1995/09/12CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 12, 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
UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Edward Aghjayan
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Lisa Stipkovich
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
CIVIL ENGINEER-DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Natalie Meeks
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 2:40 p.m. on September 8, 1995 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Jack White. There is one additional matter to be added to the
Closed Session agenda relating to the continuation of Performance Evaluations
by the Council of their appointees, today's being City Manager Ruth. This
item was inadvertently not included on the agenda and, therefore, it will be
necessary to waive the 72-hour posting provision of the Brown Act.
MOTION. Council Member Tait moved to waive the 72-hour posting provision of
the Brown Act adding Council appointee performance evaluations to the Closed
Session agenda inadvertently not included on the posted agenda (see Item No. 8
below). Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session:
1. 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.
2. 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 LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
(a) Name of case: Lopez v. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 74-82-94
(b) Name of case: Simmons v. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior
Court Case No. 73-13-78.
(c) Name of case: Barajas dba/Barajas Produce, et al., v. City of
Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 75-09-60.
4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of
Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: three potential
cases.
(i) Existing facts and circumstances: Public Records Act requests
received from Los Angeles Times and Orange County Register relating
to the release of personnel information which may be protected
pursuant to provisions of the California Constitution and State
statutes.
(ii) Existing facts and circumstances: Waiver of potential conflict
of interest concerning representation of the Orange County Fire
Authority by the firm of Rutan & Tucker.
(iii) Existing facts and circumstances~ Waiver of potential conflict
of interest concerning representation of the anaheim Redevelopment
Agency by the firm of Stradling, Yocca, Carlson, and Rauth.
5. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Agency negotiator: Dave Hill
Employee organization: IBEW update
6. LIABILITY CLAIMS
Claimant: Great Western Bank
Agency claimed against: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
7. LIABILITY CLAIMS
Claimant: Anthony, Lori and Eric Montez
Agency claimed against: City of Anaheim
8. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (ANNUAL REVIEW)
TITLE: City Manager
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By general Council consent, the Council recessed
into Closed Session (3:19 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.
(5:40 p.m.).
INVOCATION:
Mary L. Mibbard, Anaheim United Methodist Church, gave the
invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Council Member Lou Lopez led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
STATUS OF POLICE OFFICER, TIM GARCIA: Mayor Daly. He would first like to
focus on Anaheim Police Officer, Tim Garcia who was shot while performing his
duty a few days ago. He asked the City Manager to comment briefly on his
status but first expressed the concern of the Council and the citizens for
Officer Garcia and his family.
City Manager Ruth. Officer Tim Garcia was shot twice in an incident that took
place over the weekend and he is presently recovering at UCI Medical Center.
He is doing well although still in intensive care. His prognosis looks
positive and points to a full recovery; Mayor Daly. Me reiterated the concern
expressed by all. They look forward to Officer Garcia's full recovery and his
return to continue to serve the public.
1192 PRESENTATION - GRAND PRIZE - SUMMER READING PROGRAM CHILD; Marcia Myers,
Recycle Anaheim (Supervisor, Street Maintenance) explained that the Library
Department and Public Utilities worked together on the reading program. It is
her pleasure to introduce the Grand Prize Winner of the Summer Reading
Program, 5 1/2 yr. old, Adam Stewart, who was present accompanied by his
family - parents and grandparents. Adam reported that he read six books a
week.
A plaque was also presented to the Anaheim Bullfrogs for promoting the reading
program. Accepting were Stuart Silver, owner of the Bullfrogs, Brad
McCaughey, Assistant Coach, Vickie Louis, Assistant Director of Marketing, and
Zeus, the Team Mascot.
Mayor Daly and Council Members first personally congratulated little Adam and
commended him on his outstanding accomplishment. The Mayor also commended the
Anaheim Bullfrogs for promoting such a worthwhile program and also for
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
donating 2,000 tickets to their home games. The City is most appreciative of
their contributions to the Anaheim Community.
119: PROCLAMATION recognizing September 17 - 23, 1995, as
Constitution Week in Anaheim.
Betty Lundgren, Mojave Chapter, National Society, Daughters of the American
Revolution accepted the Proclamation and briefed the Council on the activities
the Chapter sponsors to promote a greater knowledge and respect for the
Constitution.
119: THE FOLLOWING WERE RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME:
PROCLAMATION recognizing September 24, 1995, as Race For the Cure
Day in Anaheim.
PROCLAMATION recognizing September 24, 1995, as American Gold
Star Mothers Day.
PROCLAMATION recognizing October, 1995, as Independent Living
Month in Anaheim.
PROCLAMATION recognizing December 10 - 16, 1995, as
Apprenticeship Week in Anaheim.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,160,527.13 for
the period ending August 28, 1995, $3,399,155.66 for the period ending
September 5, 1995 and $3,461,109.88 for the period ending September 11, 1995,
in accordance with the 1995-96 Budget, were approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5:58 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (6:04 p.m.)
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Phyllis Greenberg, Chairperson, Beach Boulevard
Concerned Citizens (BBCC), 603 Gaymont St., Anaheim. She is speaking as a
representative of the BBCC group which was formed approximately two years ago.
Last summer, a representative from the group addressed the Council about the
needs of the community. As a result of that petition, they have had the
opportunity to work in cooperation with many employees of the City and Police
Department which has resulted in a very positive liaison. They have been very
productive. She is present today to outline the accomplishments of their work
in the past year and to give a vision of their present and future goals and
objectives. She thereupon briefed the document previously submitted entitled,
Beach Boulevard Concerned Citizens (BBCC) Annual Report Card of
Accomplishments, September 1994 - 1995.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Under the guidance of Steve Swaim from the City Manager's Office, a series of
issues were identified and actions proposed to address those problems (see
Need Assessment list attached to the "Report Card" with headings, Issues,
Actions, Responsibility). The report listed 22 items which were accomplished.
These were elaborated upon by Mrs. Greenberg. She emphasized the tremendous
amount of effort made by not only by the residents but also City staff
including representatives from the City Manager's Office, the Police
Department and Code Enforcement as well as meetings with and visits to the
area by Mayor Daly and Council Member Feldhaus.
In conclusion, she reiterated that this was a most productive year. Besides
all of the accomplishments, the residents/business people of west Anaheim are
meeting and talking more with their neighbors, there is an improved sense of
community, and they feel empowered to solve problems. They have only begun to
meet the challenges of improving the business and living conditions of west
Anaheim and look forward to a day when families will want to move into the
area because of its good reputation.
Mrs. Greenberg then especially commended the following staff members who they
feel deserve special recognition for their efforts over the past year and who
regularly attended their meetings and gave their encouragement and support:
Don Yourstone, Code Enforcement; Steve Swaim, City Manager's Office, Officer
Bob Adrian, Officer Mark Yurovich, and Sgt. Steve Walker. There are many other
City representatives too long to list who have taken the time to educate and
assist them. She also thanked the Mayor and Council for their continuing
support in their mission to improve the quality of life in west Anaheim. They
will keep the Council informed of their progress. They have a team of many
committed people working together which is the mark of their success.
