1995/06/27CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES
June 27, 1995
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
MAYOR: Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Gary Johnson
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGER: John Lower
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS OFFICER: Kristine Thalman
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings
UTILITIES ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER: Edward Alario
DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Mary McCloskey
CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER: Chuck Howell
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 2:20 p.m. on June 23, 1995 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of June 27, 1995 to
order at 3:18 p.m., all Council members being present.
City Manager, James Ruth. Today's workshop will be presented by the Public
Works-Engineering Department who will first introduce the representatives
present from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA).
144: OCTA MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY: John Lower, Traffic and Transportation
Manager, Public Works-Engineering. Present today are Bill Hodge and Nancy
Michali, staff members of OCTA regarding the OCTA Major Investment Study
(MIS).
Mayor Daly welcomed Mr. Hodge and Ms. Michali to the Council Meeting. It has
been a privilege for him to work with them as a member of the OCTA Board of
Directors. They are both outstanding professionals.
Bill Hodge, Director of External Affairs, OCTA. He briefed the MIS which is
under way covering a 28-mile corridor extending from the City of Fullerton
through Anaheim, Santa Aha and down to the Irvine Transportation Center. It
is part of a Federal process to look at the potential for high-capacity
transit or other transportation improvements in that corridor. Their goals
today are to report on the status of the study, get the Council's views on
possible study alternatives and to find ways to keep the Council/City involved
in the Corridor Study. The study ultimately came about as a result of the
passage of Measure M in 1990 wherein $340 million was targeted for high-
capacity transit improvements. At the conclusion of his opening remarks, he
introduced Nancy Michali.
Nancy Michali, OCTA, Manager, Transit Programs. It is important to OCTA staff
to get input from each of the cities so that eventually whatever improvements
CITY OF ANAHE~H~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL H~NUTES - ~une 27~ 1995
they define as a result of the MIS will serve future land use and community
needs. Working from posted charts and graphs (hard copies of which were
submitted and made a part of the record), she explained why the particular
corridor was chosen and then briefed each of the alternatives considered,
i.e., the No Build Alternative (year 2015), TSM Alternative, Enhanced Bus
Alternative, Freeway/Roadway Alternative, Fixed Guideway Alternative #1/#3 (2
alternatives combined), and Fixed Guideway Alternatives #2, #4, #5 and $6. Of
the 10, OCTA would like to take six of the alternatives into the next step and
of the five Fixed Guideway Alternatives, narrow those down to two or three.
On July 25, 1995, the OCTA Board is going to adopt six of the alternatives (to
be called Final Set of Alternatives) followed by six months of detailed
technical analysis. OCTA will be coming back to the cities in early 1996 with
the results of the studies and begin public discussion on the future of Orange
County and the most viable transportation alternatives. A Board decision of
local consensus will be made in June/July 1996. That time line is critical
because the Federal appropriations process is every seven years. If not in
1996, the next opportunity is 2003. OCTA looks forward to the City's comments
on the alternatives.
Council Members then posed questions which were answered by the OCTA
representatives and also the City's Traffic and Transportation Manager, John
Lower. Mr. Lower also explained that by the end of the week, staff will draft
and submit written comments for OCTA consideration at their July 24th meeting.
Staff would like to stress Anaheim's desire to continue with the MIS because
of the possibility of gaining 80% Federal dollars and 20% local for the
preferred alternative selected. For that reason alone, it is important to
continue through completion of the MIS. Alternatives to oppose would be
Alternative #6, the Harbor Boulevard alignment, since it is not compatible
with major improvements the City is constructing on that roadway. Another
alternative that should be dropped is the mixed flow freeway alternative for
the reasons Ms. Michali previously explained.
After additional questions posed by Council, Mayor Daly thanked Mr. Hodge and
Ms. Michali for their informative presentation. The Council looks forward to
further participation in this important process.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session, noting first that
there are no additions to Closed Session items.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items.
The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
Name of case: In re: County of Orange, Debtor, U.S. Bankruptcy
Court, Central District Case No. SA 94-22272; and In re: Orange
County Investment Pools, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Central District
No. SA 94-22273.
2e
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
Name of case: Anaheim Stadium Associates v. City of Anaheim,
Orange County Superior Court Case No. 44-81-74.
3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
CITY OF AIqAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~une 27~ L995
Property: 2000 Gene Autry Way (Anaheim Stadium Property)
Negotiating parties: City of Anaheim and the Golden West Baseball
Co.
Under negotiation: Price and terms
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
Property: (1) 1621 Douglass Rd.; (2) 1133 Homer St. and 1170
Anaheim Blvd.
Negotiating parties: City of Anaheim and County of Orange
Under negotiation: Prices and terms
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
Name of case: (a) City of Garden Grove v. City of Anaheim, Orange
County Superior Court Case No. 94-04-26.
6e
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Agency negotiator: Dave Hill
Employee organization: Unrepresented Employees
RECESS:
Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member
Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:55 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS:
The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:50 p.m.).
INVOCATION:
A moment of silence was observed in lieu of the invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Mayor Pro Tem Feldhaus led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
1195 DECLARATION OF ~ECO~NITION~ A Declaration of Recognition was unanimously
adopted by the City Council recognizing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los
Angeles District, for financial and staff assistance on the Walnut Canyon
Creek Stabilization project.
Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services introduced
the representatives from the Army Corps of Engineers as follows: Mark
Williams, Planning Section Chief, Ruth Villalobos, Environmental Branch Chief,
Jill Zoiss, CAP Manager, Juan Villalobos, Project Manager, Alex Watt,
Environmental Coordinator and Jennifer Eckert, Project Biologist.
Mayor Daly and Council Members thanked the Army Corps of Engineers. The
project came in under budget and ahead of schedule thanks to the Corps.
only did they give of their time and effort, but funded $388,000 of the
$557,000 project.
Not
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,241,649.03 for
the period ending June 23, 1995, in accordance with the 1994-95 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (6:00 p.m.)
3
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (6:02 p.m. )
ADDITIONS ~ THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Arthur Stephenson, 2377 W. Broadway, Anaheim. He received a ticket for having
his vehicle parked on the street. Anaheim Municipal Code (AMC) Section
14.32.25 deals with a 10,000 lb. vehicle. His is not 10,000 lbs. He does
not believe the ticket is fair or legal constitutionally. If the law
pertained to his vehicle, he would pay the fine. It is not a commercial
street but a residential district. He has been parking there for 1 1/2 years
and now that there has been a complaint from the next door neighbor, he
received a ticket. He wants to know why. He asked that the Council look into
the matter relative to its constitutionality.
Mayor Daly. He asked the City Manager and Police Chief to investigate and
report back on the circumstances of the ticket and the City's rationale in
issuing it.
Robert Lender, 2910 W. Ball Rd., Apt. #14, Anaheim. Ail his life he has been
a customer of Southern California Edison and when he recently moved to Anaheim
from Huntington Beach, he was told he would have to provide a $150 deposit for
his utilities. He explained the process he went through, his key issues being
order takers in Utilities doe not run down a series of questions with the
consumer, phone conversations are not taped, and the procedure is not done
like other utilities which he feels protects the consumer's interests.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
A number of people spoke on Item B7. Also input was received on Items Ail and
A34. See discussion under those Items.
MOTION:
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and
resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of June 27,
1995. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR:
On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Zemel, the following items
were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and
recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolution Nos. 95R-116 through 95R-127, both
inclusive, for adoption and offered Ordinance No. 5504 for adoption, and
offered Ordinance No. 5506, 5507 for introduction. Refer to
Resolution/Ordinance Book.
A number of consent calendar items (A9, All, A27, A29, A30, A34, A42, A47,
A48, A50) were discussed and acted upon separately. (See discussion and
action under those items).
