1993/06/09City Hall, ~-mheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER: Tom Wood
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Gary Johnson
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGER: John Lower
DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Mary McCloskey
SENIOR PLANNER: Lucy Yeager
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 1:40 p.m. on June 4, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the ajourned regular meeting of June 8, 1993, held June 9,
1993 at the Inn at the Park, to order at 1:50 p.m.
Mayor Daly stated the purpose of the meeting is to conduct a public hearing on
the application from the Walt Disney Company concerning:
LOCATION: The proposed project area is generally located within the
City of Anaheim's Commercial Recreation Area adjacent to and southwest
of the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) and is accessible from Harbor Boulevard,
Ball Road, Freedman Way, Katella Avenue, West Street, Orangewood Avenue,
Haster Street and Walnut Street. (See Exhibit 1 Commercial Recreation
Area/The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Project Boundary Map, part of
Legal Notice and posted with agenda.)
The Specific Plan project area encompasses 546 acres, plus
approximately 11 acres of right-of-way improvements, generally
west of I-5 between Ball Road and Orangewood Avenue and east of
Walnut Street. Draft EIR No. 311 identifies on and off-site
intersection improvements at locations as listed in the legal
notice posted with this agenda.
The General Plan Amendment project area encompasses areas within
and outside of the Specific Plan project area. Outside areas
include area within and contiguous to the following roadways as
further described in the General Plan Amendment No. 331 proposal:
1. West Street between I-5 and Katella Avenue
2. Cerritos Avenue between Walnut Street and West Street
3. Freedman Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street
4. Katella Avenue between Walnut Street and I-5
5. Harbor Boulevard between I-5 and Orangewood Avenue
6. Clementine Street between Freedman Way and Katella Avenue
The proposed Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted
Structural Height Ordinance pertains to the entire approximately
1,046-acre Commercial Recreation Area as shown on the Commercial
Recreation Area/The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Project
Boundary Map posted with this agenda.
382
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5=00 P,M
me
PROPOSAL~
General Plan Amendment No. 331 is proposed to amend the Land Use,
Circulation and Environmental Resource and Management Elements of
the General Plan as specifically listed under A) B) and C) of item
1 of the legal notice posted and made an exhibit of this agenda.
The proposed Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (including
Zoning and Development Standards, a Design Plan and Guidelines,
and a Public Facilities Plan) would provide for the development of
an international multi-day vacation destination resort including
the construction of the Disneyland Administration Building (a
475,000 square foot building with an accompanying parking facility
for 2,300 spaces); construction of the WESTCOT Center including
the WESTCOT theme park (with up to 3.35 million square feet of
development including attractions, pavilions, an amphitheater,
restaurants, retail and potentially some hotel development),
hotels (up to a maximum of 4,600 new rooms plus 1,000 rooms
remaining in the existing Disneyland Hotel which will undergo
extensive renovation, up to 420,000 square feet of meeting space
and retail/restaurant space, and accommodation of 9,360 new
parking spaces, with provision for up to 1,000 rooms to be located
within the WESTCOT theme park); entertainment areas, internal
transportation systems and two public parking facilities
containing a maximum of approximately 34,300 spaces; and,
designation of an area for future expansion to possibly include a
third gated theme park (analyzed with up to 1,250,000 square feet
of building area and parking facilities containing 8,700 parking
spaces). Ongoing internal modifications and renovation of the
existing Disneyland theme park and Disneyland Hotel will continue
as part of The Disneyland Resort.
Also proposed is the establishment of the C-R Overlay which would
pertain to approximately 140 acres and would permit property in
the Overlay to be developed with land uses consistent with the
development program and standards for the underlying Resort
District or be governed by the same land uses (i.e. permitted and
conditionally permitted uses, etc.) as the C-R (Commercial
Recreation) Zone as set forth in Chapter 18.48 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code. As described in EIR No. 311, the proposed project
also includes the demolition and removal of some existing
facilities as well as property acquisition for implementatfon of
the off-site infrastructure improvements.
Project design modifications which have occurred since the release
of the Draft EIR and Specific Plan in November 1992 include a
reconfiguration of the West Parking Area and the designation of
parking facilities (open parking lot and parking structure) south
of Katella Avenue and adjacent to Haster Street as well as more
detailed project design features pertaining to the design of the
parking facilities.
Also incorporated with the Specific Plan is a Public Facilities
Plan consisting of maps and text which set forth and address the
timing and extent of future infrastructure improvements and
services needed to serve the project. The Specific Plan includes
a comprehensive Streetscape Program to address special treatments
383
City Hallr Anaheimr California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9r 1993 - 5500 P.M.
be
ce
for gateway entry points into the area, median treatments, street
trees and landscaping.