Mayor Daly. Me thanked Mrs. Greenberg for the summary and expressed the
Council's appreciation for their constructive problem-solving approach. They
have developed rapport with City staff that will lead to many good things
happening in the future. It is heartening to see the progress made and the
attitude that is reflected by all the people involved with the BBCC. The best
response City government can make is to continue to help the area solve its
problems and to give the resources, ideas and problem-solving techniques to
help them continue to work down their formidable list. He thanked them again
for taking the time to summarize their progress and also thanked City staff
who have been so active in helping to bring about some of the successes to
date -- Code Enforcement, Police and the City Manager's Office -- everyone who
has contributed ideas to try to revive and restore a great part of the City.
Council Member Feldhaus. He echoes the Mayor's comments. In his daily
contact with staff, they express their many accolades to the BBCC and comment
it is a delight to work with the group. He hears that from the Police
Officers, Mr. Swaim and others. He encouraged them to keep up their good work
and to continue to set an example.
Pedro Vasquez. Relative to the street vendors, he feels somebody has to take
a stand and try to do something to make the situation workable because it is
unworkable at this time. Ten minutes is not enough time for the vendors to do
their business. There are too many citations which have cost $10,000 which
they cannot afford any more. The vendors would like the City to work with
them to come up with a compromise.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Mayor Daly. He thanked Mr. Vasquez for taking the time to comment. He also
referred to an update to the Street Vendor Ordinance on tonight's agenda under
Item A20; City Clerk Sohl provided Mr. Vasquez with a copy of the ordinance.
Carlos Quinonez, 920 N. Fern, Anaheim. Be is speaking on behalf of the
vendors. During the last 1 1/2 years, he feels a lot of progress has been
made with the help of John Poole, the Code Enforcement Manager and other
officials working with him. Right now, there are several individuals within
the vendor's organization who are not in agreement with the law suit filed by
certain vendors against the City. If at all possible, he would like to see
the negotiations reopened. They would be more than willing to come back to
the table with Mr. Poole who has never closed his door, and try to institute
things that will be beneficial to everyone. He hopes that can occur in the
near future.
Phil Knypstra, 2520 Gelid, Anaheim. A subject that has been in the press a
great deal lately is full disclosure on Government compensation. Many cities
have responded with their top 25 salaries. He also knows there is a feeling
that cities should fight this but is not saying that is true in Anaheim. He
believes it has nothing to do with the courts but with the political
philosophy of the Council. Most of the Council went on record to him when
they were candidates for the last election that they supported that
philosophy. He is hoping the Council will take the position that salary
disclosure is not something to hide. He feels that some of the information
being reported is misleading because the figures include things that should
not be included and, therefore, makes comparison difficult. He briefed those
items that should not be included. In concluding, he stated he is hoping the
City goes on record supporting full disclosure for all employees and not just
the top 25.
Council Member Tait. He recalls that the first direction the Council gave to
the Budget Advisory Commission was that there be a compensation comparison
between public and private sector salaries; the Mayor and Council Members all
agreed that was the direction already given to the Budget Commission.
Mayor Daly. He believes Mr. Knypstra will recognize the information that will
be forthcoming as an important first step on his continuing theme.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no public comments on City Council Agenda items.
MOTION:
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and
resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of September 12,
1995. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR:
On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Feldhaus, 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-159 through 95R-161, both
inclusive, for adoption and offered Ordinance No. 5512 and 5514 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Al.
A2.
118: Rejecting and/or denying certain claims, and denying leave to
present late claim filed against the City.
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Nora Blanco for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 1 through
July 18, 1995.
b. Claim submitted by Eric Montez (a minor) and Anthony Montez for
bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or
about January 27, 1995.
c. Claim submitted by Lori Montez for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 27, 1995.
d. Claim submitted by Mercury Insurance (Katrina Bulmer, Insured)
for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City
on or about May 21, 1995.
e. Claim submitted by Ronald Brown for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 11, 1995.
f. Claim submitted by James H. Blain for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 18 through
30, 1995.
g. Claim submitted by Parviz Daftarian for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 30, 1995.
h. Claim submitted by Catherine O. Green for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 4, 1995.
i. Application for leave to present late Claim submitted by Rose S.
Martinez c/o Robert Kojima, Esq. for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 8, 1995.
105: Receiving and filing a Disclosure of Property Interests in
Redevelopment Areas from Stephen W. Bristol.
114: Receiving and filing Resolution No. 95-68 from the City of
Costa Mesa, directing City representatives on the Board of Directors
of the Orange County Transportation Authority to place the Measure M
sales tax ordinance on a Countywide ballot for the purpose of repeal
or modification.
173: Receiving and filing a Notice of Filing by Southern California
Edison Company before the United States of America Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Docket No. ER95-1489-000.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Telecommunications Policy
Committee meeting held July 20, 1995.
140: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Public Library Monthly
Statistical Report for the month of July, 1995.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library
Board meeting held July 26, 1995.
171: Receiving and filing a certified copy of Resolution 8479 from
the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California levying taxes upon taxable property lying within the City
of Anaheim for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1995 and ending
June 30, 1996.
Council Member Tait. He asked for a brief explanation on this item.
Ed Alario, Assistant General Manager-Water Services. This is a standard tax
that MWD has throughout all of its areas, not only Anaheim, but other cities,
the County and special districts. They have an actual tax rate which is the
same as last year and the last seven years. There is no increase, but MWD has
to pass the resolution each and every year.
173: Receiving and filing a Notice of Proposed Rate Decrease,
Application No. 95-08-001 filed by Southern California Gas Company
with the California Public Utilities Commission for a decrease in
core rates of $191.9 million.
A3.
150: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, United
Builders, in the amount of $44,845.07 for Julianna Park Play Area
Improvements; 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.
A4.
149: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder,
Hillcrest Contracting, in the amount of $151,483.20 for Community Ice
Center Parking Lot; 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.
175: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Pouk &
Steinle, in the amount of $290,039.32 for Underground District No. 14
(Nohl Ranch Road); 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.
A6.
170: Approving the Final map of Tract No. 12696 and the Subdivision
Agreement with Presley Companies; and authorizing the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute said Subdivision Agreement. Tract No. 12696 is
located at Sunset Ridge Road and the west side of Ranier Boulevard,
and is filed in conjunction with Specific Plan No. 87-1.
A7.
151: Approving an Encroachment License Agreement with Kazuho Nishida
for carports located within an existing five foot utility easement
(Encroachment No. 95-4E).
AS.
169: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-159: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REQUESTING THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY ALLOCATE COMBINED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM FUNDS (IN THE
AMOUNT OF $318,574) FOR THE ANAHEIM BOULEVARD AND BALL ROAD
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
A9.
Al0.
All ·
A12.
A13.
A14.
A15.
A16.
A17.
A18.
A19 ·
123: Approving the termination of the existing lease with Lam Thanh
Nguyen, et al. owner and operator of Brookhurst Pines Nursery, and
approving a new lease with Andrew Moo on 3.6 acres of City-owned
property located at 1650 South Brookhurst Street.
158: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-160: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A QUITCLAIM DEED TO
A PORTION OF AN UNACCEPTED EASEMENT FOR UTILITY PURPOSES. (REQUEST
BY H Q T ANAHEIM PARTNERS, L.P. TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF AN EIGHT
FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT OFFERED FOR DEDICATION ON TRACT MAP NO. 14697.)
160: Accepting the low bid of Flynn Signs and Graphics, in an amount
not to exceed $38,486 for the fabrication and installation of signage
for City Hall, in accordance with Bid #5428.
160: Accepting the low bid of G & W Electric Company c/o Banes
Associates, in the amount of $83,805 for 15 600-Amp SF-6 subsurface
switches, in accordance with Bid $5422.