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended:
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Lydia Carrizosa for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 17, 1995
CITY OF ANAHEIH~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
b. Claim submitted by Willis Tom McCarter for property damages
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 29,
1995
c. Claim submitted by W.W. Irwin, Inc. for property damages sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 28, 1995
d. Claim submitted by Worklink Innovations for property damages
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 20,
1995
e. Claim submitted by Printak International, Inc. for property damages
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 1,
1994
f. Claim submitted by Mrs. Virginia Briggs for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 5, 1995
g. Claim submitted by Preciliano Cardenas for property damages
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 22,
1995
h. Claim submitted by Viki J. Carr for property damages sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 15, 1995
i. Claim submitted by Katie Drucilla Cisneros c/o John D. Gilbert, Esq.
for property damages and bodily injury sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about February 10, 1995
j. Claim submitted by Enrique Mazon c/o Russell S. Kerr, Esq. for
bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or
about December 15, 1994
A2.
A3.
173: Receiving and filing a Notice of Proposed Major Change in
Regulation and Proposed Change in Rates (Application No. 95-06-002) filed
by Southern California Gas Company with the California Public Utilities
Commission.
117: Receiving and filing a Summary of Investment Transactions for May,
1995.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Telecommunications Policy
Committee meeting held May 18, 1995.
167: Amending the Department of Public Works Capital Improvement
Projects budget for retrofitting the City's traffic signals with red
Light Emitting Diode (LED) balls and arrows, by increasing appropriations
in Revenue Account No. 275-412-3798-1895 (Partnership in Energy Loan) and
Expenditure Account No. 275-412-3798-7851 (Public Works Construction) by
the amount of $290,000 in FY 1994/95. (Continued from the meeting of
6/13/95, Item Al6.)
167= Awarding the red LED traffic signal retrofit project contract to
McCain Traffic Supply for an amount not to exceed $290,000, providing an
option to the Director of the Department of Public Works to authorize
5
C~TY OF ANAHEIH~ C&LIFORN~A - COUNCIL ~INUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
installation of a second phase for an additional amount not to exceed
$290,000 in FY 1995/96 after adequate funds have been appropriated.
A4.
169= Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Ail
American Asphalt, in the amount of $217,298.20 for Lakeview Avenue Street
Improvement; and in the event said iow bidder fails to comply with the
terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as
well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow and second
iow bidders.
A5.
169: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, R.J. Noble
Company, in the amount of $428,843.61 for La Palma Avenue Street
Improvements Grove Street to Kraemer Boulevard; and in the event said low
bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract
to the second Iow bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the
bids of both the low and second low bidders.
A6.
175= Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Mel Smith
Electric, Inc., in the amount of $841,667.13 for Multi-Substation
Improvements, Phase II; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply
with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low
bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the Iow
and second low bidders.
A7.
175: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Pouke &
Steinle, Inc., in the amount of $967,011.71 for Underground District No.
13 Substructure & Electrical (Romneya Drive); and in the event said low
bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract
to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the
bids of both the low and second low bidders.
AS.
164: Approving Contract Change order No. 1, in the amount of $51,617.55
in favor of Griffith Company, for additional over-excavation and imported
soil to complete the Area V Site Improvements.
A9.
159: RESOLUTION NO.- .... A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE WAGE DETERMINATIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, AND DIRECTING THE FILING AND POSTING
OF PREVAILING RATES OF PER DIEM WAGES.
Council Member Zemel requested a two-week continuance on this item in order to
get further information.
City Manager Ruth. This is required by State law. The City has no choice.
To be eligible for any Federal, and in some cases State grants, the City must
pay per diem wages. He confirmed it is only applicable to Public Works
projects where Federal or State funds are received.
MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to continue item A9. for two weeks.
Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Al0. 123: Approving an Agreement with Disney Development Company for
construction of improvements at the intersection of Ball Road and Anaheim
Boulevard; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said
Agreement. (Continued from the meetings of June 13, 1995, Item Al0, and
June 20, 1995, Item A3.)
6
C~TY OF ANAHE~H~ C~LIFOI~I~ - COUNCIL ~NUTES - ~un~ 27~ ~99~
All. 169: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Griffith
Company, in the amount of $5,374,143.85 for Anaheim Boulevard/Ball Road
to Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard/Ball Road Intersection
Improvements; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the
terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second iow bidder, as
well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the iow and second
iow bidders. (Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A4.)
Chris Larson, Pouk & Steinle. Last week, (see minutes of 6/20/95), the
subject award of bid was discussed and several discrepancies brought to the
Council's attention. No matter what the outcome may be, he is certain it will
be best for the City. He thanked the Council for continuing the matter one
week and taking the time to look into it in greater depth.
City Manager Ruth. After last week's meeting and discussion on this award of
bid, staff further investigated the situation, reviewed the codes, and came to
the same conclusion based on their analysis and review of the bids and
discussion with the City Attorney that the bid should be awarded to Griffith
Company as recommended.
Allen Perkovich, Griffith Company. On behalf of Griffith, they are excited
about starting the contract. Tonight he is present supported by many of the
subcontractors listed and who will be working with them. They assembled what
he considers a fine bid package and the City will be very happy with their
work. They are working on a project in the City currently at Harbor and
LaPalma. They have a recycling operation off East Street and the 91 Freeway.
Griffith Company is looking forward to continuing business with the City.
Later in the meeting, Council Member Feldhaus stated he received a memo that
staff has not changed its position relative to the award of bid. He has not
changed his position either. The bid supplement states that until the award
is made, the City has the right to reject any or all bids and to waive
technical errors if to do so is deemed in the best interest of the City. He
feels a discrepancy of this nature (writing seven hundred and two instead of
seven dollars and two cents) since the end result or total was correct, is not
significant and will save the citizens of Anaheim $207,000. He would like to
award this project of the lowest bidder, Pouk & Steinle. He is going to make
a motion to that effect.
City Attorney White suggested that the motion be, finding and determining that
the firm of Pouk & Steinle is, in fact, the lowest responsible bidder upon
waiving the irregularities in the bids of both the low and second bidder and
finding that such irregularities are technical in nature and do not affect the
fairness in the proceedings by such waiver and based thereon, Council
determines to award the contract to the firm of Pouk & Steinle as the lowest
responsible bidder.
Gary Johnson, Public Works Director and City Engineer. If the Council chooses
to award to Pouk & Steinle as iow bidder, the bid they submitted totalled
$5,202,116.17. Staff believes, because there were some errors made in the
bid, that the bid total is $5,197,045.67 and recommends that number be used as
the iow bid.
MOTION. Council Member Feldhaus moved that the subject bid be awarded to Pouk
& Steinle with the provisions as articulated by the City Attorney, the bid
total being $5,197,045.67. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. Mayor
Daly voted No. MOTION CARRIED.
C~TY OF ANAHEI~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
Mayor Daly. He opposed the motion based on the recommendation of professional
City staff, i.e., the Public Works Director and the City Attorney.
Council Member Tait. He believes the error was minor in nature and the intent
was clear in the Pouk & Steinle bid; Council Member Feldhaus concurred.
Al2. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with Boyle Engineering
Corporation at a cost not to exceed $42,096 for construction engineering
services for the Anaheim Stadium AMTRAK/Commuter Rail Station
improvements project.
Al3. 123: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the addendum to the
First Amendment to an Agreement with JHK & Associates, which modifies the
contract cost table, in an amount not to exceed $1,073,478.08 for
consultant services to design, inspect and implement two Caltrans-funded
Traffic Systems Management projects along the SR91 Freeway/La Palma
Avenue Corridor.
A14. 123: Approving and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Local
Agency-State Agreement for Federal-Aid Project No. 12-5055 program
Supplement No. 065 Revision 1.
Al5. 123: Approving Cooperative Agreement No. C-95-965 between the City and
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City.
A16. 123: Approving and Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
District Agreement Number 12-156 A1 with the State of California for
right-of-way acquisition on the I-5 Freeway widening project.
Al7. 106: Approving the adjustment to the Public Works Department's fiscal
year 1994-95 Capital Improvement Budget in the amount of $230,289.
Al8. 000: ORDINANCE NO. 5506 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING CHAPTER 10.12 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, AND
PROPOSED RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNTS OF DEPOSITS FOR SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION, STREET SWEEPING AND WASTE WATER COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
SERVICES.
000: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-115: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM CONCERNING SANITATION SERVICES DEPOSITS.
Resolution to be acted on in two weeks along with adoption of the Ordinance.
Al9. 132: ORDINANCE NO. 5507 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION .040 OF SECTION 10.10.060 OF CHAPTER 10.10 OF
TITLE 10 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FREQUENCY OF SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION.
