Loading...
2000/10/10ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 10, 2000 The City Council of the City of Anaheim, CA met in regular session at 3:10 P.M. Present: Mayor Pro Tem Shirley McCracken, Council Members: Frank Feldhaus, Lucille Kdng, and Tom Tait. Mayor Daly arrived from another meeting about 3:20 P.M, Staff Present: City Manager Jim Ruth, City Attorney Jack White, Executive Director Community Development, Eliza Stipkovich and Assistant City Clerk Cindy Daniel/Garcia. A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on October 6, 2000 at the City Hall inside and outside bulletin boards. Mayor Pro Tem McCracken called the meeting to order at 3:10 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Anaheim City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. She explained Mayor Tom Daly was delayed in another meeting but would join the Council soon. The first podion of the meeting was a workshop on Anaheim City School District Master Plan Update. WORKSHOP FOR ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT MASTER PLAN UPDATE: Community Services Director Elisa Stipkovich presented the workshop and introduced the Superintendent of the Anaheim City School District, Sandra Berry. Sandra Berry thanked the City for providing the opportunity to update the City on the School Districrs efforts to accommodate the increasing enrollment. She explained that the District had more than doubled since 1985, when there was 11,517 students enrolled. Since 1990, the enrollment had jumped by 10,000 students, with 13,913 students. In 2000, there were enrolled 23,290 boys and girls. She clarified that even though the enrollment rate was not increasing at the same rate, 5 to 10 percent that it had over the last 10 or 15 years, they had grown the last year by 525 students. She reviewed some of the interim measures taken to accommodate the growth Ms. Berry announced that about two weeks ago, the Office of Public School Construction at the State Department of Education lePvel announced that statistically, Anaheim City School District was the most over crowded school distdct in the State. She explained that the City was eligible for $48 million in hardship funds due to passage of Proposition 1A. The hardship funds were used by the District as matching funds to become eligible for another $48 million in new construction money. With the money, the Distdct had aggressively pursued a building program. She introduced the Assistant Superintendent of Facilities, Lettie Boggs. Ms. Boggs reviewed the Facilities Solution progress report, which included current funding status. The report is available in the City Clerk's Office. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 2 Mayor Daly encouraged the District and City staff to continue working together to find solutions. At the conclusion of the workshop, at 4:05 P.M., Mayor Daly announced the next item on the agenda wa_s Closed Session. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closes Session items. Daly moved to recess to Closed Session, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carded unanimously. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code) Name of Case: Vista Royale Homeowners Assn. v. 396 Investment Co. fka The Fieldstone Company, et al., Orange County Superior Coud Case No. 77-30-74 (and related cases). CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code) Facts and circumstances: Threats of litigation against the City relating to the proposed construction of a soundwall by the City of Anaheim within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way located south of Esperanza Road between Imperial Highway and Yorba Linda Boulevard/Weir Canyon Road. LIABILITY CLAIMS Claimant: Anaheim Firefighters Association Agency claimed against: City of Anaheim CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NE~GOTIATORS Property: State Remnant Parcel Numbers 200052-20057 (Cottonwood Circle parcels) and Vermont Avenue street right-of-way northerly of 828 W. Vermont Avenue, Anaheim, California Agency negotiator: Natalie Meeks Negotiating parties: City of Anaheim and Chades E. Hance Under negotiation: pdce and terms ANNUAL EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS Titles: City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, City Treasurer CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 3 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS: Agency designated representative: David Hill Employee organization: Anaheim Municipal Employees Association. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agenc_y designated representative: David Hill Employee organization: International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkerS, LoCal 47. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agency designated representative: David Hill Employee organization: Anaheim Police Association. AFTER RECESS: Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of October 10, 2000 to order at 5:55 P.M. and welcomed those in attendance. INVOCATION: Moment of Silence FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Lucille Kdng PROCLAMATIONS AND DECLARATIONS: Mayor Daly read and presented a Proclamation recognizing October 15-21,2000 as Character Counts! Week in Anaheim, which was accepted by Mr. Joe Perez from Community Services Department. He introduced two students from Patrick Henry School. A Declaration recognizing long-term City of Anaheim Employees on their retirement was presented to the employees in attendance. Recognitions to be presented at a later date were a proclamation recognizing October 8- 14, 2000 was Fire Prevention Week in Anaheim. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Harold Martin asked Council to place a resolution on a future agenda to create wdtten public policy regarding enforcement of federal immigration laws. Ann McCracken said she had requested a meeting with the Chief of Police and he had not responded. She also requested a copy of the RFP for temporary services. She said she had requested information from the WorkForce Investment Board and had not had a response. Elaine Proco stated she was in suppod of Mr. Madin's resolution. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER I0, 2000 PAGE 4 Luke Longoria, 2172 W. Niobe Avenue, submitted his written comments regarding two businesses, Traditional Oriental Medicine Group and Fantasia Massage located at 710 Brookhurst. He indicated that two shooting incidents had occurred within a four-month period. He asked that the businesses be investigated. City Attorney, Jack White, said he would look into the two incidents and contact:Mr.' Longoria. He said the City regulated massage establishments in two ways; one was .i zoning laws where they are restricted to cedain zones in the City and the second was by regulatory license requirements of both the business and the employees. Mr. White said he would respond to the written comments. Selma Longoria, 2172 W. Niobe Avenue, read a letter from the business owner of 670 S. Brookhurst Street regarding the recent incidents discussed by Mr. Longoria. Ron Chandler, 812 Falcon Street, said he was a write-in candidate in the November 7th election. Linda Lee Grau, spoke regarding the constitution and the write in candidate. Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon, seconded by Council Member Kring. Motion carried unanimously. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no changes. Council Member Feldhaus asked for clarification on Item A9 and A15. Regarding A9, authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue purchase orders in an amount not to exceed $5,035,634 for the purchase of various vehicles and equipment for City depadments, he noted vehicles were in better condition for longer periods of time and he asked if money could be saved on vehicles with longer life spans. Assistant City Manger, Tom Wood, explained that this budget year had allocated a little more than previous years. He said when the Utility Department was evaluated, staff had held off replacing vehicles and they were now catching up. He said staff had extended the life curb on a number of vehicles. Overall, he said, the staff was trying to get the most optimal wear, trying to minimize the amount of 1~3bor spent on them before they were replaced. He said in some cases, equipment may be turned in earlier or later than its life span, depending on its repair history. Regarding Item A15, authorizing the Chief of Police to execute an agreement with Wellness Solutions in an amount not to exceed $77,250 to provide a fitness/wellness program for the Police Depadment, Council Member Feldhaus asked for some benchmark measurements as to how the program was progressing. He moved to continue the item for one week so that staff could respond in writing to his request, seconded by Mayor Daly. Motion carded unanimously. Council Member Kring explained that she knew of one case where an officer was helped with the program. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 5 Council Member Tait declared a conflict of interest on Item A4, stating his firm had a banking relationship with Sanwa Bank. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A24: On motion by Mayor Daly, the following items were approved in accordance with the repods, ', cedifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed or~ the Consent Calendar. A1. A3. A4. A5. A6. Reject certain claims and cedain applications for leave to present late claims filed against the City. Claim rejection list is available in the City Clerk's Office. Receive and file minutes of the Golf Advisory Commission meeting of August 24, 2000, minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting of August 23, 2000, and minutes of the Public Utilities Board meetings of July 6, 2000, and August 3, 2000. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, S&M Landscape, Inc., in the amount of $33,840.50 for Miraloma Avenue median island improvements and approve and authorize the Finance Director to sign said escrow agreement pedaining to contract retentions. Approve an Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 2320 South Harbor Boulevard - Chapman Avenue (northside) east of Harbor Boulevard street-widening project (R/W 5506-01 ), authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement and authorize the acquisition payment of $4,391 to Sanwa Bank California, Successor Trustee. Approve an Acquisition Agreement for the purchase of real properly located at 1461 North Daly Street, authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement and authorize the acquisition payment of $11,229 to Hatsuyo Mori, Trustee. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-209 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the destruction of cedain City records more than two years old. (Public Works Department) CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 6 A7. AS. A9. A10. All. A12. A13. A14. A15. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-210 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting cedain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim cedain real propedies or interests therein. (City Deed Nos. 10305 and 10308-10316) RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-211 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting cedain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim cedain real propedies or interests therein. (City Deed Nos. 10306 and 10307) Accept the low bid of Danny Lether, Inc., DBA Letner Roofing Company, in an amount not to exceed $214,500 (including tax) for the removal and replacement of roofs at various locations throughout the City, in accordance with Bid ~EE~065. Authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue purchase orders in an amount not to exceed $5,035,634 for the purchase of vadous vehicles and equipment for City departments for Fiscal Year 2000/2001. Authorize a Second Amendment to an Agreement with PRC Public Sector, Inc., to decrease the not to exceed amount to $45,561 for the third pedod of maintenance for the computer aided dispatch (CAD) and records management systems (RMS) at the Police Depadment. Accept the proposal of Netvantage, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $167,000 (plus applicable taxes) for a remittance processing system for the Finance Depadment's Collection Division and authorize the Purchasing Agent to execute subsequent maintenance agreements, as required and budgeted, in accordance with Request for Proposal f¢6063. Authorize the Purchasing Agent to implement the MasterCard Purchasing Card program throughout the City and to execute any related documents or program modifications as required. ORDINANCE NO. 5738 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 1.04.240 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to authorize the use of purchase cards for purchases of supplies by City depadments. ORDINANCE NO. 5739 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 6.44.010 of Chapter 6.44 of Title 6 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to include abandoned wells as public nuisances. Authorize the Anaheim Police Depadment to accept the donation of a German Shepherd canine from the Friends of the Anaheim Police Canine Association for use by the Anaheim Police Depadment Canine Detail. Waive Council Policy 306 and authorize the Chief of Police to execute an agreement with Wellness Solutions, in an amount not to exceed $77,250, to provide a fitness/wellness program for Anaheim Police Officers as provided for in CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 7 the Memorandum of Understanding between the Anaheim Police Association and the City of Anaheim. A16. A17. Authorize the Chief of Police to accept a grant award in the amount of $207,403 from the Office of the State Controller for the "California Law Enforcement Equipment Program" and increase revenues and expenditures in the Po!ipe Depart/nent's Fiscal Year 2000/2001 budget by $207,403. Amend the Fiscal Year 2000/2001 Fire Department budget, increasing revenue and expenditure appropriations by $400,000. A18. Approve the consolidation of fund options offered through GWL in the City's full- time Deferred Compensation Plan (457 Plan) and approve the elimination of GWL as provider for the City's part-time Deferred Compensation Plan (457P Plan). A19. RESOLUTION NO.2000R-212 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving two Letters of Understanding between the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, General Employees and Clerical Employees, to establish a Compensatory Time Program for certain employees in the Police Department. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-213 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Memorandum of Understanding establishing the terms and conditions of employment for employees in classifications assigned to the Parking Lot Unit represented by the General Truck Ddvers Union, Local 952. A21. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-214 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Letter of Understanding between the Anaheim Police Association and the City of Ariahelm to transfer into the Association certain employees in classifications formerly represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, General Unit. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-215 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the destruction of certain City records more than two years old. (Public Utilities Depadment) Approve certain agreements between the City of Anaheim and Arnold Ontes, an individual doing business as Arnold Ontes Design, for professional consulting services for a two-year period, in an amount not to exceed $30,000, and Adler Public Affairs, Inc., for a two-year period in anfamount not to exceed $100,000, for professional services in connection with the implementation of an information outreach program for the Community Development and Anaheim Public Utilities Depadments. A24. Approve minutes of Anaheim City Council meetings held August 15, 2000, and August 29, 2000, and Workshop minutes of August 8, 2000. Roll call vote: Ayes - 5. Noes - 0. Motion carded. Council Member Tait abstained on A4. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 8 END OF CONSENT CALENDAR A25. Request by Council Member Kring to discuss advertising on taxicabs. Council Member Kring noted that she had staff research destination resort cities! regarding top of cab advertising and she reported that only Honolulu had restrictions on that type of advertising. She also said that the taxi industry derived between $20,000 and $55,000 per year from advertising. She noted the franchise was designed without advertising and companies would be losing that revenue. OCTA allowed "wraps" around buses and she said she did not think it would have an impact on the City's beautification program. She felt there was also a safety issue in that citizens could recognize a cab approaching by the roof top advertising. Discussion took place among Council about the revenue produced by roof top advertising on taxicabs. Upon a question by Mayor Daly to Code Enforcement Manager, John Poole, he responded that the franchise proposals were out and were due back October 20, 2000. Mr. Poole said the Committee did consider the sign restrictions and they voted to recommend to Council that roof top signs not be allowed. He said the recommendation regarding the advertising came from City staff as they were looking for ways to provide taxi service that would raise the bar. Council Member Feldhaus noted that the franchise could be modified at a later date, noting that other businesses were allowed to have roof top advertising. Council Member Tait said raising the bar to him meant cleanliness, politeness, and roof top advertising was different from other types. He said he suppoded the roof top advertising. Council Member Kdng moved to remove the roof top advertising provision from the franchise, seconded by Council Member Tait. Council Member McCracken said she had talked to vendors regarding the advertising and she foresaw a problem with limiting the type of advertising, like sex-oriented business. She said she had not had an opportunity to, study the issue and if it was going to be changed, she wished to have an oppodunity to study it. She said since the RFP was due next week, she felt it should remain while the advertising issue was studied. City Attorney White explained that the franchise proposal was being analyzed by cab companies based on no roof advertising and if the franchise was awarded to a company and then they were told the City changed their mind and they could have roof advertising, it would create an issue for those that were not awarded the franchise. He said if the Council was going to make the change, it was probably best to decide it now rather than later. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 9 John Poole said staff had looked at the advedising issue and they did not feel, with the volume of business in the City and the size of the franchises that would be awarded, that it would not have a negative effect on the cab company operation. Mayor Daly asked if there had been discussion on interior advedising and Mr. Poole said they had not discussed that consideration. :, Council Member Feldhaus said he felt the content of the advedising needed to be addressed. City Attorney White said he was not aware of a restriction or law that required private companies to sell their space to anyone who applied for it. He said his concern was from the City's point of view of controlling it, adding that the City could control the advedising reasonable time, place and manner restrictions, once the City staded imposing restrictions of content, they would have a legal problem under the first amendment. Mayor Daly recalled recent complaints from citizens regarding the content of a billboard and he noted that if taxicab companies were able to sell advedising space, they could not be regulated as to content. Larry Slagle, Yellow Cab, 1619 E. Lincoln Avenue, explained that the operator could make an agreement with the agency to restrict adult entertainment from the advedising. He explained that the owners expected the advertising rate to double or triple when the resort was complete. He said that exterior advertising was more of a revenue source than intedor advertising. He said he supported exterior advertising on cabs. Mr. White said he was not aware of any agreement with any taxi company restdcting the type of advertising that they currently have on their cabs and he said he was concerned about a formal City edict that only certain businesses were allowed to advedise on taxi cabs, calling it content based discrimination that could be viewed as a violation of the first amendment. He said he would research the issue if that was Council's desire. Mayor Daly moved to table the discussion to a future date, pending legal research and staff analysis, noting that questions had been raised and staff would have an opportunity to research the issue. Council Member Tait said he would suppod the moti<}n to table, giving the City Attorney an opportunity to study the issue. The City Attorney said he would repod back to Council. Mayor Daly asked the City Attorney to review and advise the Council regarding the point where the franchise could be adjusted. Roll call to table the discussion to a date uncedain: Motion carried unanimously. B1. ORDINANCE NO. 5740 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 99-00-19). CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 10 C1. 6:00 P,M, Public Hearin.cis: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO, 2000- .00376 :: (GPA 'i'RACKING NO. 2000-00383) CODE AMENDMENT NO, 2000-00002 AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 "ZONING" (ZCA TRACKING NO, 2000-00003) RECLASSIFICATION NO, 2000-00023 (RCL TRACKING NO, 2000-00033) AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: REQUESTED BY: City of Anaheim (Redevelopment Agency), Attn: Rob Zur Schmiede, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, 10th floor, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: Subject area consists of approximately 430 acres located along, and surrounding, Anaheim Boulevard between Broadway to the north and the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway to the south. To consider modifications initiated by staff subsequent to the Planning Commission's prior actions related to the following items: General Plan Amendment No. 2000-00376 - A proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to: a) redesignate properties from the General Industrial, General Commercial, Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential designations to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation; b) redesignate