160: Accepting the low bid of Metro Floor Covering, in the amount of
$99,800 for carpet tiles for the Police Department, in accordance
with Bid #5431.
160: Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing
Agent to issue a Purchase Order to Sony Electronics, Inc./R&M
Marketing, in the amount of $47,995 for one Sony Clipmaster System
for Anaheim Stadium.
160: Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing
Agent to issue a Purchase Order to Advance Control Systems, c/o
Matzinger-Keegan, in an amount not to exceed $118,995.14 for a
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition system upgrade including
hardware, software and installation.
184: Ratifying the Seventh Proclamation of the Existence of a Local
Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on September
5, 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.
108: ORDINANCE NO. 5512: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.12 OF TITLE 2 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES. (Introduced at the meeting of
August 22, 1995, Item Al7.)
108: ORDINANCE NO. 5514: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING SUBSECTION .050 OF SECTION 18.89.030 OF CHAPTER 18.89 OF
TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SEX-ORIENTED
BUSINESSES. (Introduced at the meeting of August 22, 1995, Item
Ail.)
107: ORDINANCE NO. 5519 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 7.44.015 AND DELETING SECTION 7.44.040 OF
CHAPTER 7.44 OF TITLE 7 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
GRAFFITI.
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
A20.
108: ORDINANCE NO. 5520 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTION 14.32.310, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION
14.32.310 TO CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO SALE OF GOODS OR MERCHANDISE BY VEHICLE.
Council Member Lopez. He asked how the proposed ordinance came about.
City Attorney White. Since the last Council Meeting, a law suit has been
filed by some of the street vendors challenging portions of the City's current
vending ordinance, specifically the areas relating to food handling and also
requiring vehicles to have accurate weighing and measuring devices on their
trucks. As to those two items, Judge Segal of the Superior Court determined,
in his view, those two areas are pre-empted by State law and, therefore,
issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the City's ordinance.
Rather than continuing to litigate those two issues, because they believe
State law provides the same protection, they are readjusting the ordinance
with those provisions eliminated and will now rely upon the County Health Code
as well as the State statutes that control in those areas. Other than that,
the ordinance will remain intact.
A21.
117: Delaying the review of the 1995/1996 Investment Policy
following the full appointment of the Investment Advisory Commission,
as requested by the City Treasurer.
A22.
123: RESOLUTION NO. 95R-161: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF COOPERATION
AGREEMENT NO. 88 FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE ANAHEIM
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (FOR INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING AND PARKING LOT
WEST OF COMMUNITY ICE RINK).
A23.
105: Appointing a representative from the Library Board to the
Community Development Advisory Board.
A24.
161: Approving all documents related to the Police Residence
Assistance Program, (to provide a $10,000 no interest forgivable loan
for qualified Police Officers interested in residing within the
Anaheim City limits); and authorizing the Executive Director of the
Community Development Department to develop and execute all documents
on behalf of the City for the Program, effective August 23, 1995.
City Attorney White, upon questioning by Council Member Feldhaus, explained
the reason behind using the word "shall" instead of "may" in the subject
agreement (pg. 4, para. C., line 6).
A25.
156: Authorizing the Anaheim Police Department to accept a donation
of eleven specially-equipped GT Tequesta police bicycles from Carl
Karcher Enterprises, Inc., Coca Cola Fountain and Dr. Pepper/Seven-Up
Corporation for use by the Community Policing Team.
A26.
128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented
by the Director of Finance for one month ended July 31, 1995.
A27.
114: Approving minutes of the City Council meetings held August 8,
1995, and August 15, 1995.
10
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 95R-159 through 95R-161, both inclusive, for
adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 95R-159 through 95R-161, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
~oll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5512 and 5514, 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. 5512 and 5514, duly passed and adopted.
Council Member Lopez abstained on Item A24
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
A28.
105: BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
Appointment to the Budget Advisory Commission to fill a vacancy due
to the resignation of Ben Bay. Term expires June 30, 1996.
Before taking action, there was a brief Council discussion relative to the
requirement that four of the seven Commission Members be residents of Anaheim
and whether the replacement for Mr. Bay would have to be a resident.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved that the appointment to the Budget Advisory
Commission be continued for one week to research the issue of residency for a
new appointee. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A29.
105: INVESTMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE:
Appointments to the newly established Investment Advisory Commission,
in accordance with Ordinance No. 5502. (Continued from the meeting
of August 22, 1995.)
Mayor Daly nominated Scott Feltenberg who lives on Camelia Street in Anaheim,
and also Clarence Kaufman who is a resident of south Anaheim.
MOTION: Council Member Feldhaus moved to close nominations. Council Member
Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Zemel. He is not familiar with Mr. Kaufman enough to vote for
his appointment and for that reason alone he will be abstaining.
11
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Council Member Tait. He agrees. He would like Mr. Kaufman to elaborate more
on his resume.
Mayor Daly. Two persons have been nominated for two slots. He asked if in
that case there had to be a vote; City Attorney White. There will need to be
a roll call vote on the nominees and it will take three yes votes for
appointment.
A roll call vote was then taken on the nominees in the order in which they
were nominated.
Scott Feltenberg - Ayes: Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly.
Clarence Kaufman - Ayes: Lopez, Feldhaus, Daly Abstained: Tait, Zemel
Mr. Feltenberg was thereupon appointed to the Investment Advisory Committee
for the term ending June 30, 1996 and Mr. Kaufman for the term ending June 30,
1997.
ITEMS BI- BI0 FROM THE PI2%NNING COMMISSION ~TING OF AUGUST
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS SEPTENmmR 12~ 199~
B1.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2607:
OWNER: JOHN WOLBERG, P.O. BOX 280, Orange, CA 92666
LOCATION: 127 and 133 West Hill Place. The property is
approximately 0.75 acre located on the north side of Hill Place and
being located approximately 90 feet east of the centerline of Iris
Street.
To amend Resolution No. 84R-393 to permit the expansion of a
previously approved 40 bed board and care facility to allow a total
of 49 beds with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
DENIED, without prejudice, amendment to Resolution No. 84R-393/CUP
NO. 2602 (PC95-97) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement DENIED, without prejudice.
Negative Declaration previously approved.
H2.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3541 AND NEOATIVE DE~.~RATION~
OWNER: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, Attn: Rob Zur Schmiede, 201
South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, Ca 92805
LOCATION: 195 West Harbor Place. Property is approximately 0.2 acre
located at the northeast corner of Harbor Place and Lemon Street.
Petitioner requests modification of a condition of approval
pertaining to the time limitation of a previously-approved outdoor
dining area in conjunction with a previously-approved 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. 3541,
permitting the outdoor dining area until September 9, 2000 (PC95-98)
(7 yes votes).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
12
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
B3.
B4.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3781 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION=
OWNER: NEWPORT FEDERAL, Attn: Gary Elder, 4425 Jamboree Road, $250,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 3368 E. La Palma Avenue. Property is approximately 2.1
acres landlocked between La Palma Avenue and the Riverside (91)
Freeway, having a maximum width of 269 feet, and a maximum depth of
425 feet located east of 3364 East La Palma Avenue (Concourse Bowling
Alley) and accessed by and south of 3356-3360 E. La Palma Avenue.