A20. 160: Accepting the bid of Absolute Asphalt, in an amount not to exceed
$43,750 for an estimated 180,000 pounds of 9078 asphalt sealant, for a
period of one year beginning July 1995, in accordance with Bid ~5394.
160: Accepting the bid of Koch Materials Company, in an amount not to
exceed $31,250 for an estimated 165 tons of SS-iH sealant, and ten tons
of L.M.C.R.S. sealant, including an estimated 60 hours of spreading
charges, for a period of one year beginning July 1995, in accordance with
Bid ~5394.
8
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
A21. 160: Accepting the low bid of Ken Thompson, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $300,000 for sewer and storm drain repair for a period of one year
commencing July 1, 1995, with the option to renew for an additional three
years, in accordance with Bid $5395.
A22. 160= Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Purchase Order to
Anacomp, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for a period of one
year beginning july 1, 1995, for microfiche services, in accordance with
Bid $5225.
A23. 160~ Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to
issue a Purchase Order, to Roto Industries, in an amount not to exceed
$130,000 for an estimated 1,200 sixty-gallon containers and 1,175 one
hundred-gallon containers, on an "as needed" basis for a one year period
beginning July 1, 1995, with two one year optional extensions.
A24. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to
issue a Purchase order to R.J. Noble Company, in an amount not to exceed
$1,500,000 for asphalt concrete, for a period of one year beginning July
1, 1995, with options to renew for up to three one year periods.
A25. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Change Order to ASSI
Security, Inc., for an additional $2,535 for three additional controllers
bringing the total amount of the purchase to $24,485 for the upgrade of
the security access card system at the Police Department, in accordance
with Bid ~5373.
A26. 123: To consider the execution of an Assignment and Assumption Agreement
to reflect the corrected corporate name (from Elite Maintenance
Services/Coast Maintenance Services to Ponderosa, Inc., dba United
Building Services), effective July 1, 1995.
City Manager Ruth. Staff is requesting that Item A26. be withdrawn at this
time. A merger is being considered by the two firms which does not seem to be
working out.
This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
A27. 128= Approving the FY 1994/95 write-off of uncollectible miscellaneous
and paramedics accounts receivable totalling $609,107.07 for the Finance
Department.
City Attorney White confirmed for Council Member Tait, who questioned both
Item A27 and Item A42 and also for the public's edification, a write-off does
not mean the City is forgiving the debt and will not continue to pursue it.
It is only an accounting mechanism. Even after the debt is written off, the
City typically obtains judgements and records those in Southern California
Counties so that perhaps in six months or even in six years, they often
receive frantic phone calls from people who are about to buy or sell a home or
business but told there is an outstanding lien and want to know what to do to
clear it up. It is then they are informed they have to make payment for that
outstanding debt.
A28. 150~ ORDINANCE NO. 5504: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING
SECTION 13.08.100 OF CHAPTER 13.08 OF TITLE 13 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC PARKS. (Introduced at the meeting of June 20,
1995, Item A13.)
C~TY OF ANAHEI~ C&LIFORN~A - COUNCIL ~INUTE8 - ~une 27, ~995
A29. 117: Approving the 1995/96 Statement of Investment Policy, Strategy and
Goals as submitted by the City Treasurer. (Continued from the meeting of
June 20, 1995, Item AS.)
Council Member Zemel. His concern last week was that the Investment
Commission was not yet in place and he would like them to go through the
Investment Policy. The Treasurer did meet with him in the interim. He would
like the matter brought back to the Council in 90 days for review.
This item was approved by the Council; staff to submit a report in 90 days.
A30. 114: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-116: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING A CITY COUNCIL POLICY REGARDING SPECIAL EVENT
FINANCIAL SUPPORT.
Council Member Feldhaus. He recommends three changes in the proposed
resolution as follows: That item a. be eliminated entirely, that item d. be
worded to insure that in-kind donations of goods or services will be equal to
the amount requested of the City and in h. that "by the City Council" be added
between the words 4eterm£ned and to.
Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. Answering
the Mayor, he stated he has no problem eliminating item a. or with the changes
suggested for items d. and h.
City Attorney White. He recommended the following amendment to the wording in
item d. to accomplish the request of Council Member Feldhaus .... .
identified in an amount that approximates, to the extent reasonably feasible
. "between the words described and to.
Council Member Feldhaus was agreeable to the proposed wording.
MOTION. Council Member Feldhaus moved that the foregoing changes as
articulated be approved. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
The Resolution was adopted with the changes as recommended.
A31. 123: Approving an Agreement with Pacific Bell, Pacific Telesis Company,
for tree pruning as a result of the upgrading and rebuilding of Pacific's
telecommunications broadband network (replacing their existing phone
lines with a fiberoptics system) throughout the City of Anaheim.
A32. 123: Approving a License Agreement with Feedback Foundation, Inc., to
utilize Brookhurst Community Center on a shared basis to provide a
comprehensive meal program, including recreational activities and social
services to senior citizens through June 30, 1996.
A33. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with Major League
Softball, Incorporated, dated June 29, 1993 for the period of July 1,
1995 through June 30, 1996.
A34. 123: Approving a License Agreement with Los Angeles SMSA Limited
Partnership (AirTouch Cellular) for the use of a portion of Riverdale
Park for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a cellular antenna
site; and instructing the City Manager to sign the forthcoming mitigation
agreement letter when provided by AirTouch Cellular. (Continued from the
meeting of June 6, 1995, Item A23.)
10
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
Jeff Kirsch, 2661W. Palais, Anaheim. If the agreement is going to be
approved, he hopes there is the maximum amount of money to maintain the
building.
Council Member Zemel. He reiterated his opposition to installing any antennas
such as the one proposed in any of the City's parkland. He notes that the
agreement was rewritten but his concern is doing it in the first place. He
will be voting no and is encouraging the Council to join him.
Council Member Zemel moved that the proposed license agreement with AirTouch
Cellular be denied. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion for purposes of
discussion.
Before further action, City Manager Ruth explained that staff tried to address
some of the concerns expressed at the meeting of June 6, 1995 (see minutes
that date). They got an additional $6,000 contribution and the term changed
from 25 years to 10 years with a five-year option.
Council Member Tait. He would like to hear from a representative of AirTouch.
He could support the agreement but without the five-year option and asked if
that would be acceptable.
Mr. John Petke, Planning Associates, speaking for AirTouch, answered yes.
Council member Lopez. He is familiar with the area and does not see any
problem with an antenna being installed in the same location as the Fire
Department antenna. It will not have any negative impact from any direction.
He is in favor and agrees with the ten-year term.
City Manager Ruth. He wants to be certain it is understood that all other
terms and conditions will remain the same; Mr. Petke stated that is
understood.
MOTION. Council Member Tait moved to approve the subject License Agreement
with the amendment to the term of the agreement to ten years only with all
other terms and conditions remaining the same. Council Member Feldhaus
seconded the motion.
Council Member Zemel voted no. MOTION CARRIED.
A35. 123: Waiving Council Policy 401, and authorizing an Agreement with Harte
Enterprises, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for general
business contract programming services. (Community Development
Department.)
A36. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-117: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT TITLES
II-A/II-C MASTER SUBGRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE TERM OF JULY 1, 1995 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1998.
A37. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-118: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT TITLE III
MASTER SUBGRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA FOR THE TERM OF JULY 1, 1995 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1998.
A38. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-119: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS MORE
T~AN TWO YEARS OLD. (Stadium documents.)
11
C~TY OF ANAHE~ C&L[FORNIA - COUNCIL HINUTES - ~une 27~ ~995
A39. 124: Approving the FY 1994/95 write-off of uncollectible tenant accounts
receivable for the Anaheim Convention Center totalling $640.41, and for
the Stadium totalling $37,012.61.
A40. 123: Approving the Memorandum of Understanding with the Women's
Transitional Living Center, Inc., to provide temporary shelter,
education, open communication channels, and 24-hour telephone response to
police; and authorizing the Chief of Police to execute said Memorandum of
Understanding annually provided that no changes are made to the terms and
conditions of the MOU.