The proposed Anaheim Commercial Recreation Maximum Permitted
Structural Height Ordinance would replace Map 1124 entitled
"Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Height Standard Guideline"
which was previously adopted by City Council Rsolution No. 80R-174
for the Commercial Recreation Area.
ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Environmental Impact Report No. 3115
A Draft EIR (EIR No. 311) has been prepared for the project and
circulated for public/responsible agency review in compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and
City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines. Response to Comments documents
have been prepared to address the public/responsible agency
comments on the Draft EIR.
Recommending City Council certification of Environmental Impact
Report No. 311, including a Statement of Findings and Facts and
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adoption of a
Mitigation Monitoring Program.
GPA No. 331~
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC93-58
Adopting and recommending to the City Council adoption of General Plan
Amendment No. 331 pertaining to the Land Use, Circulation and
Environmental Resource and Management Elements of the General Plan (The
Disneyland Resort).
ee
Specific Plan No. 92-1
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC93-59
Recommending City Council adoption of a Resolution and an Ordinance
approving Specific Plan No. 92-1 (including Zoning and Development
Standards, a Design Plan and Guidelines, and a Public Facilities Plan)
(The Disneyland Resort)
Zoning and Development Standards Specific Plan No. 92-1
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC93-60
Recommending City Council adoption of a Resolution and an
Ordinance approving Zoning and Development Standards in connection
with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1
Planning Commission Recommendation for approval of the Anaheim
Commercial Recreation Area Height Standard Ordinance
ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO. - ..... : Certifying EIR No. 311, adopting a Statement of
Findings and Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations and adopting a
Mitigation Monitoring Program.
RESOLUTION NO. - ..... : Adopting General Plan Amendment No. 331 pertaining to
the Land Use, Circulation and Environmental Resource and Management Elements
of the General Plan.
384
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. . Adopting Specific Plan No. 92-1 (Including Zoning and
Development Standards, a Design Plan and Guidelines, and a Public Facilities
Plan) for The Disneyland Resort, and, by ORDINANCE NO. amending the
Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to
Zoning (Specific Plan No. 92-1, The Disneyland Resort).
RESOLUTION NO. : Adopting Zoning and Development Standards for The
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1, and, by ORDINANCE NO.
amending Title' 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code by adding thereto Chapter
18.78 relating to Zoning and Development Standards for Specific Plan No. 92-1
(SP92-1) Zone (The Disneyland Resort).
ORDINANCE NO. ---- (INTRODUCTION)$ Adding Section 18.04.035 to Chapter 18.04
and amending Sections 18.48.050 and 18.48.082 of Chapter 18.48 of Title 18 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Zoning (Anaheim Commercial Recreation
Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Requirements).
Mayor Daly explained the procedure to be used during the public hearing, i.e.,
that the Council will first call upon the applicant, the Walt Disney Company,
including any representatives they may have to present testimony and evidence.
Next the Council will hear the Staff Report, followed by a report from the
City's environmental consultant.
Following these presentations, the Council will hear from the public, and in
accordance with the City's Rules of Order will first hear testimony from any
persons wishing to testify in favor of the proposed project.
Following the receipt of all testimony in favor, the Council will hear
testimony from those persons wishing to testify in opposition.
Following testimony in opposition, the Council will allow time for the
applicant to present rebuttal testimony, or to answer any questions posed
during the opposition testimony. At the conclusion of the rebuttal
testimony the City Council will have the opportunity to ask questions of
staff, its consultants the applicant or members of the public who have
testified. After the completion of such questioning by the City Council the
public participation portion of the public hearing will be closed. The City
Council will not consider, and the record of these proceedings will not
include any written materials submitted to the Council or the City after the
public hearing is closed.
The following is the list of letters/documents received by the City Clerk up
to and at the June 9, 1993 Public Hearing and transmitted to the City Council:
Exibit No. Letter/Document
Jeffrey L. Farano/Farano and Kieviet to City of Anaheim, City
Clerk, dated June 2, 1993.
Cynthia M. Wolcott/Palmierl, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron
(representing Ben and Mary Lou Hathaway) to Ms. Leonora Sohl/City
Clerk, dated June 7, 1993.
3
Cynthia M. Wolcott/Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron
(representing the Schlund family) to Ms. Leonora Sohl/City Clerk,
dated June 7, 1993.
385
City Hall, Anaheimr California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9r 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Alfred & Marilyn Long/LFS Benefit Services to City Clerk, dated
June 7, 1993.