To permit a self storage facility with caretaker's unit with waiver
of minimum number of required parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3781 GRANTED (PC95-99) (7 yes votes).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3782 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: U.S. INVESTMENTS, LTD., Attn: Ken Campbell, 5500 Interstate
N. Parkway, Ste. 220, Atlanta, Georgia 30328
LOCATION: 1000 N. Kraemer Place. Property is approximately 1.8
acres located on the east side of Kraemer Place and approximately 770
feet south of the centerline of La Palma Avenue.
To permit an automobile sales facility of used cars with waiver of
(a) minimum required landscaping (DENIED), (b) maximum sign area
(DENIED), and (c) minimum number of required parking spaces
(APPROVED).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3782 GRANTED (PC95-100) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement GRANTED, IN PART, waivers (a) and (b)
DENIED, and waiver (c) APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B5.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT~CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2147 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, C/O SUNDOR BRANDS, INC., Attn: John
Devins, 1230 N. Tustin Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92807
LOCATION: 1477 N. Jefferson Street. Property is approximately 7.70
acres, having a frontage of approximately 313 feet on the west side
of Jefferson Street, having a maximum depth of approximately 840 feet
and being located approximately 360 feet south of the centerline of
Orangethorpe Avenue.
To permit the expansion of an existing fuel terminal to add a trailer
truck staging and storage area including one modular office building
with waiver of required improvement of parking areas.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 2147 APPROVED for a period of one year, to expire on
August 21, 1996 (PC95-101) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B6.
134: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 338aAMENDMENT TO SYCAMORE CANYON
SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-1) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15223 and FINAL SITE
PLAN AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: BANK of AMERICA PROPERTIES, INC., 333 South Hope Street, 21st
Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90071
13
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
AGENT: HORST SCHOR, 746 N. Lemon Street, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: Development Area 5 within The Sycamore Canyon Specific
Plan (SP88-1). Property is approximately 4.2 acres located on the
northeast corner of Weir Canyon Road and Canyon Vista Drive.
The petitioner requests approval of the General Plan Amendment No.
338 (to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to
redesignate subject property from General Commercial land uses to
Hillside Medium Density Residential land uses). Amendment to The
Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan (SP88-1)(to amend certain exhibits to
redesignate Development Area 5 from commercial land uses to single-
family residential land uses and to amend the Development Area 5
Development Standards to establish development standards for detached
single-family dwelling units). Tentative Tract Map No. 15223 (to
establish a 4.2 acre, 25-1ot single-family detached subdivision
including 24 residential lots and one lettered lot).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended adoption of GPA NO. 338 to the City Council (PC95-102)
(7 yes votes).
Recommended to Council approval of the proposed amendment to Sycamore
Canyon Specific Plan (SP88-1) (PC95-103).
Tentative Tract Map No. 15223 APPROVED (no action taken by the City
Council on this item at the meeting of August 22, 1995, Item B10.
Final Site Plan withdrawn.
Approved Negative Declaration.
THIS ITEM WAS PREVIOUSLY SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 3, 1995,
DUE TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 338 AND SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-1).
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS~
B7.
179: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 95-01 - REQUEST TO CONSIDER AMENDINO TI~.m
18 PERTAINING TO OUTDOOR ACCESSORY USES IN THE CG (COMMERCIAL
GENERAL) ZONE. Requested by City of Anaheim, Planning Department,
200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommending adoption of an ordinance with the change that outdoor
storage shall be a conditionally permitted use in the CG Zone.
Mr. Phil Schwartze, representing Ace Fixtures, 1120 W. Lincoln, Anaheim. He
referred to his letter to the Council dated August 2, 1995 recommending that
Council take action to modify the zoning code in the CG zone as indicated but
delete the Planning Commission's condition of requiring a CUP. The code
amendment being suggested by the Planning Commission which modifies the CG
zone takes all existing non-conforming outdoor storage uses and permits them
subject to putting up a fence and landscaping. When the item was heard by the
Planning Commission, the Commission added the requirement for a CUP. Although
it has some merit, it is a disincentive for the average person. He is trying
to solve a multiple of problems at Ace Fixtures. If the Council approves the
amendment deleting the CUP requirement, it would just require putting up a
fence and landscaping. In his judgment, it would solve the problems. He does
not believe the CUP is necessary.
Mayor Daly asked to hear from the Planning Director regarding the comments of
Mr. Schwartze and also those contained in his letter of August 2, 1995.
14
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Joel Fick, Planning Director. The City's zoning code presently requires in
the CG zone that all activity be conducted wholly within a building. The CG
zone was established when original zoning was established for Anaheim. As a
result, the zone is not widely used throughout the City but primarily occurs
in the downtown area where parcels are located close to residential homes.
Ace Fixtures has been the subject of neighborhood complaints, concerns and
Code Enforcement activity in the past. Staff has been working with the
property owner on an on-going basis. The only variation between the Planning
Commission recommendation to the Council and that suggested tonight is whether
or not outdoor storage that presently is existing non-conforming would be
permitted or allowed to expand as a matter of right, or whether a CUP should
be reviewed. When the Planning Commission heard this item, they received
testimony from surrounding neighbors expressing concern about outdoor storage.
The Commission recommended that a CUP should be attached and that is the
ordinance being recommended. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission
recommendation because, in their opinion, there is not a need City wide to
address the outdoor storage issue. If there is a CUP, such uses would be
allowed to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and ultimately the Council.
Me asked Mr. Fick if he saw this new CUP requirement for outdoor storage areas
as a potential hurdle in the effort to improve the Ace Fixture property.
Joel Fick. They view instituting the CUP as recommended as an opportunity.
Right now, outdoor storage is not permitted so there is no vehicle to solve
the problem. If a CUP is allowed, as an alternative, it would allow staff the
opportunity to work with Mr. Schwartze and the property owner to attempt to
address that issue.
Mr. Schwartze. If the code is changed to allow outdoor storage, it would
become necessary for Ace Fixtures or anyone else to put up a wall and
landscaping. The issue of a CUP would make it necessary to go through a CUP
process to do so which does not make sense to him. Most of the concerns with
Ace are not with the outdoor storage but the operational characteristics of
the use.
After additional questions posed to staff by the Mayor, the Mayor stated the
ordinance requires two readings and will be before the Council again next
week. He has additional questions to clarify with staff but at this time will
offer the ordinance for first reading. He would like additional clarification
whether this is appropriate and how many circumstances it would involve
throughout the City.
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance 5521 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 5521 (INTRODUCTION): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING NEW SUBSECTION .150 TO SECTION 18.45.030 OF CHAPTER
18.45 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING
(OUTDOOR STORAGE).
BB.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3301 - REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
REQUESTED BY: Blash Momeny, 27762 Pebble Beach, Mission Viejo, CA
LOCATION: Property is located at the northwest terminus of Garland
Circle.
15
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Request for an extension of time (to expire August 21, 1996) to
comply with conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No.
3301 (to construct 2 dwelling units within the Flood Plain Overlay
Zone to establish a 19-lot, 18-unit, RS-5000 residential subdivision
with waivers of required lot frontage and minimum distance between
oil drilling sites and dwelling units).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Request for extension of time on CUP NO. 3301 APPROVED (to expire
8/21/96).
BP.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3165 - REQUEST FOR SUESTANTIAL
CONFORMANCE:
REQUESTED BY: Mike Valdivia of 9570 Pathway Street, Suite A-202,
Santee, Ca 92701
LOCATION: Property is located at 2438 East Katella Avenue (Hunqry
Hunter}.