A41. 123: Approving an Agreement with the California Department of Forestry
to provide wildland fire-protection services for 3,004 acres of land in
the Gypsum and Coal Canyons.
123: Approving the First Amendment to Agreement with the Irvine Company
acknowledging compliance with Section 4.3 of the Mountain Park Community
Development Agreement requiring reimbursement of all costs associated
with wildland fire-protection needs.
123: Increasing revenue and expenditure appropriations to the Fire
Department, in the amount of $2,637.
Council Member Tait abstained on this Item.
A42. 128: Approving the Fiscal Year 94/95 write-off of uncollectible accounts
totalling $899,208.
A43. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-120: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RULE 21 OF THE RATES, RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
THE SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICITY AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION
NO. 71R-478 AND MOST RECENTLY AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 95R-64.
A44. 123: Amending the existing Agreement with Geonex Vernon Graphics for a
Drawing Conversion project to extend the term to December 30, 1995.
A45. 123: Approving an Attorney Services Agreement with Donald H. Maynor, a
Professional Law Corporation.
A46. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-121: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-19 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT.
(Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-122: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-22 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT.
(Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-123: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-21 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS MIDDLE MANAGEMENT.
(Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-124: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-20 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS SUPERVISORY. (Continued
from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
12
CITY OF ANAHEIH~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL ~INUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-125: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-18 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS PROFESSIONAL. (Continued
from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item Ag.)
153= RESOLUTION NO. 95R-126: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS
ASSIGNED TO THE I.B.E.W. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
LOCAL 47. (Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-127= A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 91R-125 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES
OF COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS UNREPRESENTED
PART-TIME. (Continued from the meeting of June 20, 1995, Item A9.)
A47. 153: Approving the appointment of William G. Sweeney to the position of
Finance Director, effective June 30, 1995.
Council Member Lopez. The City Manager has made a recommendation to the
Council to appoint Mr. Sweeney the City's Finance Director and several
citizens have concurred with his findings; however, he (Lopez) cannot support
the recommendation. He has no animosity towards Mr. Sweeney. He is a fine
person and a fine employee but he does not believe he has the qualifications
for the position. Mr. Sweeney received a Bachelors Degree in Journalism in
1977 and no other formal education since 1980. If he was applying for the
same position in any City whether in California or the United States, it would
require a Masters or Doctorate in Accounting, Finance or related field. He
feels it is City Manager Ruth's desire to place Mr. Sweeney in the position.
Other individuals in house, he feels, had better qualifications but the
Council was only given the one resume. He is concerned if Mr. Sweeney is
appointed, it will send the message that although certain positions require
certain educational requirements, the system can be circumvented if you know
the City Manager. As a result of the Orange County bankruptcy, Anaheim lost
$19-20 million which makes it even more important that they hire an individual
who has the proper qualifications to avoid the criticism that they have made
an exception to the rule.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to appoint Mr. William J. Sweeney Finance Director
of the City of Anaheim. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. Council
Member Lopez voted No. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Daly. He would like to take the opportunity to congratulate Mr. Sweeney
on his appointment. He understands that Mr. Sweeney will also retain the
responsibility for the preparation of the City budget which has been his for
the last few years.
City Manager Ruth. He is very proud of the appointment of Mr. Sweeney as
Finance Director and takes strong exception to Council Member Lopez' inference
that he was appointed because he (Ruth) knew him. He knows a lot of people
and they will never get a recommendation from him unless they are qualified to
do the job. The first four years when Mr. Sweeney was at the Stadium, he
demonstrated extraordinary skills and ability in the area of finance and
administration. He took over the City budget at a very difficult time when
the Budget Officer left right before preparation of the budget three years
ago. His is one of the most professional budget presentations in the State of
California. He has a great grasp for the finances of the City and has worked
extremely well with the Budget Advisory Commission. He went through a
competitive process for the position and the outside panel recommended Mr.
13
C~TY OF ANAHE~H~ CALiFORNiA - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
Sweeney very highly and felt without reservation he could do the job. He does
not want to see Mr. Sweeney appointed with a cloud. He is very proud of the
appointment, will stand by it and will guarantee Mr. Sweeney will do an
outstanding job as the Finance Director for the City.
A48. 153: Staff recommended Supporting AB 1785 concerning utility service to
tenants, and communicate this position to appropriate legislative
representatives in Sacramento.
Council Member Zemel. Contrary to staff's recommendation, he wants the
Council to take a position of opposition to AB1785 sending the message that
the Council by doing so is supporting property rights. He does not think a
landlord should have to bear the brunt of the responsibility for a tenant who
does not pay his Utility bill.
MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to reverse the staff recommendation and
instead vote to support AB1785. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, extensive discussion and questioning followed with
input from Kristine Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer and Chuck
Howell, Customer Service Manager, Public Utilities Department who respectively
explained the provisions of the Bill and the rationale for staff's
recommendation and also why the Utilities Department believes the Bill will be
of benefit to their collection efforts in delinquent cases along with a
detailed explanation of the current process and what the change will bring
about.
Kristine Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer. The Bill was brought
to the City Attorney's attention by the Utilities Department because of the
impact to the Department's writeoff of bad debt. The bad debt has decreased
as a result of the new policy that was implemented by the Council in November,
1992 which required a deposit for residential customers. The Bill would not
allow the City to obtain the landlord's name as the name of record which could
cause a substantial increase in the bad debt.
Chuck Howell, Customer Service Manager. The City's present policy on deposits
is to require both residential and commercial customers to have a deposit on
record of two times their bill which is exactly in line with AB1785. If the
tenant has service in his/her name and the tenant leaves the area, Utilities
does not hold the landlord responsible. If the landlord has the service to
that address in his name and the tenant leaves, they do go back to the
landlord. Utilities has the right to ask the landlord to have the service
placed in his/her name prior to the new tenant. As far as he knows, the
Edison Company follows the same procedure. They do not hold the landlord
responsible for the previous tenant, but the next bill will be in the
landlord's name. AB1785 will not allow Utilities to put the service in the
landlord's name in between tenants which would severely impact Utilities since
they have agreements with participating apartment owners to leave service in
their name so they will not have to go through a complete change.
Mayor Daly. His concern revolves around the provision of the Bill where State
government is going to dictate to the City the maximum deposit the City can
charge for customers of the Utilities Department which may cost the City
money. He understands the concern about making landlords responsible for bad
debts of their tenants, but he needs to know what the impact of the Bill is on
the City.
14
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27v 1995
Ed Alario, Assistant General Manager-Water Services, Public Utilities
Department. Relative to Council Member Zemel's comments, there is no way the
Utilities holds the landlord responsible -- it is only during the time that
the landlord is using that energy or water to clean or show a unit. Also, a
new tenant will not be precluded from signing on. If they have a letter from
another utility saying that they have paid satisfactorily in the past, there
will be no deposit. It is the deposit issue they have the most problem with
in the Bill and also the State telling them what to do and how to run their
business.
Mayor Daly. Before he votes on the matter, he reiterated if the State is
going to tell the City how to run its billing procedures resulting in a cost
to the City, he needs to know what the cost will be.
Kristine Thalman. As she understands, the Bill may be scheduled for action by
the Assembly on July 5, 1995.
Council Member Tait. If the matter is continued, it appears they will miss
the vote date in the Assembly. He is prepared to vote on the matter now. He
does not think it will cost the City any money and he does not see the
fairness in holding the landlord responsible for a delinquent tenant's bill.
He will support the Brewer Bill.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to continue action relative to AB1785 for two weeks
to give an opportunity to know what the impact on the City will be. Council
Member Lopez seconded the motion. The motion failed to carry by the following
vote: AYES: Lopez, Daly. NO: Tait, Zemel, Feldhaus.
A vote was then taken on the motion made by Council Member Zemel, seconded by
Council Member Tait to reverse staff's recommendation and that the Council
instead oppose AB1785. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES:
Tait, Zemel, Feldhaus. NO: Lopez, Daly.
Mayor Daly. It would still be helpful to provide the Council with the
additional information he requested for future reference.
A49. 153: Reviewing the need for continuing the Sixth Proclamation of the
Existence of a Local Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency
Services on January 3, 1995, concerning the Santiago Landslide and
Pegasus Landslide in the City of Anaheim; and taking no action to
terminate the local emergency at this time.