Elio & Betty Ronconi to Anaheim City Council, dated June 6, 1993.
Mike Bailey, Director of Facilities, Planning/Placentia-Yorba
Linda Unified School District (with attachment), dated June 8,
1993.
Elaine J. Carlson (for Joyce E. Tabris) to Anaheim City Council,
dated June 7, 1993.
Post card from Balter to Mayor T. Daly, dated May 30, 1993,
including others (total of 31 cards).
DOCUMENTS RECEIVED AT THE JUNE 9, 1993, PUBLIC MEARING.
Marshall Krupp, President/Community Systems Associates, Inc.
(representing Garden Grove Unified School Distric) to Mayor and
Members of the City Council, dated June 9, 1993.
10
Marshall Krupp, President/Community Systems Associates, Inc.
(representing Centralia School District) to Mayor and Members of
the City Council, dated June 9, 1993.
11
Slides presented by Disney (19-ring binder) at the City Council
Public Hearing.
12
Letter from Douglas M. Moreland, Director of Development/Disney
Development Company to Mayor Tom Daly (with attachments), dated
June 8, 1993.
13
Art Brown, Mayor/City of Buena Park to City of Anaheim, Mayor Tom
Daly, dated June 7, 1993.
14
John E. Brown/Best, Best & Krieger (Counsel to Anaheim City School
District) to City Councilmembers (with attachments) re: Impacts of
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan on the Anaheim City School
District, dated June 9, 1993.
15
John E. Brown/Best, Best & Krieger (Counsel to Anaheim Union High
School District) to City Council members (with attachments), dated
June 9, 1993.
16
John E. Brown/Best, Best & Krieger (Counsel to Anaheim City School
District) to City Councilmembers (with attachments) re: Mitigation
of School Facilities Impacts Caused by the Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan, dated June 9, 1993.
17
Tim Paone/Paone Callahan McHolm & Winton to Mayor Tom Daly and
Members of the City Council, dated June 8, 1993.
18
Lisa Doose to Members of the Anaheim City Council, dated June 9,
1993.
19
Jeff Kirsch, H.O.M.E. Various newspaper articles and other
documents.
386
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
2O
Reed Royalty/Industrial League of Orange County to Anaheim City
Council, dated June 9, 1993.
20a
Gordon B. Ruser to Mayor Tom Daly and Council Members (with
attachment page), dated June 9, 1993.
21
Constance Spenger, President/Friends of the Tecate Cypress to
Mayor or Tom Daly and Council Members
22
Clyde Schlund - Alternate Location of Disneyland Drive, (only 1
page). No date noted except submittal date of 6/9/93.
22a
Doug Kintz re: Disney Expansion City Council Meeting (with
attachment). No dated noted except submittal date of 6/9/93.
23
Carmen A. Morinello/Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges to Mr. Tom
Wood, Assistant City Manager, dated June 8, 1993.
24
Christopher Whorton, Member of the Board of Education/Anaheim City
School District to Anaheim City Council (comments presented),
dated June 9, 1993.
24a
Daniel Rangel to Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council
(comments presented), dated June 9, 1993.
25
Betty Ronconi, H.O.M.E. to Mayor Daly, Mayor Pro Tem Simpson,
Councilmen Hunter, Pickler and Feldhaus, dated April 9, 1993.
26
Letter from Marshall B. Krupp, President/Community Systems
Associates, Inc. (representing Centralia School District) to Mayor
and Members of the City Council
27
Letter from Marshall B. Krupp, President/Community Systems
Associates, Inc. (representing Garden Grove Unified School
District) to Mayor and Members of the City Council
28
Overhead slides used by Jeff Kirsch, H.O.M.E. for his
presentation.
29
Letter from The Walt Disney Company, David K. Thompson, Vice
President-Counsel to City of Anaheim, dated June 9, 1993.
DOCUMENTS RECEIVED AT THE CIVIC CENTER ON JUNE 9, 1993.
Letter from John Sisker, Huntington Beach Transportation
Commissioner, written transcript of presentation at June 9, 1993,
City Council public hearing.
31.
Letter from David A. Rudawitz dated June 5, 1993 to the Mayor,
received at City Hall on June 9, 1993.
32.
Letter from John Campos, President, and Janet Rizzo, Legislative
Committee Chairman, La Habra Area Chamber of Commerce to
Joel Fick, dated June 1, 1993.
The Mayor opened the public hearing and called upon the applicant, the Walt
Disney Company, to make their presentation.