Petitioner requests substantial conformance review of revised plans
for an outdoor dining area in conjunction with a previously-approved
freestanding restaurant.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in substantial conformance with previously approved
plans.
El0.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1082 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
3422 REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION
PROCEEDINGS:
Initiated by the City of Anaheim, Code Enforcement Division, 200
South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: Property is located at 1339 North East street (Sweetwater
Saloon}.
Request for initiation of revocation or modification proceedings for
Conditional Use Permit No. 1082 (to permit a restaurant with the on-
premise consumption of beer and wine) and Conditional Use Permit No.
3422 (to permit a restaurant with the on-premise consumption of
alcoholic beverages).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Initiated modification and/or revocation proceedings.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
Bll ·
ITEM Ell FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF AUOUST 17, 1995~
DECISION DATE: AUGUST 24, 1995 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS
SEPTEMBER 15, 1995
179~ ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 95-07:
REQUESTED BY: FRANCINE SCHNABEL, 1813 West Harriet Lane, Anaheim, CA
92804
LOCATION: 1813 West Harriet Lane. Property is approximately .16
acre, having a frontage of approximately 75 feet on the north side of
Harriet Lane, with maximum depth of approximately 105 feet and being
located approximately 220 feet east of the center of Hacienda Street.
16
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
To permit a large day care facility with up to a maximum of twelve
(12) children.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Use Permit No. 95-07 APPROVED (ZA Decision No. 95-19).
END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS.
B12 ·
155: ORDINANCE NO. 5517: Amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code by adding thereto Chapter 18.110 relating to Zoning and
Development Standards for the Northeast Area Specific Plan (SP94-1).
(Introduced at the meeting of August 22, 1995, Item D1.)
155: ORDINANCE NO. 5518: Amending the zoning map referred to in
Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Northeast
Industrial Area Specific Plan No. 94-1). (Introduced at the meeting
of August 22, 1995, Item D1.)
The following people spoke on Item B12 under Public Comments on Agenda Items
and their comments summarized:
Harry Clark, 2711 Rodney Way, Orange. He has been associated with the Adams
family since 1987. He married Wendy Adams in 1988. He has been employed with
the company (Adams Steel) and has been privy to the operation. He agrees that
any business who abides by the rules should be allowed to operate but, in his
opinion, Adams does not abide by those rules. Mr. Clark then proceeded to
explain what were, in his opinion, incidents of wrong doing by Mr. Adams/Adams
Steel. (The incidents were not germane to the zoning issue under discussion.)
Mayor Daly interjected and stated first this is the public comments portion of
the agenda and generally the Council does not restrict those comments.
However, he is going to ask the City Attorney to elaborate on the City's
policy relative to public comments as well as Mr. Clark's remarks.
City Attorney White. Members of the public have a right to speak within the
subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. On tonight's agenda there is
a matter relating to adoption of the Specific Plan for the Northeast Area. A
portion encompasses the property owned by the Adams family. The discussion
should somehow be related to the items on the agenda (Item B12.) which is
specifically a zoning action, or things the Council has jurisdiction over
which is not the case with some of the matters broached by Mr. Clark.
Harry Clark. The Council stipulated a couple of years ago that unpermitted
structures were not to be built at Adams Metals. In the office area, there is
a 10' X 30' addition he believes is unpermitted and which the City had
requested Mr. Adams tear down two to three years ago. It has been stated that
70 some families will suffer if the business is shut down. He feels the only
people who will be hurt are the Adams family. He requested before they renew
the operating permit even for one day, the business should be forced to finish
the site cleanup on time as promised. If they do not do so or do not operate
within the law, he urged that they shut the business down.
Wendy Clark, 10522 Beardsley Circle. She is in the middle of a bitter
divorce, alimony and custody dispute with her husband (Harry Clark). She then
proceeded to relay indicents that have occurred between them relating to their
relationship and the divorce. In concluding, she stated that she would not
17
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
allow him to slander her family and that is why she felt it necessary to
refute his remarks.
Shirley McCracken, 6553 Calle de Notre, Anaheim. The Redevelopment Agency and
City Council have made a valuable contribution in developing the Specific Plan
for the 2,600 acres of the Northeast Area. She feels it is regrettable they
"spoiled" their action with an amendment granting a permitted use for 15 years
to four pieces of property. In the past three years with a Court Order, the
property owner has removed 1/3 of the 50,000 tons but 33,000 tons of ground
ferrous material still remain. She questioned whether the material will be
gone by 1998 and if they believe that there will be no damage to the
environment, the land or the water table. Do they know whether it will or has
contaminated the City's water supply. She questioned how they could allow the
City to give up the right to re-examine a controversial use for years. It is
up to the leaders to balance the rights of individuals with the protection of
the health and welfare of its citizens. The amendment to the plan failed to
recognize there is a permit process in the City which should be followed. She
urged that they not spoil a "fantastic" Specific Plan with an inappropriate
amendment.
Miriam Kaywood, Anaheim. Before the ordinance is considered, the Orange
County Water District and Regional Water Quality Control Board must be asked
for their opinions on whether there has been or the possibility for ground
water contamination from the toxic products that have been sitting on the
property for years. It was never intended to be a dump site with a health and
fire hazard.
Phil Anthony, representing Adams Metals and DBW. He refuted statements made
by Mrs. McCracken and Kaywood and invited both to come out to the site and
view the operation. The old pile in question which has been considered
hazardous is a by-product of the work that goes on. Ail of the materials
taken out of the waste stream before the residual pile is left are totally
recycled in the industry throughout the nation. Steady removal of the old
pile under the agreement with the City only started last fall and already 1/3
of the pile has been removed. The question of the position of the Regional
Board and the Orange County Water District is well documented and he leaves it
to the Council to bring forth that information. He feels enough has been said
about the operation that is untrue.
George Adams, Adams Steel. The only thing they have ever done is recycling.
Recycling steel conserves resources. They are the largest recyclers in the
County. In 1984, the law was changed making the disposal of waste hazardous.
They stored their waste for two years only. Since 1986, not one additional
pound of waste has been added to the site. In contrast, over 18,000 tons have
been removed at the rate of two truckloads a day. They feel they will be
finished in 22 months. If the rate of removal has to be increased, it will be
increased. They have made a commitment to do that. He then referred to the
recent newspaper article which also mentioned campaign contributions. At the
outset, he discussed the matter with experts on the issue and also with the
Fair Political Practices Co~mission to make sure that no mistakes were made.
No one talks about the many good things that Adams Steel does. He reiterated
the only thing his company has ever done is recycling. They recycle more
scrap metal and aluminum than anybody else. They are the recyclers of Orange
County.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. He summarized for the Mayor that this item is
basically an amendment to the Zoning Code. It establishes zoning and
development standards for the Specific Plan (S.P. 94-1) approved by the City
18
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Council at the meeting of August 22, 1995. The Ordinance would amend the code
that relates to the Northeast Area Specific Plan.
Mayor Daly then asked staff to summarize the changes requested at the last
Council Meeting (see minutes of 8/22/95) which relate to the Adams property
and the adjoining properties and to specifically summarize the implication of
changing the zoning standards to accommodate a 15-year extension on the Adams
and adjoining site and what effect that would have on the City's planning
process.