A50. 153: RESOLUTION NO. - .... A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, GENERAL UNIT, AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
AMENDING ARTICLE 59 - CERTIFICATION PAY.
Council Member Tait posed questions to staff relative to the certification
procedures which were answered by Jack Kudron, Superintendent, Parks and Golf
at the conclusion of which Council Member Tait stated he would like an
opportunity to look into the matter further.
MOTION. Council Member Tait moved to continue this item for two weeks.
Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A51. 105: Approving an Agreement with the Orange County Transportation
Authority, in an amount not to exceed $31,000 to provide transportation
15
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
services to senior citizens participating in the Project TLC lunch
programs and Senior Day Care Center.
A52. 114= Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held June 13,
1995.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 95R-95R-116 through 95R-127, for adoption=
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS= Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS= None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 95R-116 through 95R-127, duly passed and
adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5504 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
None
None
Mayor Daly declared Ordinance No. 5504 duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
A53. 105= APPOINTMENT TO FILL THE PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD VACANCY:
Appointment to the Public Library Board to fill the unscheduled vacancy
of Barbara Whorton (term ending 6/30/95). (Continued from the meetings
of May 9, 1995, Item A20, and May 23, 1995, Item A22.)
Council Member Feldhaus nominated Butt Fink; Council Member Lopez nominated
Patricia Tafolla.
MOTION. On motion by Mayor Daly seconded by Council Member Zemel, nominations
were closed. MOTION CARRIED.
Before voting on the nominees, Mayor Daly stated he does not know if the
Charter limits the number of members on the Library Board to five positions or
not. It is the feeling of the majority of the Board Members with the recent
activism of the public in the library system, that they may want to expand the
Board from five to seven members to accommodate all the talent interested in
serving. Mr. Fink and Mrs. Tafolla are both very well qualified and he would
not like to lose either one.
The City Attorney confirmed that, in fact, the City Charter does limit members
on the Library Board to five.
City Attorney White then clarified that the voting rules require not less than
three yes votes for an appointment. Abstentions do not count as a yes vote.
The person receiving the highest number of yes votes will be determined
appointed. The Council can vote yes for more than one.
A roll call vote was then taken on the nominees in the order in which they
were nominated:
Mr. Burt Fink - Ayes: Feldhaus, Daly
No: Lopez
Abstain: Tait, Zemel
16
CITY OF ANAHEIH, CALIFORNI& - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - June 2?, ~995
Mrs. Patricia Tafolla - Ayes: Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Daly
Abstain: Feldhaus
Mrs. Patricia Tafolla was thereupon appointed to the Library Board for the
term ending June 30, 1999.
A54. 105. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS-APPOINTMENT/REAPPOINTMENT TO TERMS EXPIRING JUNE
30, 1995
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/99~
(Holguin, Pinson)
COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/99~
(Cason, Hibbard, Sofia)
HOUSING COMMISSION FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/99~
(Cook, Garda)
PLANNING COMMISSION FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/99:
(Caldwell, Mayer)
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/99:
(Mejia, White)
SENIOR CITIZEN COMMISSION FOR NEW TERMS EXPIRING 6/30/98~
(Atwell, Willing)
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to continue appointments/reappointments to the
subject Boards and Commissions to July 11, 1995. Council Member Zemel
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A55. 114: Appointing a Representative for Anaheim to District 9, Orange
County Water District Board of Directors, to the unexpired term ending
November 29, 1996. (Continued from the meetings of June 6, 1995, Item
A34, and June 20, 1995, Item A17.)
Mayor Daly nominated Mr. Dale Stanton to the Orange County Water District
Board of Directors. Mr. Stanton is currently a member of the City's Public
Utilities Board and has the necessary experience in water issues that are
important to the community; Council Member Feldhaus nominated Council Member
Zemel.
MOTION. On motion by Mayor Daly seconded by Council Member Zemel, nominations
were closed. MOTION CARRIED.
A roll call vote was then taken on the nominees in the order of nomination.
Mr. Dale Stanton - Ayes: Feldhaus, Daly
Noes: Lopez
Abstain: Tait, Zemel
Council Member Zemel - Ayes: .Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus
Noes: Daly
17
C~TY OF ANAHE~ C&L~FORN~& - COUNCIL HINUTES - ~une 27~ ~995
Council Member Zemel was thereupon appointed Representative for Anaheim to
District 9, Orange County Water District Board of Directors for the unexpired
term ending November 29, 1996.
ITEMS B1 - B8 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MRRTING OF JUNE 12, 1995
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JULY 4r 1995
B1.
179: VARIANCE NO. 4273 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: DISNEY GOALS, INC., 888 S. West St., Ste, 102, Anaheim, CA 92803
AGENT: LIAM THORNTON C/O DISNEY DEVELOPMENT CO., 500 S. Buena Vista
St., Burbank, CA 91521-6400
LOCATION: 300 W. Lincoln Avenue (Anaheim Community Ice Rink). Property
is approximately 3.17 acres located at the southwest corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Clementine Street and further described as 300 West Lincoln
Avenue.
Waiver of minimum landscaping of required yard areas in conjunction with
a previously approved ice rink.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 4273 GRANTED (PC95-65) with the added condition that a
minimum of five trees shall be planted along the northwesterly side of
the property (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1918 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: JERICO VENTURES, INC., 903 E. Alosta, Ste. D, Glendora, CA 91740
AGENT: JEFF READ, 500 N. State College, $100, Orange, CA 92668;
James M. Mock, 329 S. Vine Street, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 928 East Vermont Avenue. Property is approximately 1.59 acres
located on the south side of Vermont Avenue approximately 635 feet west
of the centerline of East Street.
Petitioner requests an amendment to an existing conditional use permit to
permit a contractor's storage yard.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved amendment to CUP NO. 1918 to permit a contractor's storage yard
(PC95-66) (6 yes votes, i absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3606 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: LEDERER ANAHEIM LTD., 1990 Westwood Blvd., 3rd Floor, Los
Angeles, CA 90025
AGENT: JOHN SCHROEDER, 1440 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately 14.74
acres located north and east of the northeast corner of Cerritos Avenue
and Anaheim Boulevard.
Petitioner requests an amendment or deletion of a condition of approval
pertaining to the time limitation of an existing restaurant with on-
premise sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved amendment to conditions of approval for CUP NO. 3606 (to expire
on June 14, 1996) (PC95-67) (5 yes votes, 1 abstained, and 1 absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B4. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3770 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: GRADY HANSHAW, 2639 N. Grand Ave., Suite 255, Santa Ana, CA
92701
18
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
AGENT: PAUL RUSSAUAGE, 9762 Fairtide, Huntington Beach, CA 92646
LOCATION: 519 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 0.72
acre located at the northwest corner of Orange Avenue and Brookhurst
Street.
To permit the expansion of an existing convenience market.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3770 GRANTED (PC95-68) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager explained for the Mayor relative to
landscaping and signage, there is no provision for any upgrades. They were in
conformance with the original requirements when the property was developed.
Since this was an expansion with no alcohol sales involved, the Planning
Commission did not feel there was a reason to require additional landscaping
and signage, which is in good condition, to be brought up to current
requirements. There have been no code enforcement problems relating to the
property.
B5.
B6.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3764 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: KONIER FAMILY LOVING TRUST, Attn: B.L. Konier, 1705 Claudina
Way, Anaheim, CA 92668
AGENT: DAN KRUSE, 701 S. Parker St., Suite 1000, Orange, CA 92668
LOCATION: 801 East Ball Road. Property is approximately 0.44 acre
located on the north side of Ball road and approximately 515 feet west of
the centerline of Lewis Street.
To permit an automotive vehicle repair facility with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3764 GRANTED (PC95-69) (6 yes votes, I absent).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3768 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP., Attn: Charles b. Winn, 2201 Seal
Beach, CA 90740-8250
AGENT: GARY M. GRAUMANN, P.O. Box 7458, Menlo Park, CA 94026
LOCATION: 3370 East La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 12.62
acres located on the south side of la palma Avenue and approximately
1,308 feet west of the centerline of Grove Street.
