should handle maybe one half to one percent of the traffic expected and was it worth $3 billion.
Emily Sharp, 500 N. Clementine, said that OCTA was looking at putting in a system that was
19th century technology which was already outdated.
Alicia Jason, Santa Ana, spoke in opposition to the Centerline project.
David Helland, 515 N. Zeyn Street, said he was not in favor or against, he wanted what was
best for Orange County.
Mayor Daly thanked everyone for their comments and interests.
Mayor Daly said Mr. Leahy mentioned that the OCTA Board proceeded to decide on preliminary
engineering and that process would take a couple of years. He said as Mayor, one of his tasks
was to understand a sense of the entire Council and one thing he heard from all the Council
was that the Anaheim Historic Colony was designated three and a half years ago and he did not
detect that anyone on Council was willing to jeopardize the sanctity and integrity of the historic
district by encouraging the Centerline project to go through or near it. What aCTA had asked
the City to do now was to consider a line that would extend as far as the stadium area only. He
said he felt it was unrealistic to ask anyone to swear that 50 or 100 years from now that
something would not happen. He said all that could be asked of elected officials and
government administrators was to deal with you straight and tell you what they are thinking and
planning. Mayor Daly said everyone heard Mr. Leahy say that he had no plans to recommend a
system that would go through the historic district and he would have to say that repeatedly in
the future as he dealt with other elected officials. He said he shared the concern of downtown
residents as to what might happen 10, 20 or 30 years down the road.
Mayor Daly noted that if the democratic process was working, citizens would have every
opportunity at any future juncture of the decision making process to affect he outcome. He
added that the County Transportation Authority must, by law, plan some type of central county
rail system and Mr. Leahy had said there was no technology decision as of yet and everyone
would want to know and deserved to know what the technology would be. They must plan a
system by law because Measure M was approved by the voters of Orange County and it
included a central county raii system of some type, he explained. As one person pointed out, he
reminded, there was already a rail line that ran from the stadium to Fullerton, the Amtrak line,
and some peopie had suggested that the additional central county line should simply go along
the Amtrak line. He added that if the majority of the Orange County citizens say, "stop, don't
plan it, don't spend the money" that changes that, but for the time being, Mr. Leahy had the
legal mandate to plan a rail line.
Mayor Daly said he thought the residents of the historic district should know that, unless he was
wrong, no one on the Council supported bringing the system into the downtown area. He said
OCTA had to listen to Anaheim, it was the biggest city in the County, just as they had to listen to
Santa Ana, Irvine, Orange and other affected communities. He said he felt the rational thing to
do was to continue talking to OCTA and to suggest strict perimeters on the project and he said
he thought Council should direct the City Manger and his staff to continue to talk to OCT A and
to try to reach an agreement. He felt the City should try to get as detailed a commitment, in
,..
.__~_"_________"'____m',"_
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 16
writing, as possible for OCTA as to what they would and would not do in the City of Anaheim
and everyone needed to monitor it on a continuing bases. He noted that bus traffic in the City
had expanded, there were more bus riders and there probably would be more in the future. He
said a line that went into the stadium area and possibly into the resort area should not be a
cause for fear for people who lived three or four miles from the area. He explained that
everyone should stay vigilant and watchful and if OCTA committed something in writing to the
City, it would have legal weight.
Council Member Tait said any agreement entered into would not be binding because they could
not force the hands of future Councils or future OCT A Boards. Once it was built and went to
Fullerton, it would have to go through the heart of Anaheim, he said. He said this was a
technical issue and the City's professional engineering staff analyzed it and clearly said "don't
build it, don't build it in Anaheim, don't build it anywhere". He said the Centerline project did
nothing to relieve the congestion or to relieve air pollution. He explained he felt building
Centerline would make congestion worse because state transportation money would be taken
away which could have been used for roads and buses that would improve regional mobility.
Council Member Tait said the proposed Centerline was planned to go from the Irvine
Transportation Center to Anaheim Stadium, to the Fullerton Transportation Center, the existing
Metrolink went the same place, he noted, and faster. He felt if the Centerline was built, 20
years from now people would be setting in congestion asking what happened, why the
government 20 years prior did not solve the problem. He felt the Council had to send the OCTA
a clear, no build position as the City staff had recommended.