City Attorney White. At the meeting of August 22, 1995, this item came with a
recommendation that the Adams recycling uses and the adjacent use that is
under separate ownership would continue to be conditional uses even upon the
adoption of the Northeast Area Specific Plan. However, the action taken by
the Council at the last meeting was to modify the staff recommendation to
provide that both the uses of the Adams property and the currently occupied
adjacent parcel used for recycling of non-ferrous metals would also be
regarded as permitted through May 31, 2013. With regard to the legal
distinction between permitted and conditional uses, between today and May 31,
1998, the Adams property will be subject to the Stipulated Judgment and Court
Order that provides for the removal of the existing "fluff" waste pile. The
remediation of the soil that underlies that pile is another requirement. If
that occurs in accordance with the Judgment, then under the ordinance before
the Council tonight, the Adams uses and the non-ferrous adjacent use would be
permitted uses subject to the criteria of operation listed in the Court
Judgment even though that Judgment will technically expire in 1998. The
subject ordinance incorporates those conditions. As long as both of the uses
are operated in a manner consistent with the criteria, they can continue to
operate through May 31, 2013. If this were a conditional use as opposed to
permitted, the distinction would be when the Court Judgment is satisfied, it
would be incumbent upon the property owners to apply for a CUP to continue the
operation and that could be one that would be indefinite, 5 years, one year,
or 15 years -- anything the Council determined appropriate. A permitted use
says, today we are establishing the ground rules for the years 1998 through
2013 and as long as the property owners comply with those ground rules, those
businesses can stay even though in the future, the City may change the rules.
Mayor Daly. A question was also raised about the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and whether the City
is aware if those bodies have a position on the future of this use.
Council Member Zemel. He is the City's representative on the OCWD and has
done some research and obtained direction and some information from William
Mills, the General Manager. He then read Memorandum dated September 12, 1995
from Mr. Mills regarding the Orange County Steel Salvage/Auto Shredder Waste
Yard as follows:
"we have been monitoring the groundwater in the vicinity of the
subject waste pile for a number of years and have not discovered
any groundwater contamination. Therefore, we do not have any
evidence that this facility poses an immediate threat to the
groundwater basin."
Relative to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, he will defer to Ed
Alario, Public Utilities Department.
19
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He can answer for Mr. Alario that staff
talks to that agency on a monthly basis and have been told the business is in
compliance with the water quality requirements of the Regional Board.
Mayor Daly. He wants to be as clear as possible about the distinction between
the Planning Commission recommendation and the action the Council took three
weeks ago as it relates to the Adams and adjacent property. He will summarize
what he believes the distinction to be. Under the Planning Commission
recommendation, the Adams property is to comply with the court imposed
agreement to clean up the property and then reapply for a permit in 1998.
Under the Council action, Mr. Adams will have the ability to operate
consistent with that Court Order until the year 2013 but in the meantime, City
government will not be able to impose any additional conditions on the
operation occurring on those parcels until 2013. A future City Council in
1998 or 2000, or any time until 2013 will have no ability whatsoever to add
new conditions of operation or request changes to the operation going on. He
asked if that is correct.
City Attorney White. He answered yes, but with one caveat. The law provides
even with regard to existing uses, if a new situation arises that is hazardous
to the public safety, they can impose a new ordinance requiring the businesses
to conform to a new requirement in order to avoid a dangerous condition to the
public. Those are rare and few and far between. In the 18 years he has been
with the City, he can recall the only exception being the imposition of fire
sprinklers on residential structures. He explained for Council Member Zemel
that if then there was a violation, it would be a misdemeanor punishable as a
crime and the City would have jurisdiction. If there is a continuance where
it becomes a nuisance, the City could then seek an injunction against the
nuisance. Previously, the CUP was revoked and subsequently Adams, not the
City, brought action challenging the revocation. Ultimately, there would have
been a procedure like that instituted by the City.
Mayor Daly. He asked that staff elaborate on why the Planning staff
recommended and the Planning Commission upheld no extension of the ability to
conduct a steel salvage recycling operation on the property.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. To summarize, one reason was in recognition of
the past problems that had occurred on the site with that type of land use and
secondly, it is the type of land use that is subject to review to determine
whether it is appropriate in a particular location, what the time limits and
conditions should be, etc.
Miriam Kaywood. She has been involved with the City for over 35 years and to
her recollection, she has never heard of anybody being given such a special
privilege.
The City Attorney then clarified for the Mayor that if the ordinances are
adopted tonight, they would go into effect in 30 days.
Mayor Daly summarized his concerns. The Adams property has a long storied
history. City government a few years ago had to revoke their permits because
of commitments not kept and had to spend taxpayer's money in a court of law to
convince the property owner to clean up the property. An agreement was
reached and now, against the recommendation of the City's professional
planning staff, there seems to be a desire to extend the operating permits for
this business. He feels it is very unfortunate that the City employs
professional planners to advise the Council in setting standards for the
community and then to simply disregard that expertise because it is convenient
20
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
for one property owner when so much time, effort and money has been spent in
an attempt to uphold the integrity and soundness in such a key part of the
City. Anaheim has to raise its standards and he feels this Specific Plan is a
step toward doing that but to exempt one property, ignore the recent
experience of that property and all the problems that have existed and to deny
future policy makers for 15 years to apply additional reasonable standards to
that property is unfortunate. He is going to vote no on the Specific Plan
because of the language the Council has asked be placed in it including the
language affecting the Adams property. He believes it is a serious mistake
especially since 60% of the City's drinking water comes from the underground
water supply. It is a bad planning decision and a bad decision for the
environment. He does support the new planning standards in the 2,600 acres
contained in the Specific Plan for the Northeast Area but with the exception
of the amendment regarding the Adams and adjacent property.
Council Member Zemel. His comments were then directed to the Mayor's
concerns. He believes that staff is to bring the Council facts but it is the
Council who sets policy. The Council is not to take direction from staff, but
vice versa. This is a property rights issue. He feels it is important to
look back on the history of what happened. Me noted there were a lot of
people from the Beach Boulevard Concerned Citizens group present and they
deserve a little more explanation than they received. There has been a kind
of "whisper" campaign going on about this decision. He then briefed the
history of the property starting in 1977 when Adams came to the City
requesting a CUP to operate a recycling center, the actions that were taken,
the conditions set, the Council's voting record when the matter came before
them, etc. He also quoted from minutes of previous Council meetings comments
that were made by Council Members going back to 1986, including Council Member
Kaywood who several times expressed her concern with having to shut down a
recycling facility so desperately needed especially to keep abandoned vehicles
off City streets.
He feels the present Council has inherited a major problem and they want to
avoid further costs to the citizens. The City Attorney himself wrote the
conditions of the Stipulated Judgment that he tightened as tight as possible.
Mr. Adams has to fulfill those conditions and covenants which are going to run
with the land even when the Court Order runs out. They are going to have to
abide by those rules which are much stricter than those laid out in 1977. It
is important to remember that they will have a multi-million dollar problem in
the cleanup of the property if Mr. Adams decides to leave. The use is there
and it is not going to go away.
Council Member Zemel then spoke to comments made by some of the speakers who
expressed concern if the ordinance is adopted with the amendments made by the
Council. He then reiterated his concern for property rights and expressed
that, in his opinion, to control property owners zoning and businesses is
wrong. This is not the time to get even but to work the situation out. The
ground water question has been answered and the fire hazard is no longer
there. What he wants is to get rid of the pile and support business and
property rights and that is why he is going to vote in favor and encourage the
Council to do the same.