To permit industrially-related sales in conjunction with a proposed
144,000-square foot electronics sales facility with waiver of minimum
landscape requirements.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3768 GRANTED, IN PART, with the added condition that the
petitioner shall submit revised landscape plans (PC95-70) (6 yes votes,
i absent).
Denied waiver of code requirement.
Negative Declaration previously approved.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS:
B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3680 - SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE AND FINAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW:
REQUESTED BY: ELI HOME, INC., 140 South Imperial Hwy., Anaheim, CA
92806
19
C~TY OF A,NAHE~M~ CALiFORNiA - COUNCIL M~NUTES - ~une 27~ ~995
LOCATION: 100 South Canyon Crest Drive.
Petitioner requests a substantial conformance determination and final
site plan review for Conditional Use Permit No. 3680 (to permit a group
home for abused children and their mothers).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined plans are in substantial conformance with previously approved
plans and approved landscape and wall plans as submitted.
The following people spoke to this item under Public Comments on Agenda Items
at the beginning of the Council Meeting. Their comments are summarized=
Louise Van Brookhazen, 257 S. Glassell, Orange. She first referred to
articles on the Eli Home in the Register which she feels have harmed the
community. She represents a large group of concerned citizens called Voices
for the Children who are speaking in support of one non-profit organization
who cares about the community and for its hurting children. She is asking the
City Council to make a public statement to the press on behalf of the Eli Home
and the proposed Anaheim Hills shelter.
Mike Edmonston, 744 Fairway lane, Anaheim representing the Eli Home Board of
Directors. The Eli Home has been vindicated by the State Attorney General's
Office and should be allowed to proceed with their project without further
delay or needless restrictions.
Sheila Herrell, 256 Calle Diaz, Anaheim. The Galloways have been cleared of
all charges by the State Attorney General's Office but the memories remain.
This should never have been a political issue, but Council Member Lopez, by
calling for an investigation, made it a political issue.
Larry Ritter, 191 Possum Hollow, Anaheim. Eli Home should not be able to
occupy the building until it is ready for occupancy with all codes met.
Proponents keep trying to change the issue from one of meeting building codes
to one of caring for children.
Gene Secrest, 121 S. Canyon Crest, Anaheim. The Council is being asked to
alter the municipal code and Resolution 94R-243. He recommends the Council
remove Item B7. from the agenda and reschedule it for a Public Hearing.
Jeanie Arvil, Canyon Crest Drive, Anaheim. Since the money has been raised by
Eli Home it should be used to enhance the home and do the things they said
would be done.
April Holstein, 161 S. Canyon Crest Drive, Anaheim. This item should be
removed from tonight's agenda. They were not notified it was going to take
place. They have prepared a short video from previous Council Meetings of the
promises made by the Galloway's, Mr. Farano and the Eli home people and what
they said they were going to do.
Mary McCloskey, Deputy Planning Director. The item before the Council today
reflects the Planning Commission's finding that the Eli Home structure is
substantially in conformance with the plans previously approved as well as
final approval to the site plan, floor plan and elevation plan which did
include some interior and exterior modifications. She then summarized the
main changes. (See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated June 12,
1995.)
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager and Mrs. McCloskey then answered
questions posed by Council Member Zemel confirming that the process of
20
C~TY OF ANAHEIH~ CALiFORNiA - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
determining if plans are in substantial conformance is routine and happens in
approximately 20% of proposed projects. In this case, a condition of the CUP
required review by the Planning Commission. No member of staff objected and
no member of the Planning Commission voted no. The item is a Report and
Recommendation item and does not require a Public Hearing. Staff did notify
Mr. Secrest as a courtesy once prior to May 31 and then again within a week
prior to June 12, 1995 which was the actual Planning Commission hearing date.
The item was on the Planning Commission agenda but it was not a noticed Public
Hearing.
Mary McCloskey then reported that Eli Home has not yet occupied the site but
they are in the process of meeting the many conditions of approval required
regarding landscaping, irrigation and the block wall. Many of the conditions
will apply after the activity has commenced. At present, there is nothing
outstanding on the property and the building permit has been issued on the
site. Relative to noticing requirements, on a Report and Recommendation item,
there are none, but as a courtesy staff did contact the neighborhood
representative who they were told was the spokesman, Mr. Gene Secrest. They
talked to him personally once prior to May 31 and then left a message on his
answering machine one week before the hearing. It was not a Public Hearing
but a public meeting.
City Attorney White. The video Mrs. Holstein wanted to show was the Planning
Commission or City Council meeting and the statements that were made which
will be reflected in the minutes or in the resolution itself approving the
CUP. The Council has the minutes of all the previous meetings and any
pertinent statements should be in the minutes. He does not believe it is
essential to see videos of previous Council meetings.
Council Member Zemel. The action of finding something in substantial
conformance is basically a ministerial duty -- it is the approval of an
adjustment to a previously approved item and not something the Council needs
to hear evidence on again.
Mary McCloskey. When the Council conditions a project, the right is given for
staff to determine substantial conformance, the key word being substantial.
This project was taken back to the Planning Commission to clarify their intent
and staff's basis for recommendation of approval. There was no change in
intensity of the use itself. The numbers of people remain the same and the
structure itself relative to single family is the same. They did not feel
there was an intensification of the use to require a new Public Hearing. A
couple of modifications were made to the layout of the floor plan and staff
wanted to make sure that was within the intent of the Planning Commission
approval.
City Attorney White. This is normal procedure. He served as Counsel to the
Planning Commission for a number of years and in almost every case, a
condition is imposed that development proceed in substantial conformity to the
plans presented to assure somebody does not present plans for one thing and
subsequently build something different. Minor modifications are not unusual.
When modified plans are submitted, staff does not take it upon themselves to
ascertain in their own mind whether they are conforming or not to the
intention of the Council or Planning Commission's approval but bring those
back as a Report and Recommendation item listed on a public agenda.
Council Member Zemel. He asked the City Attorney if on every adjustment to a
plan there was a noticed Public Hearing, in his opinion, how often would they
have to have such a hearing.
21
C~TY OF ANAHEI~ CALiFORNiA - COUNCIL ~INUTE8 - ~une 27~ L995
City Attorney White. There would be hundreds if not thousands; Mrs. McCloskey
also confirmed for Council Member Zemel that most projects do have slight
changes and that is why they indicate substantial conformity. Relative to the
roof, they are going to put a new composition shingle roof on the home as
indicated on the plan. At one point there was discussion about a metal roof,
but the plan now reflects new composition shingle.
There was no action taken by the Council on this item.
BB. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PEI~IT NO. 3726 - SUBSTAIFfIAL CONFORMANCE REVIEW:
REQUESTED BY: FAIRMONT PRIVATE SCHOOLS, ATTN= GLEN NOREEN, BUSINESS
MANAGER, 1557 W. Mable Street, Anaheim, CA 92802-10932
LOCATION: 5300 E. La Palma Avenue.
Petitioner requests substantial conformance review to expand the play
area of a previously approved private educational facility (accessory use
of an existing church facility).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined plans are in substantial conformance with previously approved
plans.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
Bg.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 5505: FOR ADOPTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone
property under Reclassification No. 93-94-10 located at 608 West Vermont
Avenue from the RS-A-43,000 zone to the RM-2400 zone. (Introduced at the
meeting of June 20, 1995, Item B10.)
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5505 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5505: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE AONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(Reclassification No. 93-94-10 located at 608 West Vermont Avenue from the RS-
A-43,000 zone to the RM-2400 zone.)
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance Nos. 5505, for adoption=
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5505, duly passed and adopted.
D1.
107~ PUBLIC HEARING - EMERGENCY MEASURE EXTENDING STREET VENDOR
ORDINANCE REGARDING TEE ISSUANCE OF VENDOR/OPERATOR PERMITS~
To consider adoption of an emergency measure extending Ordinance No.
5445, previously adopted by the City Council as an interim measure on
September 17, 1994, and amended by Ordinance No. 5476, to place a
temporary moratorium on the issuance of new Vendor/Operator Permits for
an additional period of time to expire on December 31, 1995, or at such
other date as determined by the City Council following said public
hearing, while the City Council is Considering changes to Section
14.32.310 of Chapter 14.32 of Title 14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
(Street Vendor Ordinance).