387
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Jack Lindquist, President, (residence 9491 Villa Isle Drive, Villa Park,
California) noted that the deliberations before the Council at this time are
perhaps the most important ever to come before the City, as their decision on
the Disneyland Resort will determine the course of the City for the next 50
years.
Mr. Lindquist recalled that over the past 37 years, Disneyland has created a
special and continuing relationship and partnership with the people of Anaheim
and Orange county. He listed the benefits of Disneyland's innovative
community service programs; service by its employees on hospital boards,
service organizations, youth groups and volunteer organizations; the support
they provide for educational institutions; and the tens of thousands of jobs
for students.
Mr. Lindquist concluded that the Disneyland Resort is something that the Walt
Disney Company believes in and wants to proceed very much, but if the project
is not approved, they will still be a very viable presence in Anaheim.
However, he questioned, without Westcot and the Disneyland Resort project what
will become of the Commercial Recreation Area in Anaheim; and where will the
money for the necessary infrastructure and transportation improvements come
from? The City Council must consider these issues as much as they consider
the specifics of the Disneyland Resort.
Cary Hunnewell, Vice President, Disney Development Corporation (residence 1910
Hillcrest Road, Los Angeles California) stated that the Disneyland Resort is
about economic opportunity for Anaheim, Orange County and the State of
California. The project represents one of, if not the largest, private
investments being considered in the United Stated today. At full build-out
the Resort will create 28,000 permanent new jobs, and over 40,000 person years
of construction period jobs will be created. The Resort at full build out
will generate 2.4 billion dollars per year in new economic activity for
Southern California. The Resort will also generate 150 million dollars per
year in new tax revenues for Anahem, Orange County and the State of
California.
Mr. Hunnewell added that despite the significant benefits from the project, it
cannot single-handedly solve all the problems of Orange County, but can serve
as a catalyst for new and better community partnerships. Mr. Hunnewell called
attention to the fact that the project placed before the City Council this
date has been meticulously planned for over 3-1/2 years; a project lauded by
SCAG and the Air Quality Management District for commitment to sensitive
environmental issues and sound planning practices.
At the conclusion of his presentation, Mr. Hunnewell introduced the next
speaker.
Martin Sklar, President, Walt Disney Imagineering, (residence 7974 Woodrow
Wilson Drive, Los Angeles, California) Mr. Sklar gave the details of his long
relationship with the City of Anaheim as a resident and civic minded
volunteer. He explained that he has worked with the Disney Organization since
his college days, beginning as Editor of the Disneyland News. He also wrote
the film communicating Walt Disney's ideas for Epcot. Mr. Sklar now feels
that the Epcot idea will really be accomplished in Westcot, where the
imagineers will have figured out how to create fun and entertainment for their
guests, but at the same time provide learning experiences about people, places
and careers, science and technology, the oceans and the environment. Mr.
Sklar introduced and presented a 5-minute video encapsulating the idea and
theme for Westcot.
388
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Doug Moreland, Director of Development, Disney Development Company, stated
from his experience with nine other large projects throughout Southern
California this is definitely the most comprehensive EIR he has seen. He
explained the concept of a "destination resort" and the challenge in design of
the Disney Resort to transform an asphalt urban area into an attractive place
where people would want to come, visit and vacation. The Specific Plan for
the Disney Resort is intended to transform the current Commercial Recreation
Area into a garden district. He explained that the project's environmental
impacts were reduced by incorporating 125 project design features to minimize
the impacts on traffic, air quality, noise and construction. During the EIR
review process an additional 225 mitigation measures were added, and the
Planning Commission, on its review and approval of the project, added sixty-
six more conditions.
Mr. Moreland related that to create a place where people will stay for several
days requires three elements - a wide variety of amenities and activities; a
transportation plan which allows guests to arrive and depart with ease and to
move about; and an attractive resort environment. Using slides, Mr. Moreland
demonstrated what the resort hotel district and theme park district would
incorporate and what the major streets in the CR area will look like. He
related the travelling and car pooling characteristics of Disney guests and
cast members. The traffic study area used was 54 square miles, most of
central Orange County. The study area was bordered by the 91 Freeway on the
north, Beach Boulevard to the west, the 22 Freeway to the south and and 57
Freeway to the east. Thirty-six intersections within the focus area of these
boundaries were analyzed, both with and without the I-5 widening. The
transportation plan uses freeway exits and entrances to direct resort traffic
into the east and west parking districts, removing Disneyland traffic from
city streets.
