Loading...
1992/09/22City Hall, ~_~aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Jim Armstrong CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 2:40 p.m. on September 18, 1992 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. The Council meeting scheduled to start at 3:00 p.m. with a closed session was adjourned to 4:00 p.m. due to lack of a quorum. Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session to consider the following items: a. To confer with its attorney regarding pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) to wit: Golden West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 40-92-46; Anaheim Stadium Associates vs. City of Anaheim, et. al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 44-81-74. Newport Federal Corporation vs. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. X64-31-50. b. To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative regarding labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6. c. To consider and take possible action upon personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. Tn Re Grievance o~ Jeffrey Mayer, P~le No. §109§1. d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) (1). e. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as are orally announced by the City Attorney, City Manager or City Council prior to such recess unless the motion to recess indicates any of the matters will not be considered in closed session. Added items to Closed Session were as follows: f. Newport Federal Corp. v. City of Anaheim, et al., OCSC No. X64-31-50. 649 City Ha11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES- SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. g. City of Anaheim v. Admiral Insurance Co., et al., San Diego Sup. Ct. No. 65-06-78. h. City of Anaheim v. Ertzan Associates, Inc., et al., San Bernardino Sup. Ct. No. 55-75-40. The 72-hour posting requirement for these items was waived by motion of the City Council - Ayes.' Ehrle, Daly and Hunter; Temporarily Absent: Pickler; Absent: Simpson. By general Consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. (4:00 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. (5:20 p.m.) INVOCATION: Keith Kettenring, Pastor, Calvary Baptist Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Tom Daly led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Hunter and authorized by the City Council: Orange County Symphony Day in Anaheim, September 25, 1992 Book It Day in Anaheim, October 1, 1992 Mental Illness Awareness Week, October 4-11, 1992 Lorraine Reafsnyder and Ed Peterson accepted the Orange County Symphony Day proclamation; Laura Overzet accepted the Book It Day proclamation; and Betty Ronconi accepted the Mental Illness Awareness Week proclamation. 119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declarati'on of Recognition was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Robert "Bob" Berkeley on his occasion of his retirement as General Manager, ARA Leisure Services at the Anaheim Convention Center and Anaheim Hills Golf Course, a post he has held for 11 years. Mayor Hunter and Council Members congratulated Mr. Berkeley and commended him for the fine service provided at the City's facilities. They wished him well in his retirement and move to North Carolina. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,035,241.26 for the period ending September 18, 1992, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were approved. Mayor Hunter recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority meetings. (5:25 p.m. ) Mayor Hunter reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:27 p.m.) PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no public comments on City Council Agenda items. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: 650 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5~00 P.M. Pedro Vasquez, street vendor in Anaheim. He is asking the Council to reconsider the ordinance passed recently regarding street vendors. They want the opportunity to discuss the issues with NOVA. He has not participated at all. He tried to make contact but he has not been contacted in return. They will be out of business when the ordinance goes into effect. Council Member Ehrle asked Mr. Vasquez if he was asking the Council for some assistance to talk to NOVA. Pedro Vasquez. He is a businessman and he has not had the opportunity to negotiate relative to his business or someone else's business. He has not been able to talk to the people who are hurting his business. He can manage his business a lot better. If he was doing something wrong, nobody ever told him. He is asking the Council for reconsideration. Council Member Ehrle: He has received messages in his business office that Mr. Rusty Kennedy from the Orange County Human Relations Organization, the people from NOVA and some vendors are meeting. There are meetings going on to possibly work out some type of compromise and these meetings are being monitored by Bill Taormina. Mr. Vasquez undoubtedly knows Mr. Amin David. He should contact Mr. David. Mr. Vasquez. He is aware of the meetings, but they only want to talk to two people at a time. He has heard they might not want him to participate. He has talked to Mr. Kennedy and was told there was not much hope. Amelia Opico, speaking through an interpreter,, explained she has been a resident of Anaheim for many years and is a street vendor. Her living is selling clothes. She wants to know if the Council will give her the opportunity to sell her clothes. If not, she questions what she is going to do. She works honestly and found out about the ordinance through other vendors. She would like a meeting set. Mayor Hunter explained that there have been several public discussions on the matter before the Council, and additional discussions are going on where perhaps some compromise can be worked out. Maria Chavez, speaking through an interpreter, stated she wants support for people who do not have a job. For someone her age, she cannot work in a warehouse. She wants to know if there is some opportunity for the vendors and if there is to be a meeting. She does not want to live dishonestly selling drugs and being involved in crime. She questions why this is happening - why the selling of clothes and food are not being allowed. She thanks everyone and she knows she is going to be supported. 651 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. Mike Kowalski, NOVA. He is on the negotiating committee with NOVA and the vendors. So far he has spent close to nine hours talking with the vendors. It has been very educational. NOVA has learned a lot about the vendors. They are hard working and it is a difficult business. They are trying to make a living in a very difficult manner. There has been quite.a bit of give and take over the last three meetings. The vendors have come to understand that placing their business in a residential neighborhood is an unfair competitive edge for the fixed businesses. Those wanting to remain competitive would have to resort to the same tactic. If that is the playing field the businesses are going to compete on, everyone has to be competing on that basis. NOVA has gone so far as to identify commercial locations - vacant lots, parking lots they can rent or store fronts they can rent. The areas they like to do business in are less than 200 yards from their existing customers. There will not be a loss of jobs by relocating to a commercial site. They can still maintain their mobility. They can keep not only the property owners happy, but also the fixed commercial businesses. They are negotiating on a lot of other points - four very good ones at present. Rusty Kennedy (Orange County Human Relations Organization) has set up the negotiating rules - the number of people on each side. He made restrictions on their group and is sure he has done so with the vendors as well. It is unfortunate that everyone cannot participate or keep up-to-date. He feels everyone will come out better - the vendors and the citizens. Council Member Ehrle. He thanked Mr. Kowalski for devoting the time to the issue. He had encouraged the communication and Mr. Kowalski has now brought the Council up-to-date. This is an issue that will not go away until the parties sit down and communicate. Just a few weeks ago the Council gave additional approvals to the huge indoor swap meet on Anaheim Boulevard. They have 200 or 300 spaces available and there could be a ready market place for the vendors to sell their wares. Hopefully, Mr. Vasquez could talk to Mr. Kowalski since he very much wants to participate. Mr. Vasquez was one of the original vendors in Anaheim over five years ago and wants to at least have a voice in the negotiations. Mr. Kowalski. He will do that. They know they are not communicating with everyone at this time. Susan Kocsis, NOVA. They do feel very compassionate for people worried about losing their income. She is more compassionate than most because she lost her entire income because of a commercial enterprise (vendors) in front of her home in a residential district. She knows how difficult it is. She spent years and tens of thousands of dollars to prepare herself and lost it all. She does not want that to happen to anyone else. She recalled the demonstration with the horn at the first meeting regarding the vendors in the Council Chamber. Such a horn is still honking in front of her house three times a day. This is the 30-day period between adoption and when the ordinance goes into effect and she can hardly wait for the time to be up. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Daly, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 92R-196 and 92R-197 for adoption. Council Member Simpson was absent. Refer to Resolution Book. 652 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 92R-196 and 92R-197) Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Robert W. Blesi for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 21, 1992. b. Claim submitted by Yolanda Prado for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 27, 1992. c. Claim submitted by William A. West for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 14, 1992. d. Claim submitted by Mary Klieves for b6dily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 30, 1992. e. Claim submitted by Patricia Thacker for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 17, 1992. f. Claim submitted by James F. Scholle for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 3, 1992. g. Claim submitted by Linda M. Cleveland for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 15, 1992. h. Claim submitted by Ted Brouws for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 22, 1992. i. Claim submitted by Associated Heating & Air, Attn: Cheryl Perardi- Brennan for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 3, 1992. j. Claim submitted by Danece Bendig for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 2, 1992. k. Claim submitted by Christina R. Cirocco, c/o F. Lee Christensen, Law Offices of Andreos & Cole for indemnity sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 10, 1992. 1. Claim submitted by Rohie Yvette Bey for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 20, 1992. m. Claim submitted by Greg Eckel for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 4, 1992. n. Claim submitted by Pablo Sanchez for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 28, 1992. 653 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5=00 P.M. o. Claim submitted by Zelma Barnhart for bodily injury and property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 4, 1992. p. Claim submitted by Ronald M. Stires for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 2, 1992. A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission meeting held 8/13/92. 105.' Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Services Board meeting 105: Receiving and filing a Notice to Customers of Proposed Rate Increase from Southern California Gas Company (Application No. 92-03-038) filed with the California Public Utilities Commission requesting authority to begin a new Customer Gas Storage program to offer more reliable, flexible storage services to the larger industrial and commercial customers. 173: Receiving and filing Application No. 88-10-054 before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California regarding Michael S. Mitchell and Bruce P. Hector, dba Mickey's Space Ship Shuttle application to extend service-replacements. (Operation of a Passenger Stage service between certain portion of Los Angeles county and orange County and Los Angeles International Airport and John Wayne Orange County Airport.) 156: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Police Department Crime and Clearance Analysis for the month of August, 1992. 117: Receiving and filing the Summary of Investment Transactions for August, 1992, as submitted by the City Treasurer. A3. 175: Awarding the contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder, Irish Construction, in the amount of $392,874.80 for Fairmont 12KY Underground Conduit and Vault System; 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. 123: Approving an Agreement with Darnell and Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $75,000 for traffic signal design services. A5. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change order to extend service with Forbes Computer Group, Automated Office Products, and Microage ComputerMart for microcomputer maintenance services through December 31, 1992. A6. 106: Amending the FY 1992/93 Budget by decreasing revenues and expenditures in Account No. 01-43-328, and increasing revenues and expenditures in Account No. 01-85-328, in the amount of $172,579 for reassignment of mapping work (from the Planning Department to the Public Utilities Department). A7. 123: Approving an Agreement with Florence Crittenton Services of Orange County, Inc., in the amount of $15,000 for facility remodeling efforts. (CDBG funding. ) 654 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M. A8. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-196: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN TO THE CITY. A9. 127: RESOLUTION NO. 92R-197: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ENDORSING PROPOSITION 156 ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 1992 BALLOT. (Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act. ) Al0. 123: Approving the Subordination Agreement with Trider Corporation for the deed, securing deferment of the Santa Ana Canyon Road Improvement fee, at 435 South Anaheim Hills Road, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. Ail. 123: Agreement with Holmes & Narver, in the amount of $353,349 for architectural services required to design the Anaheim Police Department Satellite Substation Facility; and amending the FY 1992/93 Budget by increasing expenditure appropriations in Program 995 by $49,509. (Item removed from agenda by staff, no action taken. ) Answering Council Member Daly, Assistant City Manager Jim Armstrong explained that staff is removing the item at this time. It may come back. They are looking for funding opportunities. Al2. 106: Amending the FY 1992/93 budget to increase both revenues and expenditures in Program 20-355 by $624,062. (State's allocation to the City for Community Development/JTPA Division. ) . Al3. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held July 28, 1992. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 92R-196 and 92R-197 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 92R-196 and 92R-197 duly passed and adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. Al6. 114! APP0INTH~NT OF JIM ARH~TRON~ CITY MAWAO~R OF THE CITY 0P FULLERTON: Mayor Hunter stated it is appropriate at this time to congratulate the City's Assistant City Manager, Jim Armstrong on being appointed City Manager of the City of Fullerton. It was noted that Mr. Armstrong was chosen from among 80 candidates who applied for the position. Councilmembers congratulated Jim but also commented that he would be missed. Al4. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 5334 FOR ADOPTION: 'Establishing the penalties for Anaheim Municipal Code parking violations. (Introduced at the meeting of September 15, 1992. ) WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 5334) 655 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance. Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Pickler offered Ordinance No. 5334 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 5334: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING THE PENALTIES FOR ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PARKING VIOLATIONS. Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5334 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5334 duly passed and adopted. A15. 