Council Member Lopez. He agrees with Council Member Zemel. The water is safe
and there are controls to make sure Mr. Adams complies. If he does not, they
will do whatever it takes to shut the business down. They should give the
business the ability to make money so they can now move on to other things.
21
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Council Member Zemel offered Ordinance No. 5517 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5517: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING
TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO CHAPTER
18.110 RELATING TO ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE NORTHEAST
AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (SP94-1).
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5517, for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Daly
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5517, dully passed and adopted.
Council Member Zemel offered Ordinance No. 5518 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5518: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO ZONING, NORTHEAST INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5518, for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Daly
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5518, duly passed and adopted.
B13.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 5522 INTRODUCTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone
property under Reclassification No. 94-95-11 located at 700 West
Orangewood Avenue, Units B & C from the CG zone to the CL zone.
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5522 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 5522 INTRODUCTION: AMENDING TITLE 18 TO REZONE
PROPERTY UNDER RECLASSIFICATION NO. 94-95-11 LOCATED AT 700 WEST
ORANGEWOOD AVENUE, UNITS B & C FROM THE CG ZONE TO THE CL ZONE.
B14.
179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITION~T.
USE PERMIT NO. 3768 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP., Attn: Charles B. Winn,
2201 Seal Beach Blvd., Seal Beach, CA 90740-8250
AGENT: GARY M. GRAUMANN, P.O. Box 7458, Menlo Park, CA 94026
22
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12t 1995
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.
Informational item at the meeting of June 27, 1995, Item B6. Letter
of appeal submitted by the Agent, Gary Graumann.
At the meeting of August 1, 1995, Item D2, the Anaheim City Council
held a public hearing on, and subsequently GRANTED CUP NO. 3768,
subject to Planning Commission conditions and modifications as
articulated by staff (Resolution No. 95R-144). Request for rehearing
submitted by the Agent, Gary Graumann.
City Clerk Sohl announced that letter dated September 12, 1995 was received
today via FAX from Gary Graumann, Agent for the applicant, withdrawing his
request for a rehearing on this item.
MOTION. Council Member Feldhaus moved to approve the request from Mr.
Graumann withdrawing his request for a rehearing on CUP 3768. Mayor Daly
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
B15.
APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 284 (EL PARAISO) - CATEGOHIC~?3~
EXEMPTr CLASS 21:
OWNER: GOCK WOEY JUNG, 433 S. Vicki Lane, Anaheim, CA 92804;
EL PARAISO RESTAURANT, Attn: Eva Fragosa, 420 S. Brookhurst St.,
Anaheim, CA 92804
INITIATED BY: City-Initiated (Code Enforcement Division) 200 S.
Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 420 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately
0.50 acres located on the east side of Brookhurst Street and
approximately 619 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue. (El
Paraiso Restaurant). City-initiated request to consider revoking or
modifying Conditional Use Permit No. 284 (to establish a restaurant
and cocktail lounge) pursuant to Zoning Code Section 18.03.091 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 284 Terminated (PC95-93) (5 yes votes, i no vote, and 1
abstained).
Informational item at the meeting of August 22, 1995, Item B3.
Letter of appeal submitted by Ralph B. Saltsman, Solomon, Saltsman &
Jamieson, on behalf of the owner, E1 Paraiso Restaurant.
TO CONSIDER HOLDINO A CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE APPEAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 284, OR TO REFER THIS MATTER TO A HEARING
OFFICE.
City Clerk Sohl. There will be a Public Hearing on this matter. The action
before the Council tonight is to consider whether the Council wishes to hold
the Public Hearing itself or to refer the matter to a hearing officer for the
Public Hearing.
23
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
City Attorney White. He would recommend referral to a Hearing Officer due to
the extensive time involved when the matter was heard before the Planning
Commission. Procedural matters came up that lead him to believe this would
adversely impinge upon the Council's time if Council were to hold the hearing.
He would recommend Mr. Victor Kaleta to serve as the Hearing Officer. He was
the former City Attorney of Pasadena now in private practice who has indicated
a willingness to serve in this capacity. His office has contacted Mr.
Saltsman who is the appellant and have suggested a hearing date of October 11,
1995. He recommends that the Council take action by motion pursuant to AMC
Sec. 1.12.110 to refer the appeal of CUP 284 to a Hearing Officer, Mr. Victor
Kaleta and that the matter be heard on October 11, 1995 in the Council
Chamber. The result of the hearing would be a recommendation from the Hearing
Officer and a transcript of the hearing which would come back to the Council
for final determination.
MOTION. Council Member Feldhaus moved to refer the appeal of Conditional Use
Permit No. 284 to a Hearing Officer (Victor Kaleta) with the Public Hearing to
be held on Wednesday, October 11, 1995 in the Council Chamber. Council Member
Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
D1.
PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 95-4A:
To consider vacating certain public streets, highways and service
easements, and to consider abandoning that portion of North Vine
Street located north of Lincoln Avenue, and south of that unnamed
alley located approximately fifty feet north of Lincoln Avenue
(ABANDONMENT NO. 95-4A)
At their meeting of August 1, 1995, Item A5, the Anaheim City Council
adopted Resolution No. 95R-142 declaring its intention to vacate
certain public streets, highways and service easements, and to
consider abandoning that portion of North Vine Street located north
of Lincoln Avenue, and south of that unnamed alley located
approximately fifty feet north of Lincoln Avenue (ABANDONMENT NO. 95-
4A)
REQUESTED BY: The Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
Natalie Meeks, Civil Engineer - Development Services. She briefed the staff
report recommending approval of the abandonment.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished
to speak; there being no response, he closed the Public Hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Mayor Daly,
seconded by Council Member Tait, the City Council finds that the proposed
activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 5, of the City of
Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and
is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirements to file an EIR.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution 95R-162 for adoption, approving Abandonment 95-
4A as recommended by the City Engineer in his report dated, August 1, 1995.
Refer to Resolution Book.
24
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
RESOLUTION NO. 95R-162: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING A PORTION OF THE ACCESS RIGHTS ADJACENT TO THE PORTION OF
NORTH VINE STREET LOCATED NORTH OF LINCOLN AVENUE, AND SOUTH OF THAT UNNAMED
ALLEY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY FIFTY FEET NORTH OF LINCOLN AVENUE (ABANDONMENT
NO. 95-4A)
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 95R-162 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Tait, Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 95R-162 duly passed and adopted.
D2.
PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3774 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: DAVID DANIEL, ET AL, 469 S. Green Grove Drive, Orange, CA
92666
AGENT: FANCHER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC., Attn: Nina Raey, 1342
Bell Avenue, Suite 3-K, Tustin, CA 92680
LOCATION: 1810 East Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 0.55
acre located on the south side of Katella Avenue and approximately
203 feet west of the centerline of State College Boulevard.
To permit a fast food restaurant with a drive through lane (waiver of
minimum number of required parking spaces was deleted).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3774 GRANTED, IN PART, (PC95-76) (6 yes votes, i absent).
Denied waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by
Council Member Frank Feldhaus and Mayor Daly at the meeting of August 1, 1995,
and Public Hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - August 31, 1995
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - August 31, 1995
Posting of property - September 1, 1995
Staff Input: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated July 10, 1995.