The east and west parking districts are composed of two new public parking
structures containing 34,300 spaces. A vacant portion of the area marked
future expansion will be used primarily for cast member parking. The east
parking district has three potential configurations, option 1, north of
Freedman Way, options 2 and 3 below Freedman Way. The internal circulation
plan includes walkways, people movers, an expanded monorail, connections to
the CRA businesses and the Anaheim Convention Center, as well as future
connections to the proposed Orange County regional transit projects.
Recognizing that not everyone will arrive via freeway, additional design
features and mitigation measures to reduce impacts on local streets were
included.
To protect the pedestrian experience on the major streets in the resort
district, Harbor, Katella and West Streets, the 1964 height regulation
ordinance is proposed to be expanded. This would als0 preserve the special
historic character of Disneyland as well as future theme parks. The proposed
regulation accomplishes this, while at the same time allows the majority of
property owners in the CRA to design projects exceeding the current 75 foot
height limit. Additionally, there is new zoning in the CR Overlay to provide
comprehensive development standards to ensure a resort environment while
achieving increased densities (50 to 75 rooms per acre).
Concerning the environmental review process, Mr. Moreland advised that Westcot
2000 held a rally where more than 4,000 supporters were in attendance.
Partnership 2010, also held a rally calling on local and business leaders to
make completion of Disneyland Resort a top priority for Southern California.
The project has received 19 chamber of commerce resolutions, 13 Orange County
and public agency endorsements including the Industrial League of Orange
389
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
County, Partnership 2010, I-5 Consortium Cities Joint Power Authority and
Anaheim Private Industry Council, SCAG and the South Coast Air Quality
Management District. The draft E.I.R. analyzed the resort's impact on 15
different areas and lists only seven unavoidable adverse impacts, two
temporary and five long term.
The temporary impacts are the construction period, and intersection of Anaheim
Boulevard and Ball Road until I-5 construction is completed. Longer term
impacts deal with the loss of agricultural land, solid waste and air quality.
Mr. Moreland elaborated on these.
Responses to the issues brought forward during the 69-day public comment
period were reviewed by Mr. Moreland. Specifically, of 306 letters received,
four accounted for 70 percent of the issues raised. These letters were from
the City of Garden Grove, Anaheim City School District, Anaheim Union High
School District and West Street-Ball Road motel owners. The issues were land
use, west parking structure; traffic, its impact on West Street, south of
Katella and the West Street realignment; school impacts- state law requires
commercial developers to pay a maximum fee of 25 cents per square foot,
(adjusted for inflation to 27 cents per square foot) the required fee would be
2.5 million dollars. The schools feel that the state mandated fees are not
~dequate and have requested additional funds. Mr. Moreland elaborated on each
of the issues, and the mitigation steps proposed.
Mr. Moreland's final subject was the construction impact. He emphasized that
this is an important issue for them as well, since Disneyland, as well as
other businesses must be operational during construction. They plan to ensure
mobility throughout the CRA area during construction with phasing, beginning
with construction at the eastern portion of the site, with the east parking
structure and a new movement system to the entry plaza for Disneyland. Once
the east structure is complete, the existing parking lot is freed up for
construction of Westcot theme park, then new hotels and the west parking
structure.
He explained steps to be taken to coordinate construction, staging areas for
materials and sound attenuation measures, and monitoring.
At the conclusion of his presentation, Mr. Moreland submitted three items for
Council consideration: two proposed modifications to the conditions of
approval and mitigation monitoring program; findings for the Disneyland
administration building; and a sewer storm drain report for the Disneyland
administration building.
Mr. Jack Lindquist concluded the presentation on behalf of Disney by advising
that they plan, in response to the nearby community concerns regarding the
noise from the Fantasm£c entertainment program, to spend more than $500,000 to
reconfigure the sound system and address these concerns. He stated he
believes his organization has done a great job in addressing community
concerns and the project's impact. They have great confidence in this
project, that it can and will deliver everything they have said it would, both
creatively and fiscally. They urge Council approval.
RECESS: Following the Disney presentation, the Mayor called for a five-minute
break. The Council, by general consent, recessed.(3:lO p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (3:30 p.m.)
390
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Mr. Tom Wood, Deputy City Manager, introduced the staff report on the Disney
Resort project to be given on behalf of the City. He reaffirmed that copies
of the City's Staff Report dated June 4, 1993 had been delivered to the City
Council. Copies are also available for the public. He submitted for the
record the staff report, attachments, letters received up to this point,
actions and recommendations of the Planning Commission into the record of this
hearing.
Additionally, it is Staff's recommendation that the Disneyland Resort EIR No.