105: APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION: Appointment to the Housing Commission to fill the unscheduled vacancy of Elmer Thill, term expiring June 30, 1993. This matter was continued from the meetings of August 11, August 18, August 25 and September 15, 1992 to this date. MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to continue the appointment to the Housing Commission for one-week for full Council action. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Before concluding, Council Member Daly asked if Council Member Ehrle had an opportunity to speak with the gentleman he wanted to nominate at the last meeting. Council Member Ehrle. He answered yes (Robert Lowe), but the only concern was if the Housing Commission met on Wednesdays that is the only day he has a commitment. He told Mr. Lowe the matter would probably be continued another week. If he (Lowe) could not make the change, he was willing to pass on the possible appointment and wait for another to come up. ..ITEM FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF SEPTE~M~_ER 3, 1992: DECISION DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 1992 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEl?. PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 25, 1992: Bi. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4195, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 11: OWNER: HUNT PROPERTIES, Attn: Don Hunt, 12844 Inglewood Avenue, Hawthorne, CA 90250 ACENT~ PHIL SC~WARTZE, 27132-B Paseo Espada, ~1222, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 LOCATION: 400 West Wilken Way. Property is approximately 9.69 acres having a frontage of 425 feet on the soqth side of Wilken Way, a depth of approximately 590 feet and being located approximately 610 feet east of the centerline of Harbor Boulevard. Waiver of permitted identification signage to construct two 34 square- foot entry monument signs for an approved condominium complex, (one 20- square foot sign permitted; two 34 square-foot signs proposed). ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4195 APPROVED (ZA92-41). 656 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. ITEM FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1992: DECISION DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 1992 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS OCTOBER 2, 1992: B2. 179: ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 92-04: OWNER: JOYCE NARAD, 17020 Chestnut Street, Yorba Linda, CA 92686 AGENT: VERLA B. MILLER, 1303 W. Arlington Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 1303 West Arlington. Property is approximately 0.14 acre with an approximate frontage of 61 feet on the north side of Arlington Avenue, and being located approximately 398 feet west of the centerline of Bluegrass. To permit a large family day care home involving up to twelve (12) children. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Use Permit No. 92-04 APPROVED (ZA92-42). B3. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5335 - INTRODUCTION: Amending Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 91-92-08 located at 431 North State College Boulevard from the RS-A-43,000 zone to the CL zone. Council Member Ehrle offered Ordinance No. 5335 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 5335: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. Cl. 107: APPLICATION FOR POOL ROOM PERMIT - 1830 W. LINCOLN AVENUE: Request for Pool Room Permit Application by Hoa Do Tran, 119 Night Heron, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. The business is located at 1830 West Lincoln Avenue and the application is for operation of eight pool tables. Submitted was report dated September 10, 1992 from the Code Enforcement Manager, John Poole recommending that the Council deny the subject application giving the background and reasons why the Pool Room Permit should be denied. Mayor Hunter asked if the applicant or applicant's agent was present and wished to speak; no one was present. He then asked if anyone else wished to speak; there was no response. Council Member Hunter moved that the Pool Room Application of Hoa Do Tran to permit 8 pool tables at 1830 West Lincoln Avenue be denied on the grounds that, by reason of the location where the pool room is sought to be located, the conducting or carrying on of the pool room would be detrimental to the public health, public order or morals for each of the following reasons: ® Twelve residences are located immediately south of the proposed location and the proposed use would generate noise and traffic which would be incompatible with, and would disturb the peace and tranquility of, such residential neighborhoods· · The proposed use would contribute to the noise and loitering problems in an area already overburdened by excessive noise, loitering and zoning violations which problems would be detrimental to the public order and adversely affect the surrounding commercial and residential uses. 657 City Hallt Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5=00 P.M. 0 The proposed location is in an area which has been identified by the Anaheim Police Department as a high crime area in that such area was statistically 26% above the average in reported crimes city-wide in 1990, and was 50% above the average in reported crimes city-wide in 1991. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. SWEAR-IN OF THOSE TESTIFYING AT PUBLIC HEARINGS: The City Attorney announced that it is appropriate at this time for all those intending to testify at any or all of the public hearings including staff be sworn in at this time. Those testifying were requested to stand by the City Clerk and asked to raise their right hand. The oath was then given. D1. 179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 91-92-19 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: The Fluor Family Trust, 4521 Perham Road, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625. AGENT: Cecil C. Wright, 265 S. Anita Drive, Ste. 205, Orange, CA 92668. LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1320-1382 Auto Center Drive and is approximately 7.98 acres located at the southwest corner of Auto Center Drive (formerly Taft Avenue) and Sanderson Avenue. The request is for a change from the ML Zone to the CL Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 91-92-19 GRANTED (PC92-79) (5 yes votes, 2 no votes) . Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: The Planning Commission's decision was appealed by the Fluor Family Trust (agent, Cecil Wright) and public hearing scheduled and continued from the meetings of August 11, August 18, August 25, September 1 and September 15, 1992 to this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - July 30, 1992 · Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 30, 1992 Posting of property - July 31, 1992 City Clerk Sohl announced that a letter had again been received by the agent for the applicant, Cecil Wright requesting an additional weeks continuance of the public hearing. Mayor Hunter asked if anyone was present opposed to the one-week continuance; there was no response. MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to continue the subject public hearing on Reclassification No. 91-92-19 and Mitigated Negative Declaration for one week to Tuesday, September 29, 1992. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3148 AND NEGATIVR~ DECLARATI ON: 658 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5=00 P.M. OWNER: Taylor Bus Company, 3130 W. Duluth Street, Sacramento, CA 95691. AGENT: SCHER-VOIT, ATTN: MIKE HEFNER, 2099 S. State College Boulevard, Suite 100, Anaheim, CA 92816. LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 917 E. Gene Autry Way and is approximately 4.62 acres located at the northeast corner of Gene Autry Way and Lewis Street. The request is to amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to required street dedication and time limitation of a previously-approved bus storage terminal. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3148 GRANTED, IN PART, to amend Condition No. 17 extending this CUP to March 1, 1995, and not amend Conditions 1-3 and 7 pertaining to right-of-way dedication and improvements (PC92-94) (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by the owner, Taylor Bus Company. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - September 10, 1992 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 10, 1992 Posting of property - September 11, 1992 . PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated July 27, 1992. Mayor Hunter first asked to hear from the City Attorney while the applicant or applicant's agent was coming forward. City Attorney Jack White. Based upon his review of the correspondence received from Alan Burns, Attorney for Taylor Bus Service dated September 21, 1992 and his discussion with the City Council concerning potential litigation on the matter, it is his recommendation that the Council delete the two requirements relating to dedication of land, specifically the dedication regarding the widening of Lewis Street and Gene Autry Way which two conditions are a part of the subject matter of the appeal tonight. If the Council concurs, he believes that they may be able to expedite that portion of the hearing. Alan Burns, Attorney representing the appellant, 453 S. Glassell, Orange. Everything he had to say relates to what the City Attorney just explained. Therefore, he has nothing further to say. Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear if anyone wished to speak elth~r in favor or in opposition; there being no response he closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler, 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. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 659 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-198) Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 9.2R-198 for adoption, amending certain conditions to Conditional Use Permit No. 3148 but deleting the dedication requirements on Lewis Street and Gene Autry Way. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-198: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3148 AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. PC-183. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-198 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-198 duly passed and adopted. D3. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3526, CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3: OWNER: CANYON ACRES RESIDENTIAL CENTER, 233 S. Quintana Road, Anaheim, CA 92807. AGENT: DAN MC QUAID, 233 $. Quintana Road, Anaheim, CA 92817. LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 233 South Quintana Road and is approximately 4.6 acres located approximately 185 feet west of a private access road from Quintana Road a~proximately 300 feet south of the centerline of Arboretum Road. The request is to permit two (2) temporary school trailers in conjunction with an existing shelter for children. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3526 GRANTED (PC92-92) to be used for education purposes for resident children only; to be used only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.; applicant to bring revised landscaped plans to Planning Commission within 30 days; and CUP NO. 3526 is approved for one-year with the opportunity for further extensions (to expire 8/3/93) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). HEARING SET ON: A letter appealing the Planning Con~nission's decision was submitted by area residents and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - September 10, 1992 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 10, 1992 Posting of property- September 11, 1992 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated July 27, 1992. Mayor Hunter asked first to hear from the homeowners who set the matter for a public hearing. 660 City Hall, A~aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. Mr. Steve Wahlbrink, 145 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim (7~ years). His property backs up to the Canyon Acres facility. Over the past couple of months, the residents have worked with Dale McQuaid, Executive Director, Canyon Acres Residential Center on a solution to what he is proposing tonight. He then read a prepared statement outlining his concerns relative to the subject request summarized as follows: the residential center is now growing and on its way to becoming an institution. The proposed permit is only a component of a larger intended project which will greatly impact the surrounding neighborhood. The various conditional use permits over the years reflect a continual expansion of the facility. It is their opinion that the subject CUP as well is only the tip of the iceberg. A master plan is needed. Many surrounding residents are seeing the CUPs as a stepping stone to a massive institution with related problems. Upcoming requests to the Planning Commission will include a new 6,000 square foot multi-purpose facility, enlargement of the main parking lot and another lot, expansion of existing buildings and a swimming pool. He suggested That it would be in the best interest of Canyon Acres, the City of Anaheim and the residents directly affected by the center to develop a major league plan in order to best achieve a workable and compatible situation to all concerned. Conditional Use Permit No. 3526 reflects the "divide and conquer" technique to develop and expand beyond its residential boundaries. They are requesting that the Council consider the integrity of the community by keeping the neighborhood residential for all its neighbors. Questions were then posed by Council Member Daly to clarify the concerns of the residents - whether it is the way the use is operated now or with the future expansion of the use. Peggy Farner, 165 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. Her home also backs up to Canyon Acres. She addressed the school issue and the educational study that was done regarding Canyon Acres which identified the need for an on-site school. No one has knowledge of this study including teachers, the Orange Unified School District and the County Board of Education. She explained what occurred at the County Board of Education meeting she attended on August 6, 1992. They brought the issue up at the Planning Commission meeting on July 27, and did not get any answers. Council Member Pickler interjected and asked for clarification as to the specific problem. · Peggy Farner. She backs up to the property and she will have the school expanded parking lot backed up to her wall and all the noise and other things that go with a school. The study was done and has been referred to in letters. They are wondering where the study is that said there was a school needed on site. Canyon Acres is a residential center at present and she does not have a problem with that. There are some things that have not been taken care of but what they are ~aying - they are concerned with the whole integrity of Canyon Acres being changed from a residential center to something more than that. Their issue is with the school itself. Beth Smith, 175 S. Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. They live in a residential neighborhood and Canyon Acres is also located in that neighborhood. Their neighborhood has 22 children under the age of 14. She would not say it is quiet, but it is reasonably safe. For the sixth time, Canyon Acres is requesting a CUP which is an attempt to modify the original zoning of the land by putting in trailers. She questioned when is the expansion going to stop and that is their concern. The rural setting that Mr. McQuaid said he wanted to maintain in 1988 is being jeopardized by the continual expansion which is 661 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. already changing the integrity of the neighborhood. She then explained the problems associated with the parking lot which is located right behind her home. In concluding, she stated that she feels there is a more suitable site to locate the school and urged that they do not let the uncontrolled expansion continue. Debbie Stran, 185 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. Her home is directly impacted by the proposed trailers. If the trailers are approved, Bonnie Gene Lane residents, unlike anyone else in the community, will have to withstand an increase in traffic, noise and dust and the visual intrusion of the unsightly trailers. They have already experienced an increase in traffic from the double amount of staff. She challenged Mr. McQuaid's calculations relative to traffic and explained why there will be an increase. The residents are also experiencing more noise. The site is at the bottom of a "bowl" with hillside residential surrounding three sides. Any activity taking place at the ranch is amplified into their yards. She also explained how the residents will be affected visually, that the expansion will cause lower property values and that the rural feeling of the community will be changed significantly. They feel if approval is given and certain concessions are made by Canyon Acres that those will not be fulfilled as evidenced by previous promises made and not kept. She asked that the Council be fair in coming to a decision. Mike Smith, 175 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. One of his concerns is safety - both for the residents of Canyon Acres and those oH Bonnie Gene Lane. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting of July 27, 1992, he was contacted by the Chairman of the Board (Mr. Winters) at Canyon Acres who said they would be happy to add two tiers of block to the existing wall to their property line wall in exchange for the neighbors withdrawing their opposition to the request changing from a residential to an educational facility. He informed the Center that due to Canyon Acres 1988 expansion, his block wall no longer met the City's minimum height requirements for pool owners and that in his opinion Canyon Acres should feel obligated for the safety of the children to bring the wall up to code. Mr. Winter said if he felt that way, he should pursue legal action against Canyon Acres. He felt that comment was cavalier in terms of the safety of the children. The situation with the wall poses significant liability. He suggested that the Council table any decisions on granting a CUP until the safety concerns are addressed and brought up to the minimum safety standards required by law. Sherry Kovacich, 195 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. In addition to the fourteen (14) signatures of residents on Bonnie Gene, she has an additional nineteen (19) signatures of neighbors bordering Canyon Acres directly affected by the expansion. There are thirty-three (33) signatures in opposition to the CUP. She then addressed maintenance issues that needed to be done on the Canyon Acres Property since 1988 but not accomplished until photographs were submitted in opposition at the Planning Commission hearing. In the event that th~ Council uphold~ th~ 91arming C~mm£~§£~n ~£§£~n, ~h~ ~u~l£n~ questions that the residents would like answered as well' as other conditions that they would like imposed on Canyon Acres. Tom Kovacich, 195 Bonnie Gene, Anaheim. He outlined additional concerns of the residents. Mr. McQuaid is proposing to place trailers on the site with two large air conditioning units which are going to turn on and off all day. He questions the CEQA Finding that the project is categorically exempt or findings relative to the cumulative nature of the development. Promises made by Canyon Acres have not been kept. The entire length of the access road does not have a berm, which would prevent cars from coming into their backyard since they slope down from the road. The development may have outgrown the 662 City Ha11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22~ 1992 - 5:00 P.M. neighborhood. Either they maintain the residential nature of the facility or relocate the school facilities to another site. At this time, it is not compatible with the existing neighborhood. During his presentation, Mr. Kovacich also noted that the developer has elected to use a single trailer 24 x 60 instead of two trailers. Under Uniform Building .Code requirements and load requirements, the number of persons to be allowed in that building being 72, is far in excess of the CEQA requirements 'for a Class 3 Exemption. Dan McQuaid, Executive Director, Canyon Acres. He is not a developer but a Licensed Clinical Social Worker. Canyon Acres is the property owner. He gave the background on the facility. The present request has been downsized to one (1) 24 foot x 60 foot classroom (trailer) which reduces the approved square footage by 25%. Canyon Acres intends to submit plans that will include permanent classroom facilities in the future. The youngsters have previously been enrolled at several outside district schools. The Orange County Department of Education can provide Canyon Acre's children with the needed appropriate services with an on-ground school classroom. With two classrooms, he does not consider it a school. He then explained the advantages to the children of having the classrooms on site as well as the issues relative to the School District. Canyon Acres has changed as the neighborhood has changed but the ranch has grown considerably slower. He thereupon submitted photographs of the facility taken in 1975. Several of the neighbors, which he named, have supported their application for the classroom. They also scheduled meetings with their Fieldstone neighbors on Bonnie Gene who filed the appeal. The main concern of the neighbors is they want to limit Canyon Acres development. They have taken a no-growth position. A master plan was approved in 1987. They regret the opposition and have attempted to mitigate neighborhood concerns by means which he subsequently explained. Before concluding, he submitted additional pictures of the facility and read two letters, one written by Bill Steiner, past Orange Unified School District Board Member and Chairperson and Director of Orangewood Children's Home Foundation and one he (McQuaid) had written to Mr. Kovacich relative to his concerns about the landscaping adjacent to his property. In conclusion, he urged Council approval of the request so that they can better help their kids to cope, learn and succeed. It is not a major request. They will deal with their future plans at a later date. They wanted to let them know they have something planned in the future. They need to get the kids in school right now. Mayor Hunter. He first asked for clarification that the request was modified from two (2) to one (1) trailer 24 x 60 feet. He then asked Mr. McQuaid if it was his intention to eventually come back to the Planning Commission and the Council in the future to build some type of facility. Dan McQuaid. They will be looking at constructing a permanent facility that will have classrooms so they may be able to take advantage of the opportunity on a long-term basis. Working from a posted plan of the Canyon Acres facility and grounds, Mr. McQuaid explained where the proposed trailer is going to be located as well as the building to be proposed which would be completely out of the view of the neighbors on Bonnie Gene. Mayor Hunter. He believes the anxiety the neighbors have is that they are going to have an Orangewood type home in the middle of this residential area. He has read all of the conditional use permits from 1974 to 1988 and how . Canyon Acres has grown. Everybody wants to do something for abused children. The issue is, at what point does the rural setting change to one of an institutional facility. 663 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5=00 P.M. Mr. McQuaid. They started out with 15 children and now have 30 which is not a substantial increase. In order to have the children be successful at school, they have had to transfer them using their vehicles in the morning and afternoon to pick them up. The kids have been out of school since June. The noise and other things will not be any different than it has been all summer if they have two classrooms on site. Mayor Hunter reiterated that the issue is originally and up to this date, Canyon Acres was a home for abused children and now they are adding to it and going to have a school. He asked if there will be additional children brought to Canyon Acres to be taught or only the children who are living there; Mr. McQuaid answered only the kids from Canyon Acres. They will not be offering adult education or other related services. Council Member Pickler. Anytime Canyon Acres makes changes, they will have to come back for approval. It is a CUP and can be revoked for cause. Over the years, not once has he heard a complaint. If the people have a concern and they bring it to the City, they can follow through to rectify it. He has been to the facility many times and they have enhanced the area. Council Member Daly. Points that are important are the screening of the trailer and air conditioner on the roof and the traffic issue. He asked if staff had looked at screening the