Mayor Daly. His concerns had to do with setbacks usually required from
Katella and also the drive-through lane location and its proximity to Katella.
This is a parcel that is surrounded by an "L" shaped parcel. In its previous
operation as a restaurant (Fitzgerald's), there was a parking problem. He
believes the reuse of the site is a good one but it is at a very busy and
important location. Trying to get in and out of the gas station at the corner
of Katella and State College during rush hour is very difficult already and
this is a fast food location right next to the gas station. He wants to be
certain all City standards are upheld.
Annika Santalahti. This afternoon, they received a revised plan labeled
Revision #1 from the applicant revising the plan in accordance with the
criteria set forth by the Planning Commission. However, a number of things
needed to be corrected. The posted drawing on the right is the original
25
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
drawing. The building is now located on the southerly side of the property
where before it was on the easterly side. (Also see drawing submitted just
before the Public Hearing by the Applicant - Site Plan dated 9-11-95). She
then briefed the changes that were made from the original plan and in
concluding stated the plan meets all applicable zoning regulations regarding
landscaping, square footage, distance of drive-through lane and issues of that
type.
She understands Traffic Engineering has some concerns that probably can be
taken care of relatively easy but the drawing does not reflect those kinds of
issues. If Council favorably views Exhibit #1, Rev. 2, there will need to be
some modification to the conditions of approval contained in the Planning
Commission resolution. She clarified for the Mayor that this change is
definitely an improvement over the previous plan which is what should have
been submitted the first time. No waivers would be required if approved
assuming the traffic concerns can be taken care of. It complies fully with
the zoning code.
John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager. Given the short period of
time he had to review the plan with staff, there are a few items identified in
need of correction and it appears they can be corrected. They involve the
turning radius of the drive-through lane and widths of 2 or 3 of the parking
spaces, specifically the corner spaces which would need to be a bit wider.
Annika Santalahti. If Council were to approve the project today, staff would
recommend a condition that the final site plan prior to building permits or
even prior to the Planning Commission's review of landscaping shall have the
approval of the City Engineer.
Mayor Daly. At this time, the only portion to go back to the Planning
Commission is the landscaping; Annika Santalahti clarified that was correct.
Council Member Lopez. He referred to the MacDonald's on State College and
Katella across the street. He has been there many times and does not believe
there has been any history of problems at that location. He asked if staff
compared that use when considering the proposed use.
Annika Santalahti. The proposed project is somewhat better. The MacDonald's
site is problematic and they did not want to see that repeated at this
location.
Council Member Feldhaus asked how the trash trucks could get to the dumpster
area if the parking spaces are filled.
Annika Santalahti. The applicant is present and they are aware of the
situation. Sanitation has not seen the drawings. They do have one extra
parking space. They potentially can locate it towards the easterly property
line so there is a "T" intersection. She agrees the trash enclosure is not
in a very good location at present. If Council were to approve this,
condition 9(b) addressed the issue of the trash enclosure location which can
be modified. They would still have to get the approval of the Sanitation
Division regarding the location of the trash enclosure. She clarified for the
Mayor that staff would recommend approval of the project with amendment to the
conditions.
26
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing.
Scott Dufner, Vice President, Fancher Development Services representing David
Daniel. Relative to setbacks, they have exceeded the setback with regard to
the building. On the trash enclosure, 31 spaces are required and 32 provided.
They can work out a location with Sanitation on the east side of the property
line that would satisfy their concerns. With respect to the proximity to
State College, they are 230' west of the right of way and the driveway is set
back from that approximately another 25'. Ingress and egress is right turn,
right out. In the plan before the Council, they are not seeking any variances
with respect to City standards. They met with Traffic and can accommodate
their concerns adequately with respect to on-site design and the design of the
driveway. Relative to the conditions before the Council as approved by the
Planning Commission with some modifications, he is prepared to address those
or Miss Santalahti can do so. The conditions are acceptable and they would
like to proceed tonight.
Mayor Daly. He asked for clarification that they are prepared to live with
additional conditions as recommended by staff.
Scott Dufner. They met with staff this afternoon and worked out a consensus
as to the modifications necessary to make these conditions of approval
satisfactory to both sides, i.e., the conditions of approval approved by the
Planning Commission.
Annika Santalahti. Page 3 of the resolution is where all the changes would
take place. She then briefed all of the changes to the conditions.
Roy King. He is speaking on behalf of the Angel Inn Motel which is adjacent
to the subject project. The Sheehan's, owners of the motel, oppose the
project because it will create a problem for them and their guests. There is
already a service station on the corner with a car wash. The traffic on the
corner is horrendous and the proposed restaurant is not only a family type
restaurant, but a drive-thru. If they relocate the board for the sound system
away from the motel, it would help. There will be guests staying within 50'
of the restaurant on the west and south side. If they build a wall that would
encompass the restaurant property, that would also help since it would protect
the motel guests. Their main concern is the peace of mind of their guests.
Annika Santalahti. She understands there will be a 6' block wall on the west
and south sides. The exception would be at the front landscape setback where
they would have to drop the wall down in the front area.
Scott Dufner. They are proposing with the plan before the Council tonight
building a 6' concrete block wall along the entire length of the southerly and
westerly property lines. This was in direct response to the comments made by
the management of the hotel at the Planning Commission hearing.
Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. The zoning code requires that the wall be
stepped down in the front setback area to 3 1/2' for vehicular and pedestrian
site lines.
Mayor Daly. If the Angel Inn has concerns about the details of the design of
the wall, for instance, at what point it transitions from 3' to 6', they
should follow up with Planning staff at City Hall.
27
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Mayor 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 Daly offered Resolution 95R-163 for adoption granting Conditional Use
Permit No. 3774 subject to City Planning Commission conditions with amendments
as articulated by the Zoning Administrator amending Condition No. 2, 4, 9 and
10 (No. 10 deleted in its entirety and adding a new Cond. 10). Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 95R-163: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3774.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 95R-163 for adoption=
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Lopez, Zemel, Feldhaus, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 95R-163 duly passed and adopted.
C1. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Council Member Zemel. There is an item he would like placed on the agenda
next week. Since he was elected last November he has been working with the
Police Association on an issue and also with Congressman Cox's office
regarding illegal aliens who have been arrested and brought to the City jail.
They are then released and subsequently do not show up for court and the
Police will rearrest them and bring them back to the jail which takes a great
deal of Police time. He has thought about the idea of having an Immigration
and Naturalization Service officer in the jail to help with that situation.
It is proving to possibly be something that might work. He has talked to the
City Manager about the possibility and now feels it is time he brought this to
the Council's attention in order to get further direction and input and
perhaps get another Council Member to assist.
The issue of possibly including the INS in criminal work at the City's jail
will be on the Council agenda of 9/19/95 for purposes of Council discussion.
Council Member Tait. Last year, he served on the Block Grant Committee.
There are four target areas in the City whose neighborhoods are in the central
city. He would like staff to bring back information on whether or not it is
28
CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
possible to develop another target area on the west side and to devote some or
more Block Grant monies to that area. This might be a solution for doing
something tangible for west Anaheim. With more money coming from Washington,
perhaps now it will be possible.
Mayor Daly. The Council will look forward to a report from the City Manager
on that potential.
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
September 12, 1995 was adjourned (9:00 P.M.).
LEONORA N. SOHL
CITY CLERK
29