311 be incorporated by reference, the South Central Sewer Efficiency Study as
approved by the City Council Resolution No. 93R-73, on May 11, 1993, and the
Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central area, as approved by City
Council Resolution 93R-67 on May 4, 1993. The City Council was also forwarded
an informational memorandum from the City Attorney's Office regarding schools
relative to this project. He read the list of additional letters and
materials received this date, but not referenced in the staff report (items 9
through 29 on the list shown above).
He introduced Joan Kelly from Michael Brandman Associates, to present (with
Council concurrence) only the highlights of her presentation to the Planning
Commission, as the previous presentation for the Planning Commission has been
made a part of the record.
Joan Kelly, Project Manager for the Disney E.I.R. Document, Michael Brandman
Associates, 2530 Red Hill Avenue, Santa Ana. She indicated that she would
discuss four major issues - schools; noise impacts; and two items concerning
the intermodal transportation center.
Ms. Kelly summarized the detailed analysis of the project impacts on schools
and on student generation. She reviewed the population demographics and
statistics and the unique aspects of the Disneyland cast, many of whom are
students and teenagers. Her review of these unique characterist&cs is that
the project will produce less impact on schools than would be the case for
another nonresidential project of similar size. She noted that the EIR
estimates of students indirectly generated is based on official school
district data. She pointed out inconsistencies in the numbers used in the
school district studies concerning the direct new jobs, full-time equivalent
positions, and new households projected. She noted that the studies do not
indicate from where or how these numbers were calculated. The EIR used a .307
student generation rate, the second School District study used .324 and the
third .46. This results in a tremendous number of new projected students, 170
in the Disney EIR, 372 in the second school study and increasing to 2,611 in
the third study. She noted that the impact cost jumps dramatically as well
from 1.8 million in the EIR to 7.9 million in the second School study and 79.4
million for the third Anaheim City School District study.
Addressing noise impacts, Ms. Kelly stated that to minimize noise from the
parking structures adjacent to the residences along Walnut Street, the project
will include: textured driving surface to minimize tire squeal; engine noise
from sweeping equipment to be muffled; noise to Walnut Street residences to be
minimized by louvers and sound walls, tiering of the structure above the third
floor; noise to the Conestoga Hotel minimized with sound attenuation louvers
on the north side of the west parking structure. The structures must comply
with the City's sound pressure level ordinance - 60 decibel compliance at the
property line. She offered that Dr. Tony Chung from Michael Brandman
Associates is present and can present a demonstration on sound pressure levels
if Council desires.
391
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Ms. Kelly introduced Pat Gibson, Cooper Associates, 1453 Third Street, Santa
Monica, to adress the two issues related to the intermodal transportation
center.
Mr. Gibson stated that since the Planning Commission meetings there has been a
question as to whether or not the intermodal transportation center was
included in the draft EIR. He relayed what was considered in the EIR, which
included Resort guests, hotel guests, theme park guests, cast members to all
the elements of the Resort, cast and guests of the retail entertainment
center, an expanded convention center, as well as transit in the form of all
shuttle buses, tour buses, sightseeing buses and Airport buses. Also the
Orange County Transit District, Southern California Rapid Transit District,
regular arterial buses, recreational vehicles and service vehicles and trucks.
So his response is definitely yes the intermodal transportation center was
included in this EIR. The draft EIR assumed a 16,700 space west garage and a
17,600 space east garage. Subsequent to that analysis the cast parking has
been moved to the Riviera site south of Katella (5,100 spaces).
The critical intersections for the Disney Resort are planned to accommodate
peak arrival and departures (10:00 to 11:00 inbound in the a.m. and 11:00 p.m.
ntil midnight outbound at night). If the intermodal transportation center
Des into the east garage, as presently proposed, the commuter traffic will
.~ave greater propensity to move in the 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. hour than the Disney
guests. Therefore additional analysis on the impact of this scenario was done
and the improvements in the EIR were found sufficient to handle the traffic
pattern from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. Clearly, the transit trips'necessary for the
intermodal transportation center are included in the EIR, documented, and the
mitigation measures would accommodate the commuter traffic.
Ms. Kelly stated that the final issue to be addressed is that of air quality
emissions related to the intermodal transportation center, which fall within
the emission projections in the Disneyland Resort EIR, because the emissions
related to mobile sources using the intermodal center were included in the
traffic projections. The project will be in conformance with the Regional
Growth Management Plan and the Air Quality Management Plan.
Mr. Wood stated that this concludes the staff presentation.
Mayor Daly reiterated the procedure for members of the public to speak and the
time limits. He opened the hearing to all those wishing to testify in favor
of the Disney Resort Project.