trailer with landscaping as well as screening the roof top air conditioning unit. Relative to traffic, did they try to document how many additional cars will be coming to the site because of the two classrooms. Dan McQuaid. There is a teacher in each classroom. The air conditioning units are located on the side where they will be facing east and west. They are not on the roof. They have shared their plans with the neighbors. There will also be no excavation, recompaction or dust. The trailer will not be used 24 hours a day. The time restriction from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. was conditioned by the Planning Commission. Joel Fick, Planning Director. The location of the air conditioning unit itself is 135 feet away from the property line. In terms of screening, there are existing buildings and landscaping that exist between the proposed trailer and property line. The Planning Commission did impose a condition, Condition No. 11, which he read relating to a landscape plan to subsequently be submitted to the Planning Department regarding the planting of additional trees along the shared property lines after the petitioner confers with all adjacent residential property owners. It is a condition of approval of the project. Mr. McQuaid then stated that there are three people who would like to speak relative to the canyon Acres request. City Attorney White. The comments should be restricted to rebuttal of the testimony; Mayor Hunter. In this case, the homeowners appealed the Planning Commission decision. The City Attorney is saying that those who now wish to speak can do so only in rebuttal of the testimony given by those opposed and not just positive comments. Larry Patterson. They have been living at their present location at 251 S. Quintana Drive since 1965. Three different points that concerned him were relative to traffic, appearance and worthwhileness of the project. He along with others donate money to Canyon Acres and are delighted to do so because they believe in the project. When it started in 1975, they were concerned and 664 City Hall, A_n_aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. attended many Planning Commission and Council meetings. He then addressed the traffic and other related issues which were mitigated when Mr. McQuaid took over as manager as well as maintenance of the property. Mr. McQuaid has been a man of integrity. He believes the neighbors would be well advised to try to work with him rather than against him. There are only about 7 or 8 homes along the wall (on Bonnie Gene). He would hope that the City Council would support this worthwhile endeavor and give Canyon Acres a chance to grow. He does think it is right that they limit the number of children they can handle which would put a ceiling on the growth. SUMMATION AND REBUTTAL Tom Kovacich. This is a land use issue. It is necessary to look at the past, present and future development. There is going to be another application before the Planning Commission for the development of the 6,000 square foot multi-purpose building. They are asking a study be done to determine the environmental effects of the development of the trailers and future expansion on the neighborhood. They are concerned about traffic, noise and aesthetics of the development. Mr. McQuaid has not answered whether the children at the school will be Canyon Acre residents or are there going to be vans busing children into their neighborhood to go to school. He did not report that Canyon Acres has several satellite homes in the area. Barbara Wahlbrink. The indication is that the neighbors are not supportive and that has never been the case or the question. They would like to have clarification on the number of children to be educated if the request is approved. They are wondering about the umbrella that involves the satellite children because having them bused into Canyon Acres for educational purposes would be a problem. Relative to the downsizing of the request, the original plan was to have the one (1) trailer. There is frustration on their part when they feel their serious concerns are given low priority when attempting to maintain their residential atmosphere. They hope that the Council will weigh their testimony more heavily than those indirectly affected. Mike Smith. He gave additional comments and then read a recent article from the Anaheim Hills News which outlined the future expansion plans of Canyon Acres. The neighbors have no complaints about it being a residential center but are concerned about the educational services. There will be a school right in the middle of a residential neighborhood. There will be a day treatment facility, on-site care and family counseling, etc. - people who have abused their children will be driving through their ne£ghborhoo~ on a da£1y ba~£~. T~y a~e concerned ab~u~ the integrity of their neighborhood. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Council Member Ehrle. He is going to have to declare a conflict of interest and not be able to participate in voting on the issue. The City Attorney has advised him that since his employer owns fourteen custom lots adjoining Henning Way as well as Quintana and is approximately within 300 feet of the subject property, it is advisable for him not to participate. He apologizes because it is the kind of project he likes to talk about and try to resolve. 665 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. City Attorney White. With Council Member Ehrle's inability to participate in the decision, the City Charter requires that any resolution be adopted by three affirmative votes. It will take a unanimous vote one way or the other to take an action this evening. In the absence of that, .it would automatically go to the next meeting when Council Member. Simpson returns. For clarification, the only application that is b~fore the Council tonight and · which can be affected by their decision relates to authorizing originally two (2) and now one (1) 24 x 60 foot trailer to be used for educational purposes. Conditions would limit the use to the 30 resident children of that facility between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The Council's decision will only affect that particular application. Mayor Hunter. The application tonight is for one (1) 24 x 60 foot trailer which is only to be used by the children who are at Canyon Acres to go to school and not children bused in from other schools. City Attorney White. That is a condition that was imposed by the Planning Commission, Condition No. 10. Council Member Pickler. What they are requesting to do is an enhancement. The request is related to what they already have. It will not be a detriment and he has no problem with the request. If anything else comes in, it is something that will have to come before the Planning Commission and/or Council. Council Member Daly. He intends to support the project as proposed. The City Planning Commission approved it unanimously. The Commission did a fine job on the project in imposing some of the conditions. They have tightened up the application. It is a one year permit and will be back for renewal in a year. Any further changes would have to come back through the public hearing process. He sympathizes with many of the concerns raised by the neighbors. They can be addressed and will be addressed if any further changes are proposed to the project. Mayor Hunter. He is concerned about changing a very well respected board and care home for abused children to an educational facility on-site even though it has been stated it will be limited to just the children who are living there. There is the question of maintaining the integrity of neighborhoods and how far this home will expand. If it is eventually going to be a school, perhaps it might be time to start looking for a location. If plans are to make it more of an institution in a residential area, in his opinion, they are going in the wrong direction. Keeping it as originally intended in a rural setting is the right way to go. In this case, he will vote in favor based upon the fact that it is a one year CUP at which time he will have an opportunity to evaluate the situation. His "gut" reaction, he does not want to see Canyon Acres turned into an institution of some nature in a residential area. Council Member Daly. A mile or so to the north, the City has allowed and encouraged some church and school activities to be established in what used to be light industrial space. That may be an appropriate future compromise if the educational situation is going to grow. As the Mayor pointed out, if it is becoming more of an institutional setting, that may be a solution. Council Member Pickler. He does not concur with either the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem Daly. The subject property is the place for the type of school proposed. He would like to suggest that Mr. McQuaid work with the neighbors in getting them to concur. It is an environment that cannot be found along 666 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. La Palma as suggested and schools belong in a residential area. Canyon Acres was there before the homes were built. They belong in that area and are doing an excellent job. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Council Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler, the City Council determined · that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 3, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of .the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 92R-199) Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-199 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3526 subject to all City Planning Commission conditions but that the request now only includes one (1) trailer 24 x 60 feet. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-199: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3526. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-199 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-199 duly passed and adopted. D4. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3527, SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 92J04, AMENDMENT TO SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD ACCESS POINT STUDY, EXHIBIT NO. 7, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: West Street Development Company, Attn: Doug Browne, P.O. Box 18021, Anaheim, CA 92817; Canyon Garden Nursery Inc., 6270 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, CA 92807. LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 6270 East Santa Ana Canyon Road and is approximately .94 acres located on the south side of the Santa Ana Canyon Road approximately 515 feet west of the centerline of Fairmont Boulevard. The request is to permit a 2-story, 9-unit, commercial retail center with waivers of maximum structural height within 150 feet of single family residential zone boundary, minimum structural setback adjacent to single family residential zone, permitted encroachment into required yards, permitted roof mounted equipment and permitted type of shopping center identification sign. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3527 GRANTED (PC92-89) (4 yes votes, 2 no votes, 1 absent). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED (4 yes votes, 2 no votes, 1 absent). Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 92-04 APPROVED. 667 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTE~ - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. Recommended that City Council adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study, Exhibit No. 7 ( PC92-90 ). Approved Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Members Simpson and Hunter at the meeting of August 18, 1992 and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin- September 10, 1992 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 10, 1992 Posting of property- September 11, 1992 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated July 27, 1992. The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Mr. Doug Brown, 151S. Quintana. The project as depicted in the poster drawing was designed in conjunction with a meeting with the neighbors on the street contiguous to the west of the proposed structure. By placing the building against the westerly property line, the building itself forms an acoustical barrier from traffic and other noise that might be produced by operators in the center. The five foot strip of land between the westerly wall and building was going to be reserved as a landscaped strip where a line of Italian Cypress trees would be planted, which when mature will completely mask the building from the Calle Jaime side. The air conditioning equipment instead of being mounted on the roof and open was designed to fit in three kiosks which are an integral part of the building. They are structurally designed and insulated and have doors for maintenance purposes. The roof mounted equipment is internally mounted and not open to view. The kiosks form not only an architectural mitigation but an acoustical barrier. Other variances for which he applied were the maximum width of an entrance driveway into the unit. Street improvements are existing and in place and were done when the center to the east was designed. A 36 foot wide drive apron was constructed on the property which is 6 foot wider than the maximum allowed. He does not want to take off the 6 feet and thus the request for the variance. The traffic engineer had no problem with that. He is also requesting that a monument sign, which is illuminated, but not in excess of the permitted size, be allowed so that the center can be identified on Santa Ana Canyon Road. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - IN OPPOSITION: Gene Boyle, 6271 E. Rio Grande Drive. He is president of the Pepper Tree Homeowner's Association which has 43 members. He has a pe~i~ion signed by a majority of the homeowners in opposition. Mr. Brown met with them on September 10, and showed an alternate plan which the homeowners reviewed and appeared to favor. That is covered in the petition just submitted. The developer said the new plan will make it easier for him because he would not have to have as many waivers. Norman Barsky, 6277 Rio Grande Drive. His concerns are with the proposal as it stands now and as approved by the Planning Commission in spite of the Planning staff's recommendation against the project. Main concerns are maximum structural height within 150 feet of single-family residents from zoned boundaries, the 668 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5=00 P.M. roof mounted air conditioning equipment and the attendant noise and types of businesses that will be operating in the center. He and all the neighbors on Rio Grande and those in the association are in favor of the alternate pla~, but there are still a lot of unanswered questions. They would like to see the design be complimentary with the existing commercial development and blend in with the area and that the air conditioning be placed on the ground. Mr. Brown has shown in the alternate plan that the building will be on the SAVI Canal property. Based on his alternate plan, he would buy the land and place a two-story building on it which would join up to the existing Hughes Shopping Center which would be on Rio Grande. The building would be away from them and they would have no problem with that. What they would like to know is if on the alternate plan and on the original plan will it be permitted on the existing grade or will Mr. Brown need to regrade the property. They would also like to know what he plans to do with the large amount of dirt recently dumped on the property. City Attorney White explained for Council Member Pickler that as he understands, an alternate plan was reviewed by some or all of the homeowners but it has not yet been reviewed by staff. The plan before the Council is the plan approved by the Planning Commission- the original plans submitted. Norman Barsky. They are all opposed to the original plan and are in favor of the alternate plan proposed by the developer. Bob Florentino, 162 S. Canyon Woods. He has signed a petition and is voicing opposition to the plan as originally proposed by Mr. Brown. While the Council has not yet seen the alternate plan, as a group, they are very much in favor of it and urge Mr. Brown to bring it forward for consideration. They feel the plan would have no affect on the configuration that Mr. Brown has proposed for the property owners on Calle Jamie. Their preference for the development of the property would give them the insulation they are looking for and provide their association with the type of development conducive to the maintenance of property values and appearance of the neighborhood. Peggy Meadows, 6275 E. Rio Grande. She