Council Member Feldhaus said the reason the City staff could not recommend the Centerline
before was for all of the reasons stated this date; Centerline did not address the regional
problem, that the project was too expensive and if there was a loss of State money that
Anaheim would not receive it's fair share, impacts to the neighborhoods. He informed there
were cities in south county that wanted Centerline built and their Councils had approved it. He
wanted citizens that were outside of the City of Anaheim to go to their Councils to encourage a
no build. Unlike buses, rail could only go on one track, back and forth, Council Member
Feldhaus informed that in recent meetings, Mr. Leahy and Mr. Elbalm and Mr. Hodges had
agreed to all of the stipulations; they would not come through the Colony, not come down
Anaheim Blvd., not come down State College Blvd., stop it at the stadium, maybe help build a
multi-modal transportation hub there to help move people, they would address the express bus
lines on the 91 freeway HOV lanes and begin to move people faster on those. He said they had
talked and made all the concessions that made him say let's talk with them to see what they can
do to benefit Anaheim, but it in writing. Because of the concessions and because there was a
residual benefit to Anaheim to be able to move people from the housing in the Inland Empire
rapidly to south county, to the stadium, and to people to their jobs, it made sense to keep that
door open and listen. Will they try to build it, he asked, noting they had said nothing about going
to Fullerton, he said it did not make sense to go to Fullerton Transportation Center in downtown
Fullerton, they should be going to Cal State University and connecting that with Irvine
University.
Council Member Feldhaus said he felt the door should be open, that City staff should get to the
table and re-evaluate the recommendations that had been made, the concessions made with
OCT A and bring it back to Council to see if they want to be the beneficiaries of helping the City
get their transportation hub and at the same time protect the citizens from any impacts that the
project may have.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 17
Mayor Daly moved to direct the City Manager and his staff to work with OCT A staff toward an
agreement on the issues discussed this evening, the issues involved with the Centerline
project, and to report back within 30 days. Seconded by Council Member Feldhaus.
Council Member Kring said ordinances change all the time and something in writing today with
OCTA did not mean that a Council in years to come would want to change or up date it. She
said it was mentioned that cities in south county wanted the Centerline, she believed they were
Costa Mesa and Newport. She said that Costa Mesa had three quarters of a mile of their area
that would be affected by the project, they wanted a transportation system that went to South
Coast Plaza, to the Performing Arts Center and at the cost of the light rail, she said they could
afford to hire a limo, she felt it was a waste of money. She reminded that this was a mandate,
approved by the voters in 1990, that people felt it would be a light rail that paralleled the
freeways. She explained the light rail in Atlanta, MARTA, which paralleled the freeways, really
worked. She wondered why a light rail component was not included in the 1-5 expansion. She
said she was not willing to put the decision off for 30 days. She suggested that an initiative be
placed on the ballot so if light rail was not done on the freeway, the citizens would get their
money back and there would be no voter mandate to do it. If the people in south county would
not support an airport at EI Toro, she said, she doubted they would have a rail system through
their neighborhoods. She said another way to immediately relieve congestion on the freeways
was that during non-rush hour traffic, the HOV's would be used.
Council Member Tait reminded everyone that he had asked for the item to be placed on the
agenda to vote on staff's recommendation for the no build and he would ask Council later to
vote on whether they support the no build alternative.
Mayor Daly reminded everyone that the motion on the floor was to direct the City Manager to
work with County Transportation Authority towards an agreement on the issues involved with
the Centerline Project, including issues mentioned at this meeting, and to report back to
Council within 30 days.
Ayes - 3: Council Members McCracken, Feldhaus, Mayor Daly. Noes - 2, Council Members
Kring and Tait. Motion carried.
Council Member Tait moved to recommend to the OCTA Board the no build alternative that was
staff's recommendation because of reasons stated. Motion seconded by Council Member
Kring,
Council Member Feldhaus asked if staff had heard enough information to re-evaluate their
position.
Public Works Director Johnson said the staff report evaluated the project that currently existed
and staff position and recommendation had not changed. He said they were waiting for policy
direction from Council and would proceed on the basis of the direction.
Council Member Feldhaus said Mr. Johnson had had a meeting with OCTA and he wondered if
he had heard enough to want to "tweak" his curiosity to meet with them again.
Mr. Johnson said that he believed that Mr. Leahy's comments about assurances to Anaheim
enhancements, not having diversion of key transportation funds, working on rapid bus, express
bus, Metrolink, access to Riverside County, all the things Council had mentioned, would be
._-"--
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 18
something that the staff would discuss with them and bring back to Council for consideration if
that was the policy direction.
Council Member Tait asked Mr. Johnson if it changed his recommendation and Mr. Johnson
responded that the recommendation on the project would not change because it was on the
fundamental basis of the benefit derived from the project and defining the project as the total
project, not the MOS, but the project that was evaluated in the environmental document and it
did include the impact on the Colony District and other issues that may be able to be mitigated
but the fundamental economics of the project may not have changed.
Mayor Daly reminded that the motion on the floor was to adopt the no build alternative.