The following persons addressed the City Council giving comments in favor of
the subject Disney Project: (Their reasons and rationale are summarized at
the conclusion of the list of names.)
1. Arthur C. Brown, Mayor of Buena Park, 6630 Mt. Whitney Drive, Buena Park
2. Jack C. Dutton, 1400 South Sunkist, space 181, Anaheim 92806
3. Carla Daniels, 8472 20th Place, Westminster 92683
Bob Kazarian, 1463 Westmont Drive, Anaheim 92801
Submitted as an exhibit a huge "fan" containing signatures of
numerous supporters. This project was put together by Westcot
2000.
5. Dick Ackerman, 2600 E. Nutwood, Fullerton 92631,
392
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5~00 P.M.
6. Ken Sammons, 709 Agate Street, Anaheim 92804
7. Start Pawlowski, 1433 West Janeen Avenue, Anaheim 92801
8. Mike Ellis, 897 Santa Aha, Laguna Beach
9e
Allan Hughes, Executive V.P. Anaheim Chamber of Commerce,
100 South Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim 92805
10. Juanita Metassa, 100 North Ross Street, Santa Aha
Doug Kintz - (wished to speak in favor of EIR as long as certain
modifications are made.) This testimony was ruled out of order at this
time, Mr. Kintz was advised to speak under testimony opposed to the
Project.
11. Mel Miller, 5311 Yale Avenue, Westminster
12. Mike Potts, Union Representative for Building Trades,
13. Timothy Cooley, President and CEO, Partnership 2010
14. Klm Hainley, 358 Hamilton, Costa Mesa
15.
Ken Moore, 606 19th Street, Huntington Beach, President, CEO, Orange
County Chamber on Economic Development and Industry.
16. Kevin Langan, Box 766, Stanton CA.
17. Anne Gallaugher, 517 South Laurel, Brea.
18. Liz Cason
19. Doug Gibson, 931 South Peregrine Anaheim
20.
Dick Clark, Yorba Linda, President-Elect of the Anaheim Chamber of
Commerce.
21. Dr. Robert Peterson, 2507 Poinsettia, Anaheim 92806
22.
Vaughn Hedges, 735 West orangewood Avenue Anaheim
Vice President, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
Local Union 441.
The Mayor announced that as agreed upon, the City Council would recess for a
dinner break and would return to continue with testimony in favor at
approximately 6:15 p.m.
RECESS: By general consent, the City Council recessed for dinner break.
(5:25 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Daly called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (6:35 p.m.)
Mayor Daly welcomed the public back to the meeting, reiterated the procedure
for speakers and announced the Council would resume hearing testimony of those
in favor of the Disney Resort project.
393
City Hallr Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
23. Bob Ball, 1532 Laster Street
24. Dan Van Dorpe, President, Van Dorpe/Chow, 863 Jasper Circle, Anaheim.
25. Scott Ord, 5412 Willowick Circle, Anaheim
26. Miriam Kaywood
27. Daphne Thomas, 1924 Bayshore Drive, Anaheim
28. Paula Hasler, 26031 Anacapa, Laguna Hills
29. Lucy Ord, 5412 Willowick Circle, Anaheim
30. Mary Jones, 1810 W. Wilhelmina Drive, Anaheim
31. Andrea Manes, 400 North West Street, Anaheim
32.
Timothy Connaghan, 1320 West Washington Santa Aha,
National Sales Manager, Conestoga Hotel
~3. Ron Litz, 1212 South West Street, Anaheim
34. John Sawyer, 3146 West Coolidge Avenue, Anaheim
The information and rationale given for support of the project by the above
speakers included: the creation of new jobs, both in the theme parks and
hotels and during the construction period, which would provide a catalyst to
improve the recessionary economy; the proven fine reputation for quality of
the Disney organization and their 38 year history in the City of Anaheim; the
fact that Disney is a good corporate neighbor and gives great support to
educational and non profit efforts in the community; the job opportunities for
youth attending high school and college; the planning process was careful and
meticulous; the mitigation measures provided are sufficient and well planned;
the educational theme of Westcot 2000; the improvements which will be made to
the CR area infrastructure as well as to transportation capabilities; the fact
that this will create a world-class destination for tourists.
This was the conclusion of the speakers in favor of the project. For detail
as to public comments, both in favor and opposition, please refer to
transcript of this meeting prepared by M&M Certified Court Reporters, and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.
The Mayor announced that the Council would now hear from those who wished to
speak in opposition the the Disney Resort Project. He repeated the procedure
for speakers and the time limits.