would like to have the boundaries more defined. Mr. Brown has proposed to buy some part but they do not know which part. If the purchase is made, she asked if they could keep the horse trail and maybe make it right behind Hughes Market. Lee Hiatt, 6278 Calle Jamie. He is in support of the project. He is not part of the homeowners association and the residents on Calle Jamie are not part of the association. The big difference between "us" and "them" is an elevation. They are at street level with the project. He shares a common block wall with the western boundary. Right now it is a vacant lot. He is one of the most affected neighbors. The neighbors in opposition are approximately 35 to 40 feet above that and about 50 feet off the closest boundary line. He was concerned when he was approached by Mr. Brown several months ago. His concern, he wants to maintain the serenity but more importantly the security of his property. They are adjacent to the equestrian trail "SAVI Canal" and there 669 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. is a lot of foot traffic. He has lost a few things through theft. Mr. Brown suggested putting a building along the property line. The drawing posted on the Chamber wall reflects the plan worked out with Mr. Brown. The alternate plan is no mystery. The building would be built on the opposite side of the property. He confirmed he is in favor of the original plan. The developer has responded to his particular needs and concerns with that plan. Russ Clark, 6272 Calle Jamie. His neighbor, Mr. Hiatt, is most impacted by the project. He (Clark) is second relative to impact and there is a third neighbor most impacted than the people in the homes above. He agrees on going forward with the original plan as approved by the Planning Commission. Two people who spoke in rebuttal are on the opposite side of the street on the top of the hill. He does not know how they can be impacted. Almost anything the developer can do with the property would be an improvement. Answering Mayor Hunter, he stated he would be opposed if they built the project on the east side instead of the west for the same reason Mr. Hiatt is opposed. The noise level would greatly impact them. If the building is built on the westside, it will block the parking lot and the noise level. If on the other side, the parking lot is right on their property line. He cannot believe that will make a difference to the people above. Mayor Hunter. No matter what he does, he is going to build a 15 foot wall with Cypress trees. Mr. Clark stated that is true, but the building would be a deterrent to the noise. Dan Huffman, 6275 Calle Jamie. He can only support the project as presented. Their main concern is that there be a barrier between their street, their small tract of houses and the parking lot that would need to service the project. Their biggest concern was having access to the wall from their street and a quick exit out of the parking lot and out onto S~nta Ana Canyon Road to get out of the neighborhood. With the building up against the property line closest to them it will deter that. The 15 foot wall is not the height - it will be the height that it is at present. The natural landscape barrier is purely aesthetic so that they will not have to look at a tall side of a building. He confirmed he is in favor of the project as it stands. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Mr. Brown then drew a cross section of the pro~ect on the board which showed the elevation involved comparing it to the posted site plan for Council'~ information and further clarification of his project. Mayor Hunter. He would like to see the project go back to the Planning Commission. There are two or three residents in favor of the existing plan and a number of homeowners that favor the alternate plan, a plan which neither staff or Council has seen. The original plan would require five waivers and the alternate plan none; Mr. Brown clarified that two waivers would be deleted and three would remain - the driveway width, roof mounted equipment which he has mitigated and set back from single-family residents. 670 ' City Hall, ~_naheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. After additional questions were posed to Mr. Brown by Council Members, City Attorney White stated the Planning Commission no longer has jurisdiction to act upon this plan before the Council tonight because it has been appealed and once appealed, even though by the City Council, the Planning Commission can no longer take final approval steps on the project. The Council could send it back to the Planning Commission; however, it has already been reviewed and approved by the Commission. The Council could act upon the plan tonight - they could deny it which would allow the developer to go back to the Planning Commission, start with a new hearing and plan or submit alternate plans A and B. Tonight's plan could be A; Planning staff has not seen plan B. Since the alternate plan has not been reviewed by staff, it is not known if there are other waivers that may need to be advertised in addition. Perhaps the most expeditious way would be for the Council to act on the plan tonight to move it off the City Council agenda would be to deny it without prejudice allowing the developer to go back with both plans or a new plan to the Planning Commission at which time the public can comment on both plans. If the Planning Commission is unable to resolve it, it will come back to the City Council. Council Member Daly. He feels that is a good 'idea. He also suggests that Planning staff be given as much time as they need to review the new plan. He is concerned that Planning staff does not support the existing plan which they have not seen, plan B. He will be looking for Planning staff to be comfortable with whatever is proposed in the final version of the plan. It is the planned community, the regulations are very strict and the current project is not supported by the Planning staff. The basic feeling he gets from the staff report is that the project is not in keeping with the character of the area. Joel Fick, Planning Director. Their recommendation to the Planning Commission was that the plan be redesigned both to eliminate some of the variances and some of the comments the Council heard regarding architectural compatibility. They did not believe the two-story structure and the design on the wall was in keeping with the adjacent center. Staff was looking for more compatibility with the existing center. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Ehrle, 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. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. · WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 92R-200 and 92R-201) Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-200 for adoption, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 3527 without prejudice. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-200: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3527. 671 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 - 5:00 P.M. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-200 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, .Daly and Hunter COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-200 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to deny the Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 92-04 without prejudice. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 92R-201 for adoption, denying Amendment to Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study (Exhibit 7) without prejudice. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 92R-201: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DISAPPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO EXHIBIT NO. 7 OF THE SANTA ANA CANYON ACCESS POINTS STUDY RELATING TO CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6270 SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 92R-201 for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Pickler, Daly and Hunter NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson The Mayor declared Resolution No. 92R-201 dul~ passed and adopted. ADJOURNMENT: Council Member Hunter moved to adjourn, Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. Council Member Simpson was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (8:16 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 672