Council Member Feldhaus asked if it was stated either no build or build.
Council Member Tait said it was for no build at all, anywhere and return to the drawing board
and come up with ideas for regional mobility.
Council Member Feldhaus said if there was a no build, he would not have the door open to talk
to OCTA about what they were willing to do.
Council Member Kring said there was two choices, either no build or build the railroad.
Council Member Tait said he felt his motion was clear and he called for the question.
Mayor Daly restated the motion, that Council adopt a no build approach.
Ayes - 2: Council Members Kring and Tait. Noes - 3: Council Members McCracken,
Feldhaus, Mayor Daly. Motion failed,
A26.
Discussion requested by Mayor Daly at the Council meeting of February 13, 2001, under
Council Communications, regarding the acknowledgement of employees involved in the
Resort area projects.
126
Mayor Daly requested discussion be deferred to the end of the agenda, seconded by Council
Member McCracken. Motion carried.
179
Items B1 throuQh B2 From the ZoninQ Administrator MeetinQ of February 8. 2001: (No
action necessary unless Council desires to set a particular item for public hearing.) APPEAL
PERIOD ENDS MARCH 2, 2001:
B1. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2001-00208
CATEGORICALL EXEMPT - CLASS 1:
OWNER: Mohan N. Patel, 760 S. Bunting Court, Anaheim, CA 92808
AGENT: Joseph Sargeant, 737 E. Chestnut Avenue, Orange, CA 92867
LOCATION: 760 South BuntinQ Court: Property is 0.57 acre, having a frontage of 59
feet on the north side of Bunting Court, having a maximum depth of 212 feet, located
325 feet northeast of the centerline of Humming Bird Circle.
---.----u'~._-
179
176
175
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 19
Waiver of minimum side setback (10 feet required; 8 feet proposed) to construct a 476
sq. ft. one-story addition to an existing two story single-family residence in the RS-HS
22,000 (SC) (Residential, Single-Family Hillside; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Adjustment No. 2001-00208 approved (DECISION ZA2001-4).
B2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04321
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT - CLASS 1:
OWNER: Paul T. and Lisa L. Kott, Trustees, 1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA
92805
AGENT: Maria R. Ashby, 16148 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine, CA 92618
LOCATION: 1201 West Lincoln Avenue: Property is 0.24 acre located at the northwest
corner of Lincoln Avenue and Carleton Avenue. (Formerly "EI Nopal" Restaurant.)
To permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption within an
existing restaurant in the CG (Commercial, General) Zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 2001-04321 approved (DECISION ZA2001-4).
No action was taken.
6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
C1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 00-9A:
To consider abandoning a 22.25 foot wide portion of Water Street and quitclaim of said
portion of Water Street together with an 8 foot wide portion of Water Alley, both located
east of Olive Street and west of Atchison Street. (Continued from the meeting of
February 13, 2001, Item C2.)
At its meeting, January 9, 2001, Item A 10, the Anaheim City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2001 R-4 declaring its intention to vacate certain public streets, highways
and service easements and setting a date and time to consider the abandonment of a
portion of Water Street and quitclaim of said portion of Water Street together with a
portion of Water Alley, both located east of Olive Street and west of Atchison Street.
REQUESTED BY: Jones, Bell, Abbott, Fleming & Fitzgerald, LLP, on behalf of
KWIKSET CORPORATION, 601 South Figueroa Street, Twenty-Seventh Floor, Los
Angeles, CA 90017-5759.
Mayor Daly explained that staff had requested a continuance until March 20, 2001 and he
moved to approve that request, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried
unanimously.
C2. PUBLIC HEARING - UNDERGROUND DISTRICT NO. 42 - STATE COLLEGE
BOULEVARD, PHASE I:
To consider the approval of the creation of Underground District No. 42 - State College
Boulevard, Phase I in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 17.24 of Title 17 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Underground Utilities. The location of the
_._.....~._----'--'-' ,.-.--.... -.------.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 20
district is State College Boulevard between Vermont Street and the SR91 Freeway
District boundaries.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing.
The property owner on the last property where the district stopped asked how the last two
properties not included would be handled.
Bob Templeton, Public Utilities Department, said he would have to contact the other property
owner. He said the light standards would stay standard.
Hearing no comments, Mayor Daly closed the public hearing.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 2001 R-54 for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001 R-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM creating Underground District No. 42 (State College Boulevard, Phase I).
Roll call vote: Ayes - 5. Noes - O. Motion carried.
179
C3. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3790
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT- CLASS 21:
OWNER: Bobby and Toni Gilbert, 17300 17'h Street, Tustin, CA 92780-1955
LOCATION: 1514 West Broadway. Property is 1.05 acres located at the southwest
corner of Broadway and Adams Street (B and J's Tree Service).