properties from the General Industrial, Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial, Commercial Professional, Medium Density Residential and Low- Medium Density Residential designations to the General Commercial designation; c) redesignate properties from the General Commercial, Medium Density Residential, and Low Density Residential designations to the Commercial Professional designation; and, d) redesignale properties from the General Commercial and Medium Density Residential designations to the Special Park Site designation. Code Amendment No. 2000-00002 - To amend Title 18 by establishing the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone which would serve to: a) permit new land uses in the Overlay Zone area in addition to those allowed under existing zoning; b) establish a design review p~rocess for future development projects within the Overlay Zone area; c) ado6t, by reference, a Master Plan for public and private landscaped areas; d) restrict establishment of additional locations for off-premises sales of alcoholic beverages, and; e) adopt a sign amodization program which would require the removal of freestanding signs not in conformance with the sign regulations contained within the Anaheim Municipal Code after a 15-year amortization period. Reclassification No. 2000-00023 - To reclassify subject area by combining the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone with each parcel's existing underlying zoning designation while removing cedain properties located south of the Southern California Edison Easement from the Resolution of intent to Sports Entertainment (SE) Oveday Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 11 Recommended adoption of Exhibit "A" to City Council (PC2000-60) (5 yes votes, Commissioners Bostwick and Boydstun abstained). Recommended adoption of Exhibit "B" to City Council for GPA NO. 2000-00376 (GPA TRACKING NO. 2000- 00383) (PC2000-99) (5 yes votes, Commissioners Bostwick and Boydstun absent). Recommended adoption to City Council of Code Amendment No. 2000-00002 (ZCA TRACKING NO. 2000-00003). Granted Reclassification No. 2000-00023 (RCL TRACKING NO. 2000-00033) (PC2000-61) and (PC2000-100). Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration. Set for public hearing June 20, 2000, due to GPA No. 2000-00376. Approved request for City Council review. Public hearing continued from the meetings of June 20, 2000, Item C2, August 8, 2000, Item C3, August 29, 2000, Item C2, and September 19, 2000, Item C1. Mayor Daly said staff had prepared a repod in response to the questions raised at the last public hearing and Council Member Feldhaus noted he had just received the report and he needed an oppodunity to review it. He suggested a one-week continuance. Community Development Executive Director, Elisa Stipkovich, said there were no changes from what was submitted to the Planning Commission. She said the staff had attached to the memo a list of proposed prohibited uses. She explained that staff was recommending that the commercial oreday zone have a slightly different definition in that the uses detailed on the first page of the memo would be prohibited and that the list had not been reviewed by the Planning Commission. Council Member Feldhaus said he wished to continue the item another week to give him time to review the memo and to have staff consider adding more stories to proposed commercial development. Council Member Tait asked if everything a current property owner could do today, he could do more with the proposed plan and Ms. Stipkovich answered yes. Mayor Daly moved for a one-week continuance, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carded unanimously. C2. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2000-00020: OWNER: O.C.T.A., Attn: Rick Grebner, 550 South Main Street, Orange, CA 92863 AGENT: Chuck Hance, 828 West Vermont Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 867 South Cottonwood Circle. Property is 0.195 acres located on the west side of Cottonwood Circle, 260 feet west of the centerline of Citron Street. To reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) and the RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family) Zones to CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone to construct a parking lot for the abutting automotive dealership facility. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 2000-00020 GRANTED (PC2000-70) (7 yes votes). CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 12 Approved Negative Declaration. Informational item at the City Council meeting of June 13, 2000, Item B10. Review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by Mayor Daly and Council Member McCracken. Continued from the meetings of July 25, 2000, Item C6, August 8, 2000, Item C2, September 19, 2000, Item C2, and September 26, 2000, Item C3. Natalie Meeks, Public Works Department, presented the staff repod, which is available in the City Clerk's Office. She informed that the City had prepared a purchase and sale agreement for both the potential park property and the street dght of way. She said the property owner, Mr. Hance, had not executed it as of yet. Ms. Meeks said she thought the City and Mr. Hance were in agreement on the provisions of the valuing of the street right of way where the City had allowed the property owner to obtain an appraisal from an appraiser of his choice. She informed that she was told this date that the appraisal was complete, but she had not see it. She said the agreement also set a maximum and minimum for the street dght of way so that Mr. Hance understood his exposure on the cost. She said the other issue was the City's purchase of the surplus property for the park site, staff recommendation continued to be $5 a square foot, or $87,000, which was what Mr. Hance paid OCTA to acquire the property. She said that Mr. Hance continued to take the position that he wanted $100,000 for the property. She finalized that they were not in total agreement with the properly owner and the agreement had not been executed. Mayor Daly clarified that the question before Council was to reclassify the property from irs current residential single family zoning to commercial zoning and he asked if that included the entire property under consideration. Greg Hastings, Planning Department, said that it only included the podion that Mr. Hance was requesting, primarily where the extension of where Vermont used to go as well as one portion of a single-family lot remaining nodh of that. Mayor Daly opened the public hearing. Brad Knypstra, attorney for Mr. Hance, said that the legal issues involved as to whether or not the land, the southern most podion of Vermont Street already reverted by the property being abandoned to the fee owner, which was Mr. Hance in this case, it was their contention that the northern half of Vermont had already reverted to OCTA, who owned the other side of Vermont Street, their contention was that there was no bases to require him to pay for the land because it was already abandoned. He said that he understood from staff that the abandonment was not advertised in sufficient time to bring it forward with this hearing. Mayor Daly said his question had to do with what had been talked about in the past in the hearings, the sale of a piece of property, which Mr. Hance had an option to buy from OCTA, to the City. One of the issues was the impact of the commercial zoning on the neighborhood. The Mayor asked the status of the park. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 13 Mr. Knypstra said their position was that they should not be required to sell the land to the City to obtain the rezoning reclassification for the parking lot. However, he said, staff did state that they had prepared an agreement, but it was only made available to Mr. Hance yesterday. Mr. Knypstra said he had since reviewed the agreement and there were several reasons why they could not agree to the agreement for the sale of the park area. He said-that despite the fact that Mr. Hance should not be required to sell ~the land to the City to obtain his reclassification of the zoning for commercial purposes, they did make the offer that Mr. Hance would sell or give an option to the City to purchase the remainder podion of the OCTA property for the sum of $100,000, which was exactly what he was paying for it. Since that time, Mr. Knypstra said Gina Gallager from OCTA who was handling the transaction for OCTA, was present this evening and one of the documents she handed him was an appraisal that deals with the property. As of October 6, 2000, the proposed park property, including all lots and half of the north half of Vermont Street, was valued at $234,500, which was in contrast to what the City was proposing of $4.60 a foot. Mr. Hance is contending he'll give the City the rest of the park property for the $100,000 he was paying for it. He said he understood the City was offedng $87,000, offering to pay costs and he was willing to give it to the City for $100,000. Mr. Knypstra said Mr. Hance had an option with OCTA that he had to exercise by October 23 and if the property did not get reclassified to commercial and he was not allowed to put in a parking lot, he would lose the option to buy the land. He said he was trying to be fair but their position was that they should not have to sell the land to the City to get a rezoning that the Planning Commission had already approved. Mr. Knypstra said Mr. Hance was willing to do that if the City paid him $100,000 and his costs. He said he called Mr. White to discuss his legal analysis of the abandonment issues adding that he anticipated they would be heard this date. He said he was unable to meet with staff on the legal issues but he was confident in his position that no money needed to he paid by Mr. Hance for a street that had already been moved, tom out and abandoned by the City. Mayor Daly, noting that the hearing on the agenda was for the rezoning, asked Mr. Knypstra if there were any other statements to be made on that subject. Mr. Knypstra answered that as far as the rezoning, he imagined there would be people in attendance with concerns regarding the rezoning and he said the only property that was impacted was the corner property that had already been impacted since Mr. Hance's business had been there. He said the parking lot, as proposed, would only extend to the property line of the single family home at the corner of Vermont and Cottonwod. He said he understood that when it was presented to the Planning Commission, the concerns were raised and addressed by the Planning Commission and that they still supported the plan. He said he looked at the plans for the parking lot and Mr. Hance would build a parking lot that would benefit the area. With his impending option expiring, he hoped Council would make a decision. Speaking in opposition to the rezoning, Lori Heulen thanked Council and Mayor for their consideration of open space in their neighborhood. She said the Citron-Haster Neighborhood Council had voted for the CDBG funds to be used for the proposed open space. She said the neighborhood strongly opposed the zone change, they hoped to keep it residential. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 14 Doreen Eltiste, 846 West Cottonwood, said she was opposed to the rezoning, adding that she did not want to see a parking lot across the street from her home. Mary Jane Charira, 842 West Cottonwood, said she did not want the property rezoned, she wished to see it remain residential. Brad Knypstra; attorney for Mr. Hance, explained that under the Planning Commission approval, Mr. Hance would be required to build a wall and landscape it, which he felt would be better looking than the sound wall the residents were looking at now. He said as the property sat now, residents could see the parking lot adjacent to that, which will be rectified by allowing the parking lot to be there, the residents would see a wall instead of looking into the existing parking lot. The reason, he explained, Mr. Hance needed the parking lot was because of the I-5 take by CalTrans and OCTA, in which he lost 31 parking spots and he would be unable to rent out pad of his building unless he can obtain parking spots. Mayor Daly asked if Mr. Hance could use the properly to the south to replace the lost parking places. Mr. Knypstra said it was his understanding that the property to the south was proposed to be used for a self-storage business that Mr. Hance planned on. He explained that when Mr. Hance was in condemnation with OCTA, that was the plan that was agreed upon between OCTA and Mr. Hance to resolve his parking problem. He said if that was the plan that Mr. Hance settled with CalTrans on how to resolve his parking situation, he said in his judgment, if Mr. Hance felt that was the best way to solve the problem and that was what he settled the case on, he believed he was entitled to pursue it. Mayor Daly clarified that the settlement agreement with CalTrans or OCTA did not mention plans to build public storage or to put parking on the nodh or storage on the south. Mr. Knypstra, after speaking with Mr. Hance, said he was informed that Mr. Hance did a pre-file with the City regarding parking on the southerly most podion, and Greg Hastings testified that he would not be able to park there on the southern portion. Mayor Daly asked Mr. Hastings if that statement was accurate and Greg Hastings responded that it would necessitate a conditional use permit, there would be no restriction against using that area provided the prope¢ procedure was gone through. Chuck Hance said that he originally envisioned parking to the south and that was why he purchased the property but when he did the pre-file, it was denied. He said the pre-file said a conditional use permit would be denied and the reason was that the City did not want him to expand his commercial operation to the south, was what he was told. He said the City was also concerned that he would build a commercial building on the property. He said the City testified to it in court. Mayor Daly asked staff that when the possibility of parking to the south of the Coast Corvette building was broached, what was the answer. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 15 Mr. Hastings said he did not recall off hand but there could have been some issues relative to how it was designed on the properly. He said Mr. Hance did supply plans for the properly going nodh on Cottonwood, the entire length, and staff commented back on quite a few design issues for housing in that area. He said at the same time, there might have been some design issues to the south, not necessarily the use but the arrangement. -In that case, he explained, staff would ask that the applicant work with the City to straighten out the issues, but they would not deny the request for him to appear before the Commission. Mayor Daly asked when staff was talking with Mr. Hance about parking on the south side where public storage was now being proposed, how much detail did he provide. He asked if it was just parking or was he also expanding the building: Mr. Hance said it was just parking and the staff repod said it would recommend that it be denied, not on the configuration, it specifically said something other than that. Mr. Hastings said he was not aware of anything like that in wdting. He said at one time there was a request for a U-Haul facility as well and he was confused with all the issues coming forward from Mr. Hance, the issues seemed to be tangled together. Mr. Hance said he did the pre-~le so that he would get a written answer and it was not approved, it was recommended against and he explained it to CalTrans and that was when the deal to the nodh came about. He said Mr. Hastings testified in coud that the City did not recommended parking there. Mr. Hastings dadfled that that hinged on the conditional use permit, this would not be permitted by right to expand an automotive repair facility, and it would require either a rezoning or a conditional use permit. Mr. Tait said it was too premature to vote on the issue tonight, he preferred to wait for the settlement to be finalized and he hoped it would be done by next week. Mayor Daly wondered if the public storage and the abandonment issues would be before Council next week. The abandonment was scheduled for October 17, 2000 and the public storage was scheduled for October 24, 2000. Council Member Tait moved to continue the hearing for one week. City Attorney White asked the applicant if he opposed the continuance. ;- Mr. Knypstra said his problem with continuing the matter, the issue had been continued four previous times, this was the fifth time the issue had been heard. He said he thought Council Member Tait wanted to see a settlement resolution and he said his client was willing to do that. He asked that a schedule be provided that he could meet with staff before the option expired with OCTA. Mr. White said he would commit a member of his staff, along with Ms. Meeks, to meet with Mr. Knypstra that week. Mr. Knypstra wondered if the City could request OCTA to give Mr. Hance an extension, they had refused Mr. Knypstra and Mr. Hance's request. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 16 Council Member Feldhaus asked Mr. Knypstra if it was correct that no agreement was fodhcoming for the sale of the properly to the City. Mr. Knypstra said there was no agreement yet. Council Member Feldhaus said when Mr. Knypstra spoke eadier that he did not. feel his client had to get an agreement with the City to sell the property in order to get the zor~e change. Mr. Knypstra said he still believed that the sale of the land should not be a requirement of the property being rezoned to commercial use. He said that Mr. Hance needed the parking lot and rather than risk losing all his rights and the dght to that portion of the land and having no opportunity of having a parking lot, Mr. Hance was willing to compromise. Legally, Mr. Knypstra said, he believed that the City had no further property right in the northern-southern portion of Vermont Street and that the City did not have a say whether they could ask for money. Council Member Tait reminded Mr. Knypstra that his client offered it for sale and that was how the settlement came to be. Mr. Knypstra said he would agree that at some point Mr. Hance did make an oral statement that he would be willing to sell, he said he was not sure if it was the rest of the land, the remainder of the land or the land for $100,000. He said he wished to show staff the appraisal, the remainder of the property was probably worth $190,000, he said. He said it was a good deal for the City. He said he believed that legally Mr. Hance was not required to sell the land to obtain the rezoning for the parking lot. Council Member Feldhaus asked for clarification regarding Mr. Knypstra's belief that the land at the end of Vermont Street had already been abandoned. Mr. Knypstra said by law, it had already been, he was willing to discuss that with Mr. White or his staff, that the southern portion of that land had already reverted to Mr. Hance, the northern portion of Vermont had already revealed to OCTA, which was part of the option Mr. Hance was seeking to exercise and that none of the land belonged to the City. He said he received a call from the City Attomey's office, they were unable to meet but he did discuss it over the phone with Max Slaughter. He said he disagreed with his analysis of the abandonment issues and had case law that would support his opinion and a Supreme Court case. ~ City Attorney White asked if this was irrelevant since them was already an agreement made and an appraisal done, which would be the determination of the value. Council Member Kring asked if Ms. Gallager (in the audience) had the authority to grant an extension to Mr. Hance. She replied that she did not. Council Member Tait restated his motion to continue the Reclassi~cation public headng for one week, to October 17, 2000, seconded by Mayor Daly. Motion carried unanimously. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 17 C3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2000-129 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Benjamin Fisher, 1110 Tamarisk Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807 AGENT: Anacal Engineering, 1900 East La Palma Avenue #202, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1110 Tamarisk Drive: Property is 1.27 acres located at the northeast corner of Tamarisk Drive and Avenida De Santiago with frontages of 338 feet on the south side of Tamarisk Ddve and 76 feet on the east side of Avenida De Santiago. To establish a 2-lot single-family residential subdivision in the RS-HS-22,000 (SC) (Residential, Single-Family Hillside; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Tentative Parcel Map No. 2000-129 denied (ZA DECISION NO. 2000-35). Approved Negative Declaration. Item of the Zoning Administrator meeting of August 24, 2000. Letter of Appeal submitted by the owner, Benjamin Fisher. Planning Director, Joel Fick, explained that at 2:30 PM that date, staff had received correspondence from the property owner, Benjamin Fisher, indicating that he would not participate in the hearing this date. Mayor Daly asked the City Attorney to review the Councirs options and Mr. White said the Council could hold the hearing and act upon the item based upon the hearing. He said the Council could also open the hearing, enter into the record the correspondence received as well as the staff report, close the headng and act to deny the Parcel Map based on the evidence in the record. Mayor Daly opened the public hearing. Mayor Daly recited that all written material submitted, including the Zoning Administrator's decision, was made a part of the record. Charles Groncy, 6906 Avenida de Santiago spoke in opposition of the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2000-129. Robert Sigur spoke in opposition to the Tentative Parcel Map. Hidden Canyon Estates Homeowners Association representative spoke in opposition. A resident asked if there was an appeal process to which the City Attorney responded that this was the last administrative remedy available to Mr. Fisher, he could technically request a rehearing but since he did not attend and after reading his letter, it was not thought that he would. The City Attorney said the decision would be final 10 days after this meeting. Mayor Daly closed the public hearing. Mayor Daly moved to deny the CEQA finding, mitigated negative declaration and to adopt Resolution No. 2000R-216 to deny Tentative Parcel Map No. 2000R-129, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carded unanimously. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 18 RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-216 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM denying approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2000-129. C4. C4. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2000-00030 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Margaret Yarema, 1212 South Western Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: Brian Yarema, 1212 South Western Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804 LOCATION: 1212 South Western Avenue. Property is 0.27 acre located on the east side of Western Avenue, 165 feet south of the centerline of Ball Road. Reclassi~cation No. 2000-00030 - To reclassify subject property from the RS-A- 43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to the RM-2400 (Residential, Multiple Family) Zone or less intense zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Denied Reclassification No. 2000-00030 (PC2000-103) (5 yes votes, Commissioners Bostwick and Boydstun absent). Negative Declaration approved. Informational item B7 at the meeting of September 19, 2000. Letter of Appeal submitted by owner, Brian Yarema for Margaret Yarema. Mayor Daly opened the public hearing. Bdan Yarema, 1212 Western Avenue, explained he was seeking the reclassi~cation and that the General Plan was amended in 1966 to low/medium density. He said he was designing a four-plex, 936 square foot to 1231 square foot units that would be like condominium units. Greg Hastings presented the staff repeal, which is available in the City Clerk's Office. Council Member Feldhaus asked how long Mr. Yarema owned the property, to which he responded for 25 years. Council Member Feldhaus explained that the properly was in poor condition, the back yard being full of used cars and trash. Mr. Yarema said it was being cleaned up, the trash was from a renter. Mayor Daly, hearing no furlher testimony, closed the public headng. Council Member Tait asked the City Attorney to respond to the issue that the general plan was different from the zoning. City Attorney White said the General Plan always dealt with a range of densities, it was not a guarantee of a particular density, it was a plan or a goal that the City was moving toward. He added that if there was a conflict between zoning and General Plan designation, the zoning controlled what uses could be on the property. Mayor Daly moved to deny the CEQA finding, negative declaration, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 19 Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 2000R-217 for adoption. He said the resolution to deny was based on the analysis and recommendation of the Planning staff as well as the action of the Planning Commission and the strong neighborhood opposition to the rezoning. RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-217 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM finding and determining that a change of zone should not be granted in a cedain area of the City hereinafier described. (Reclassification No. 2000- 00030) Roll call vote: Ayes - 5. Noes - 0. Motion carried. C5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-00380 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2000-00029 VARIANCE NO. 2000-04406 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16128 WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION REQUEST FOR COUNCIL REVIEW: OWNER: Polygon Development c/o David Evans and Associates, Attn: Walter Clendenon, 23382 Mill Creek Drive, #225, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 AGENT: David Evans and Associates, Attn: Walter Clendenon, 23382 Mill Creek Drive, #225, Laguna Hills, CA 92653 LOCATION: 8200 East La Palma Avenue. Property is 16.27 acres located at the nodhwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Weir Canyon Road. General Plan Amendment No. 2000-00380 - To redesignate this property from the Commercial Professional land use designation to the Hillside Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation. Reclassification No. 2000-00029 - To reclassify subject property from the CO(SC) (Commercial, Office and Professional; Scenic Corridor Overlay) and RS- A-43,000(SC) (Residential/Agricultural; Scenic Corridor Oveday) Zones to the RS-5000(SCX Residential, Single-Family; Scenic Corridor Oveday) Zone or less intense zone. Variance No. 2000-04406 - Waiver of (a) minimum lot depth adjacent to aderial highways (approved), (b) minimum lot area (approved), (c) minimum lot width (approved), (d) maximum lot coverage and open space requirements (approved), and (e) maximum structural height (denied), to construct 88 single-family residences and 4 lettered lots. Tentative Tract Map No. 16128 - To establish a 92-1ot detached single-family residential subdivision with 88 residential lots and 4 lettered lots. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended adoption of Exhibit "A" to City Council for General Plan Amendment 2000-0380 (PC2000-105) (6 yes votes, Commissioner Bostwick absent). Granted Reclassi~cation No. 2000-00029 (PC2000-106). Granted in part Variance No. 2000-04406 (PC2000-107). Approved Tentative Tract Map No. 16128. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 20 Approved Waiver of Council Policy No. 542. Approved Negative Declaration. Approved request for Council review. Informational item B8 at the City Council meeting of September 19, 2000. public hearing due to General Plan Amendment 2000-00380. Set for Greg Hastings, Planning Depadment, gave the staff repod, which is available in the City Clerk's Office. Mayor Daly noted that the previous recommendation from staff had been commercial and then to a professional office. He said the Council had spent many months working through a professional office project and he asked if Redevelopment had provided an analysis regarding the change from commercial now to residential. Rob Zur Schmiede, Redevelopment and Property Services Manager, responded that the change in use for the site had been driven by marketing conditions. He said the change came at the request of the developer when they were unable to move forward under the term of the Disposition and Development Agreement with the office project that had been approved. He said the developer requested some time to go through a developer solicitation process to find a substitute development. He said they came to staff with a residential proposal, which was originally in the vicinity of a 112-unit subdivision. He noted they had worked with the neighborhood and indicated that the neighbors were happier with a residential proposal. He said it would also require an amendment to the Redevelopment agreement. Mayor Daly asked if the density and lot size were identical to the residential propedies to the west. Greg Hastings answered on an average, yes; there were some odd shaped lots because of the grade and shape of the properly. Mayor Daly asked if it was the Redevelopment staffs recommendation that residential was the best use for the property. Mr. Zur Schmiede said the City had an agreement in place that required performance on the pad of Polygon to do a commercial project and the Agency would need to decide at a later date, whether or not to approve the contract a~endment to allow the change to move forward. Mayor Daly asked if the commercial project was hopeless or did they need more time to meet the deadlines. He asked if they asked the City for help or did they say they had no interest in pursuing the project. Mr. Zur Schmiede said the conversations staff had with the Polygon Company were that they were pulling back from a number of project sites in California. In addition to this site, the site north of the arena was one that due to the downsizing of the company in California, they were not prepared to move forward at this time. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 21 Mayor Daly reviewed the number of hours the City spent on the review of the original project, placing the land in a redevelopment area, and because the business philosophy of Polygon had changed, he wondered why Council did not have previous notice of the changes. Mayor Daly opened the public headng. Council Member Tait asked if Polygon Development was owned by Lennar and after being assured that it was not, he indicated that he was concerned about a possible conflict of interest. John Killen, representing the landowner Polygon Development, repeated the history of the property. He indicated that when they decided not to proceed with the commercial development, they met with the neighboring property owners. He said the initial proposal was for a higher density project and as it evolved, it cut back from 155 units, a mix of single family detached condominiums smaller lot program and some attached buildings, to 88 single family homes on 5,000 square foot lots. Stan Smith, Project Manager with Olsen Company, handed Council and staff color renditions of the development, which he reviewed. He explained the neighborhoed meetings and the issues that Polygon was willing to add to the project like, a street light off Jennifer Avenue, enhanced landscaping on the west side of Jennifer Avenue and on the nodh side of Old La Palma. Council Member Feldhaus asked with the current elevation, if any of the units would have an excess of 25 feet and Mr. Smith responded that none would be in excess of 25 feet measured to the City standard. Mr. Smith said the only waiver they would request was that Planning Commission requested the developer to add a tot lot into the project and they agreed to the condition. He showed a photograph indicating a tot lot for Yorba Regional Park across the street from Jennifer, where they would install a streetlight and cross walk. He indicated the developer was also granting the City a water well easement where the tot lot would have to go and they did not want a conflict with that in the future and they were asking the Council to consider waiving that tot lot. Council Member McCracken noted they would be moving a great deal of did and she asked how much time was being allocated for compaction. ;- Mr. Smith said the soils repod indicated that they would have to bdng in 200,000 yards of did, they were going to compact it and built it in lifts, compacttrig it to 90% compaction, 10% optimum moisture content as it was being built up. He said the soils repod said if they brought in any clay material or clay like material, they would be requested to wait for six months. He said they would stay away from the clay material. Mayor Daly said the rail line along Asperanza Road impacted some neighborhoods in the area and the proposed development would also be impacted. He asked if the design of the project anticipated the lowering of the track. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 22 Mr. Hastings answered that the project was required to comply with the requirements of sound attenuation and in addition a temporary wall would be built for the project until such time as any off site wall occurred. Mayor Daly asked if the federally funded sound wall project extended that far east. Mr. Hastings said it did go all the way to the edge of the proposed project. John Lower, Public Works, said the track-lowering project was only currently proposed west of Imperial Highway but he said he saw no problems with it. Bob Cook, 8124 E. Woodsboro Avenue, said the residents were very happy with the project and that it was a project in keeping with the residential attitude in the area and they supperted it. The concerns written about to the Planning Commission had been dealt with, he said, and that they could work with the developer. He said they suppoded the waivers being requested and the issue of the tot lot came up in the Planning Commission and they did not have an opportunity to address it. They spoke with the developers about it and felt that the existing lot was adequate and with a signal and cross walk it would be easy to access. Headng no further testimony, Mayor Daly closed the public hearing. Mayor Daly asked staff to comment on the waiver of City requirement that no home be built within 100 feet of a rail line. Greg Hastings, Planning Depadment, said in this proposal there was one house that would be within the 100 feet and staff felt with the appropriate attenuation measures available today, there should be no impact. Mayor Daly asked if that one home would be required to have additional sound attenuation and Mr. Hastings said definitely. Mayor Daly said since it was a Council policy, he wondered why it should be waived, especially in light of the federal government spending $15 million to built a sound wall for sound attenuation. Greg Hastings responded that the sound attenuation ;methods available today probably did not exist when the Council policy was adopted. Discussion took place regarding sound attenuation. Council Member McCracken asked why Planning Commission placed the requirement for a tot lot. Joel Fick, Planning Director, said the issue came up at the meeting and the applicant was willing to accommodate the issue, it was added into a grouping of conditions, specifically condition number five. He suggested the tot lot could be eliminated from that condition. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 23 Council Member Kring moved to approve the CEQA finding, negative declaration, seconded by Council Member Feldhaus. Motion carded unanimously. Council Member Kdng moved to approve Resolution Nos. 2000R-218, 2000R-219, 2000R-220 and remove the tot lot condition from condition number five and to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16128. Motion seconded by Council Member McCracken... RESOLUTION NO. 20004R-218 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an amendment to the land use element of the Anaheim General Plan designated as Amendment No. 2000-00380, Exhibit A RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-219 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM finding and determining that the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Cede should be amended and that the boundaries of cedain zones should be changed RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-220 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM granting Vadance No. 2000-04406 Roll call vote: Ayes - 5. Noes - O. Motion carried. Report on Closed Session Actions: City Attorney White said there was no repod from Closed Session. D. Council Communications: Council Member Tait asked staff for a repod on the status of the crossing light at La Palma by the Rancho Los Palmas neighborhood. He also asked that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Angela King. Council Member McCracken said the City was recognized along with the Anaheim Ads Council for the Veteran's Monument on Anaheim Blvd. She added that she had attended the Southern California Association of Gove~nmenrs Housing Summit annual retreat where annual goals were set. Council Member Feldhaus noted the passing of Clifford Rothrock. He noted the upcoming Holloween parade and invited everyone to attend. CITY OF ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 10, 2000 PAGE 24 Adjournment.: :' No further business to come before the Council, Mayor Daly adjourned the October 10, 2000 Council meeting at 9:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted: Sheryll Schroeder, CMC City Clerk