The following is the list of those who presented comments in opposition. For
details of comments please re,er to the tran~cr£pt o~ ~h£~ meeting pr~pa~d by
M&M Certified Court reporters, and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
Cynthia Wolcott, of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron,
2603 Main Street, Irvine Ca. Ms. Wolcott is representing the owners of
Tiffy's Restaurant, (Ben and Mary Lou Hathaway) the Schlund family, Sue
Neil Patel, Madhuco Investments, Amret Patel. Inasmuch as she is
representing several property owners she requested and received
permission to speak for 15 minutes.
394
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Raymond Fuji, 1 World Trade Center, Suite 800, Long Beach CA 90831
Mr. Fuji stated he is a real estate attorney, and has been
retained by the Fujishigi family, which owns almost 60 acres in
the area designated as the future expansion district of the
Disneyland Resort.
Mr. Frank Elfend, 610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1290, Newport Beach.
Mr. Elfend is representing the Lim Family (Anaheim Plaza Hotel),
Tarsadia~ owners of the Crystal (Haster and Katella) Suites Hotel
projects.
4e
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 West Palais Road, Anaheim, representing Anaheim
H.O.M.E.
Doug Kintz, 2012 South Norma Lane, Anaheim, also with the Anaheim
H.O.M.E. group.
Richard Anthony, Member of the Board, Anaheim H.O.M.E. and homeowner on
South Walnut Street.
7. Daniel Rangel, 203 South Margate Drive, Anaheim.
Se
Betty Ronconi, 1241 South Walnut Street, Anaheim.
Member of Anaheim H.O.M.E.
9. Steve White, 856 North Clementine, Anaheim California .
10. Dorothy F. Miller, 1323 West Castle, Anaheim
11. Tom Bartholet, Odetics, 1585 South Manchester Anaheim.
12.
Curtis Stricker, President of Anaheim H.O.M.E., 1117 Wakefield Place,
Anaheim Ca. 92802
13.
Christopher Whorton, 2074 Della Lane, Anaheim
Member of the Board, Anaheim City School District
14. Gordon Ruser, 1221 South Sycamore Street, Santa Ana.
15. Douglas Jones, 10 Park Vista, Irvine California
RECESS: Following Mr. Jones presentation, the Council recessed by general
consent, for a five minute break. (9:12 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (9:37.m.)
16. Clyde Schlund, 616 E. Peralta Hills Drive, Anaheim.
17. Liza Doose, 2411 Michigan Drive, Claremont, California.
18.
Marshall Krupp, President Community Systems Associates, representing the
Garden Grove Unified and Centralia School Districts.
19. Joan Schlund, 616 Peralta Hills Drive, Anaheim.
20. Loretta Harmon, 1883 South West Street, Anaheim.
395
City Hallr ~aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 9, 1993 - S:00 P.M.
21. Max Engel, 1181 North Katella, Anaheim 92801.
Mr. Frank Elfend returned to clarify one of his previous statements.
This concluded the testimony in opposition.
Mr. Moreland stated that the comments presented this date were raised at the
Planning Commission meeting and were addresed by the Planning Commission and
City staff. He presented one change which they would request to Option One on
the east parking structure. Disney requests that Parking Option One, which is
located above Freedman Way be deleted from the Specific Plan. He submitted a
letter requesting that change.
The Mayor asked if the applicant had anything further in rebuttal.
There were no further comments.
Mayor Daly closed the public participation portion of the hearing. (10:10
p.m.) No additional letters or documentary evidence will be received or made
part of the record after this portion of the hearing is closed.
MOTION: Motion was made by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Simpson to
delete the Fujishige property from the EIR, Specific Plan, General Plan
Amendment and all other documents including the height modification ordinance,
and to ask staff to return with the modifications to documents necessary to
accomplish this, prior to the city Council's final consideration of the EIR.
MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council discussed continuation of these items (with the public
portion of the hearing closed) to June 22, 1993. Council Members indicated
that they did have questions and would indicate these to the Clerk who would
place them in written form and submit to Mr. Wood between this date and the
22nd of June. Mr. Wood indicated staff would review the testimony given this
date and verify that it has been addressed in the EIR as well.
Councilman Hunter indicated that one of his questions is regarding the
intermodal transportation system. He would like as much information as
possible on that aspect.
MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to continue the hearing on the Disney Resort Project
to 12:00 noon on June 22, 1993 at the City Council Chamber, City Hall 200
South Anaheim Blvd. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
Prior to adjournment, Mayor Daly thanked all of the staff and consultants who
have devoted thousands of hours to this matter for all of their work and their
diligence.
ADJOURNMENT: By general consent the City Council adjourned the meeting.
(10:30 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
396