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
22
C'rTY OF ANAHE?M, C&L?FORN[& - COUNCIL ~?NUTES - June 27~ :1.995
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - June 16, 1995
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the planning Dept./Code Enforcement Dir. dated May 26,
1995
ORDINANCE NO. (URGENCY) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
amending and extending Ordinance No. 5455 adopted as an interim measure
prohibiting the issuance of any new permits for vending of goods or
merchandise from vehicles pursuant to Section 14.32.310 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code while the City is studying and considering new regulations
concerning such subject; and superseding Ordinance No. 5476; and
declaring that this ordinance is an emergency measure which shall take
inunediate effect.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak;
there being no response, he closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Lopez. He is familiar with the ordinance and it is a good
idea. He compliments John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager, and staff. A
continuance will give an opportunity to work on this matter further.
City Attorney White. Since this is an emergency ordinance, it will need to be
read in full at this time and will require a 4/5's vote to approve it.
City Clerk Sohl read the ordinance in full.
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5508 for adoption.
ORDINANCE NO. 5508 (URGENCY) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING AND
EXTENDING ORDINANCE NO. 5455 ADOPTED AS AN INTERIM MEASURE PROHIBITING THE
ISSUANCE OF ANY NEW PERMITS FOR VENDING OF GOODS OR MERCHANDISE FROM VEHICLES
PURSUANT TO SECTION 14.32.310 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND SUPERSEDING
ORDINANCE NO. 5476; AND DECLARING THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS AN EMERGENCY MEASURE
WHICH SHALL TAKE IMMEDIATE EFFECT.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5508, for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5508 duly passed and adopted.
D2.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3754 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: DOW'S ACREAGE, C/O KEWSKI PROPERTY, P.O. Box 6295, Garden Grove,
CA 92645
LOCATION: 128-136 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately
6.99 acres located south and east of the southeast corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Brookhurst Street.
To permit a 6,500-square foot church within an existing shopping center
with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3754 GRANTED for three years (to expire 5/1/95) (PC95-48) (6 yes
votes, I absent).
23
CITY OF ANAHEIMv CALIFORNI/% - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: Review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by
Council Members Feldhaus and Zemel at the meeting of May 23, 1995, Item B4.
pUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - June 15, 1995
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - June 15, 1995
Posting of property - June 16, 1995
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated May 1, 1995
Joel Fick, Planning Director. He briefed the project as outlined in the Staff
Report. Me noted that in deference to the commercial area, the Planning
Commission imposed a condition that church services and congregational
meetings shall be held no earlier than 7:00 P.M. Mondays through Fridays. Of
particular significance, the resolution specifies that the permit expires
three years from the date of the resolution or May 1, 1998. It is viewed as
an interim use. The CUP was also reviewed by Redevelopment who recommended
that the item be approved as well. The Redevelopment Commission reviewed the
project on April 26, 1995 and found it to be in conformance with the goals of
the Brookhurst Commercial Corridor area.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. Some time ago, plans were presented to
start a church in the immediate vicinity in an empty lot behind what was
Standard Brand Paints. He asked if the combination of those similar uses in
the same area will have any impact on traffic or have the other plans been
dropped.
Joel Fick. He believes that the permit is still valid but to the best of his
knowledge, there is no activity on the property at this time. The Traffic
Engineer reviewed the traffic impact. Since it is off-peak with other
commercial activities in the Brookhurst Corridor area, traffic would not be a
problem. The Traffic and Transportation Manager approved it as well.
Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Feldhaus. His concern is whether or not that is the best
locale for the use. He does not know what the project is going to be for the
Brookhurst Corridor expansion. He does not believe there is a representative
from the church present today and he would like to know how many people there
are in the congregation since they are asking for a waiver of parking.
Rob ZurSchmiede, Property Services Manager/Redevelopment. The Brookhurst
Redevelopment plan was adopted two years ago. Unlike Project Alpha, it will
not generate significant amounts of tax increment. The vision for the
corridor is to capitalize on larger sites at major intersections that could be
developed into large-scale commercial uses. The reason the item was
recommended by the Redevelopment Commission was the three-year limitation on
the CUP, the agency has no current plans to acquire the site or plans for
project area implementation but would be looking to the property owner to be
the major driver in the Redevelopment of the corridor.
24
C'rTy OF ANAHE'rM~ CAL'rFORN'rA - COUNCIL M~NUTE8 - June 27~ ~995
Council Member Feldhaus. If staff is satisfied, he does not want to inhibit
the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Daly, seconded by Council Member Zemel, the City Council approved the
negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Pro Tem Feldhaus offered Resolution No. 95R-128 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 95R-128: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3754
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 95R-128, for edoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Fealdhaus, Daly
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 95R-128, duly passed and adopted.
D3. 155:PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 317
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 334 SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1 "NORTHEAST AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN" (includingZoning and Development Standards):
INITIATED BY: CITY OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION, c/o Anaheim
Redevelopment Agency Attention: Michael Welch, 201 South Anaheim
Boulevard ~1003, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: The proposed Specific Plan and General Plan project area
consists of 2,645 acres generally bounded by the Riverside (SR-91)
Freeway, the Orange (SR-57) Freeway, Orangethorpe Avenue and Imperial
Highway. The project area includes the Canyon Industrial Area and
properties within and surrounding the boundaries of Redevelopment Project
Area Alpha. The 26 acres located at the southwest corner of Tustin
Avenue and La Palma Avenue, located within the boundaries of Specific
Plan No. 88-3 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan) are not included
within the boundaries of the proposed Specific Plan but are included
within the boundaries of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - June 15, 1995
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - June 15, 1995
Posting of property - June 16, 1995
PROPOSAL:
(A) To consider Environmental Impact Report No. 317 as prepared by the
Lead Agency (Redevelopment Agency), adoption of the Statement of Findings
of Fact (which includes the Rejection of Alternatives), adoption of a
Statement of Overriding Consideration, and adoption of a reporting or
monitoring plan.
(B)To approve General Plan Amendment No. 334 to amend the Land Use, Parks
Recreation and Community Services, and Environmental Resources and
25
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
Management (Conservation/Open Space) Elements of the General Plan to
establish consistency between the General Plan and the Development Areas
identified in the proposed Specific Plan; and to amend the General Plan
designation for the acreage within the boundaries of SP88-3 (not a part
of the subject Specific Plan), as follows:
1. Land Use Element
(a) To add text to the General Plan Land Use Element recognizing that
the Anaheim Northeast Area Specific Plan is an implementing zone for the
Canyon Industrial Area; and that the Specific Plan establishes building
intensity for each of the development areas (i.e., Industrial, Industrial
Recycling, Expanded Industrial, La Palma Core, Transit Core and
Commercial Areas). A map identifying these locations (figures) is
available for review at the Anaheim Planning Department.
(b) To amend the General Plan Land Use Element Map for 18 areas as
follows:
Fiqure i - Approximately 113.5 acres from the General Industrial to
Business Office/Service/Industrial designation. Subject area is
generally located south of Miraloma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north
of the SR-91 Freeway and east of Miller Street.
Fiqure 2 - Approximately 39.3 acres from the General Open Space and
General Industrial to the General Commercial designation. Subject area
is generally located south of the SR-91 Freeway, west of the Atchison
Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way and north of the Santa Ana
River Channel. (Note: At Planning Commission's direction, Figure 2 has
been revised to depict General Industrial as the proposed designation.
As such, the acreage proposed for redesignation has been reduced to
approximately 30 acres.)
Fiqure 3 - Approximately 11.9 acres from the General Open Space to the
Conservation/Water Use designation. Subject area is generally located
south of the SR-91 Freeway, west of the SR-91 Freeway/Tustin Avenue
interchange, north of the Santa Aha River Channel and east of the
Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way.
Fiqure 4 - Approximately 2.8 acres from the General Open Space to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located south
and east of the SR-91 Freeway/Tustin Avenue interchange.
Fiqure 5 - Approximately 11.3 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located on the
east side of Tustin Avenue between La Palma Avenue and the SR-91 Freeway.