City-initiated (Code Enforcement Division) request for the modification or revocation of
Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 (to permit a tree service contractor's storage yard with
a modular office building with waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and
minimum yard area abutting a local street).
ACTION TAKEN BY PLANNING COMMISSION:
Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 approved with modifications to expire July 3, 2001
(PC20001-3) (6 yes votes, Commissioner Arnold absent). Informational item at the
meeting of January 23, 2001, Item B1. Letter of appeal submitted by Stephen Sheldon,
Sheldon Associates.
A request for continuance was received by Sheldon and Associates.
Brad Knypstra spoke from the audience, he said he was asked by Steve Sheldon to attend the
meeting and represent his client to request the continuance.
Mayor Daly asked Mr. Knypstra if he was a part of Sheldon and Associates and Mr. Knypstra
responded no, he was only assisting.
Council Member McCracken asked if the project had to return to Planning Commission. She
said she had the impression that the whole project was being rearranged.
Greg Hastings, Planning Department, said that what was before the Planning Commission was
a re-instatement of their Conditional Use Permit and Planning Commission agreed with certain
conditions of approval that the applicant was not in agreement with. He said Planning
._~._...,,~. '.. ,-"....."'~.,-,..~_._-...-
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27, 2001
PAGE 21
Department had since met with the applicant and the item would return to Planning Commission
for additional changes before it came back to Council.
Mayor Daly asked if the project was being fine-tuned or were they substantial changes.
Mr. Hasting said the project would not change, the conditions of approval that had been
imposed would be fine-tuned.
Mayor Daly moved to continue the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit No. 3790 to April
17, 2001, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
Report on Closed Session Actions:
City Attorney Jack White reported no items required to be reported out of Closed Session.
At this point Item A 26 was discussed.
126 A26. Discussion requested by Mayor Daly at the Council meeting of February 13, 2001, under
Council Communications, regarding the acknowledgement of employees involved in the
Resort area projects.
Mayor Daly expressed his concern that the proposed amount to be spent made him
uncomfortable and the funds were resort area monies, public money. He said the work of staff
was very appreciated. He said his other concern was that this type of event tended to elevate
the resort area to a status above other city projects and he felt all city projects were equally
important.
City Clerk Schroeder said there was a clarification on the dollar amount, which was $25,500 as
opposed to $40,000.
Council Member Tait said he was in agreement, he said he understood the good intent behind it
but it was public funds and was hard to justify spending that much on a recognition party. He
said the money could be used to help repay the bond debt.
Council Member Kring said she also did not like the expenditure of public funds, but this was
probably the largest project that the City had ever encountered. She asked what would happen
to the remainder of the bond money if it was not spent.
City Manager Ruth said the money had to be spent in the Resort Area. He added that it was a
legitimate expenditure if the Council chose to spend it.
Council Member Tait moved that the City not spend the money for the employee recognition
luncheon or party, seconded by Mayor Daly.
Council Member McCracken noted that the luncheon was only $6,000.
Roll call: Ayes - 2; Council Member Tait and Mayor Daly. Noes - 3; Council Members
McCracken, Kring and Feldhaus. Motion failed.
. ---........,...--'..-..- _~__~_..-_.__ .______.__.,_, -., ._. .',,,.._~ ,..... _'_~~_~__~.__,__.__._n'_
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 27,2001
PAGE 22
Council Member Kring moved to approve the expenditure, seconded by Council Member
Feldhaus.
Roll call: Ayes - 3; Council Member McCracken, Feldhaus and Kring. Noes - 2; Council
Member Tait and Mayor Daly. Motion carried.
Council Communications:
Council Member Tait stated he wished to place on the next agenda the discussion of
revocation of the identification program that was brought up this meeting. He said he
thought, rather than talking about adjusting or changing it, it should be revoked.
Council Member McCracken said she was concerned the City Attorney would not have
enough time.
Council Member Tait said the City Attorney had asked for time to come up with some
modifications and he said he thought it should be revoked, citing constitutional problems.
Council Member McCracken congratulated Esparanza High School Women's Basketball
team in the finals. She also requested that the meeting be adjourned in the memory of
Bill Spehn, citing his active involvement in many civic organizations.
Council Members joined Council Member McCracken in their respect for Mr. Spehn.
Council Member Kring acknowledged a young Eagle Scout on his award.
Adjournment:
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Daly adjourned the
meeting at 944 P.M. in the memory of Mr. Bill Spehn.
Respectfully submitted:
~.;I)~
Sheryll Schroeder, CMC/AAE
City Clerk