Fiqure 6 - Approximately 8.0 acres from the Conservation/Water Use and
General Industrial to the General Commercial and General Industrial
designations. Subject area is generally located at the Tustin
Avenue/Miraloma Avenue intersection, and north and west of said
intersection.
Fiqure 7 - Approximately 2.1 acres from the Conservation/Water Use to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located between
Orangethorpe Avenue and the Atwood Channel, and west of the City limits.
Fiqure 8 - Approximately 7.9 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located
immediately north (on both sides of Miller Street) of the Miraloma
Avenue/Miller Street intersection.
Fiqure 9 - Approximately 46.8 acres from the General Industrial to the
Conservation/Water Use designation. Subject area is generally located
south of La Jolla Street, west of the Carbon Creek Channel, north f
Miraloma Avenue and east of Kraemer Boulevard.
26
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
Fiaure 10 - Approximately 10.7 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at all
four legs of the Kraemer Boulevard/Miraloma Avenue intersection.
Fiaure 11 - Approximately 10.7 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at the
northeast, southeast and southwest corners of the Red Gum Street/Miraloma
Avenue intersection.
Figure 12 - Approximately 5.0 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at the
northeast and southeast corners of the Blue Gum Street/Miraloma Avenue
intersection.
Fiqure 13 - Approximately 52.9 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located south of
La Palma Avenue, west of Shepard Street, north of the SR-91 Freeway and
east of White Star Avenue. (Note: Figure 13 has been revised to include
the parcels located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Shepard
Street as part of the proposed General Commercial designation. As such,
the acreage proposed for redesignation has been increased to approximately
56.8 acres.)
Fiqure 14 - Approximately 9.1 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at all
four legs of the Blue Gum Street/La Palma Avenue intersection. (Note:
Figure 14 has been deleted from the proposal.)
Fiqure 15 - Approximately 13.7 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at all
four legs of the La Palma Avenue/Richfield Road intersection. (Note:
Figure 15 has been revised to delete the northwest corner of the
intersection from consideration.)
Fiaure 16 - Approximately 23.8 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located at all
four legs of the La Palma Avenue/Lakeview Avenue intersection.
Fiqure 17 - Approximately 58.1 acres from the General Industrial to the
Conservation/Water Use designation. Subject area is generally located
south of La Palma Avenue, west of Fee Ana Street, north of the Santa Ana
River Channel and approximately 570 feet east of the centerline of La Palma
Avenue and Van Buren Street.
Fiqure 18 - Approximately 15.7 acres from the General Industrial to the
General Commercial designation. Subject area is generally located on the
south side of La Palma Avenue, approximately 468 feet west of the
centerline of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway, and north of the Santa
Ana River Channel.
2. Parks, Recreation & Community Services Element
To delete the Community Park site designation from the Park Facilities Plan
(Figure 5.1) of the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Element. Said
site is located south of the SR-91 Freeway, west of the Atchison Topeka and
Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way and north of the Santa Ana River.
3. Environmental Resource and Management Element
a. Open Space - To delete an approximately 38.7-acre open space area
depicted on the Environmental Resources and Management Open
Space/Conservation Element Exhibit, generally located south of the SR-91
Freeway, southeast and southwest of the SR-91 Freeway/Tustin Avenue
interchange, and north of the Santa Aha River. (The proposed deletion is
27
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNI~ - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 27, 1995
necessary for internal consistency between subject element and the proposed
changes to the Land Use Element as identified above).
b. Conservation - To make modifications to Water Use areas as depicted on
the Environmental Resources and Management Open Space/Conservation Element
Exhibit as follows:
(1) An approximately ll.9-acre addition to the Water Use area adjacent to
the Santa Aha River and generally located south of the SR-91 Freeway, west
of the SR-91 Freeway/Tustin Avenue interchange, north of the Santa Aha
River Channel and east of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-
of-way.
(2) Recognizing the approximately 184-acre Warner Basin as a Water Use area
in addition to its Sand and Gravel designation. Subject basin is generally
located east of Tustin Avenue, south of La Palma Avenue, west of Fee Ana
Street and north of the Santa Ana River Channel.
(C) To consider and adopt a Specific Plan identifying 6 Development Areas
for the Northeast Area which currently encompasses 2,645 acres including
the Canyon Industrial Area as well as properties within and surrounding the
boundaries of the Redevelopment Project Area Alpha. The Specific Plan
anticipates a total buildout area of 29.3 million square feet by the year
2010, of which 21.8 million square feet is existing. Approximately 3.3
million square feet of this existing 21.8 million square feet is
anticipated to be reconstructed. Approximately 7.5 million square feet is
anticipated as new development.
(D) To adopt Zoning and Development Standards to set forth standards,
procedures and guidelines for the development of industrial uses, corporate
headquarters, research and development, support services, offices and
commercial retail areas to serve the demand for a wide variety of goods and
services within the Specific Plan area as provided for in Chapter 18.93 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code. The proposed Specific Plan zoning designation,
SP94-1, will replace the current zoning designations of ML (Limited
Industrial), RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) and CL (Commercial
Limited) in the Canyon Industrial Area.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended that the City Council adopt General Plan Amendment No. 334
(PC95-58) (6 yes votes, i abstained).
Recommended that the City Council adopt Specific Plan 94-1 (including
Zoning and Development Standards, Design Plan and Guidelines, a Public
Facilities Plan for the Northeast Area Specific Plan, the recommended
conditions and Errata dated May 5, 1995, and the Revisions to the errata
dated May 17, 1995) (PC95-59).
Approved and recommended that the City Council acting as a Responsible
Agency consider EIR No. 317 as prepared by the Lead Agency (Redevelopment
Agency) and approve and adopt the Statement of Findings of Fact (which
includes the Rejection of Alternatives), adopt the Statement of Overriding
Considerations and pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resource Code,
adopt Specific Plan No. 94-1 "Northeast Area Specific Plan" as the
reporting or monitoring plan for the Project, finding that the Northeast
Area Specific Plan incorporates measures to mitigate or avoid significant
impacts on the environment and will itself act as effective mitigation for
potential environmental impacts identified in the final EIR.
28
C~TY OF ANAHEIH~ CALIFORNIA - COUNCIL HINUTE8 - ~une 27~ ~995
Mayor Daly. Staff is recommending a 30-day continuance; City Attorney White
confirmed that the Council did not need to open the Public Hearing but could
continue the matter without doing so.
Mayor Daly asked if anyone was present to speak on the matter tonight. Since
there was, Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. James Egelston, 1335 N. Miller, Anaheim. He feels more study is needed or
additional feedback solicited. In 1957, the City assured them if they came under
the City's "blanket" the area would remain light manufacturing and that is the
way they want to stay. He did spend time with staff today. Two other residents
were present but had to leave. They have concerns as well. His is a residence
in a commercial area and they do not mix. He would like to see that particular
area of Miller Street stay zoned as it is. He does not want to speak for the
other people, but feels he is expressing the majority position. Mr. Tony Lopez
who also lives on the street would like to see it remain the same and the other
resident, Mr. Allen, has concerns that when he goes to sell his property there
will be a problem. One parcel is a totally vacant lot and that owner might
benefit very well but everything else is developed. On the lot next to him,
there is not enough parking for anything.
Rob ZurSchmiede, Property Manager. Redevelopment staff will be happy to meet
with Mr. Egelston.
MOTION= Council Member Zemel moved to continue the subject Public hearing to
Tuesday, August 8, 1995 as requested by staff. Council Member Tait seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Cl. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Mayor Daly. He asked the City Attorney to submit to the Council a report on any
remaining City Charter revisions recommended by the previous Charter Review
Commission which were subsequently not put on the ballot or were on the ballot
but rejected by the voters. Some were housekeeping matters to keep the City in
conformance with State law. The Council may want to think about appointing
another Charter Review Commission and he would like to see where they left off.
City Attorney White. He has been keeping a file of issues in the Charter that
have come up since the last Commission which he will bring forward.
C2. 112: REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS~
City Attorney Jack White stated that there are no actions to report.
ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting of June 27,
1995 was adjourned (9:10 P.M.).
No Council Meeting is scheduled for July 4, 1995 due to the observance of the
National Holiday.
LEONORA N. SOHL
CITY CLERK
29