1991/03/19City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle and Hunter
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
PROPERTY SERVICES MANAGER: Robert ZurSchmiede
SR. REAL PROPERTY AGENT: Richard Santo
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 4:05 p.m. on March 15, 1991 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
items as shown herein.
Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 3:00 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.
Golden West Baseball Co. vs. William O. Talley
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.
d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1).
e. To consider add 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.
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order, all Council members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:19 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Pastor Jim Ritch, Anaheim Foursquare Church, gave the invocation.
155
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Irv Pickler led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were authorized by the City
Council:
Anaheim Family YMCA Day in Anaheim, March 29, 1991
Days of Remembrance in Anaheim, April 7-14, 1991
Child Abuse Prevention Month in Anaheim, April 1991
119: DECLARATION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Declaration of Congratulations was
unanimously adopted by the City Council to be presented to Frank 'Doc" Bila on
the occasion of his 89th birthday, March 28, 1991 as well as to recognize him
for his contributions to the Anaheim Community through social, professional
and volunteer organizations.
119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION AND CONGRATULATIONS: A Declaration of
Recognition and Congratulations was unanimously adopted by the City Council
and presented to Loretta Harvey, Personnel Analyst, upon her retirement
March 28, 1991 following 21 years of service to the City of Anaheim. Mayor
Hunter and Council Members congratulated Mrs. Harvey and commended her for her
dedicated service to the City of Anaheim during her years of employment.
MINUTES: Council Member Simpson moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held February 5, 1991 and February 12, 1991. Council Member Hunter
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $6,826,001.27 for the week
ending March 8, 1991 and $3,492,212.21 for the week ending March 15, 1991, in
accordance with the 1990-91 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. (5:32 p.m.)
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES: The titles of the following
resolutions and ordinances were read by the City Manager. (Resolution Nos.
91R-62 through 91R-82, both inclusive, for adoption; Ordinance Nos. 5208 and
5209 for introduction).
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions
and ordinances. Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member
Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler, 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
Hunter offered Resolution Nos. 91R-62 through 91R-82, both inclusive, for
adoption. Council Member Hunter offered Ordinance Nos. 5208 and 5209 for
introduction. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book.
156
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
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 Leland J. Pearson for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 20, 1991.
b. Claim submitted by Karina Barajas for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 9, 1990.
c. Claim submitted by Allen M. Zelter for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 10, 1990.
d. Claim submitted by Mark Diversified, Inc. for indemnity sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 19, 1990.
e. Claim submitted by Sandra J. Leventhal for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 28, 1991.
f. Claim submitted by Steven & Janet Strickler for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 3, 1991.
g. Claim submitted by Ricardo Torres-Reyes for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 6, 1990.
h. Claim submitted by Joyce Fedorow for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 26, 1991.
i. Claim submitted by Pacific Bell for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 6, 1990.
j. Claim submitted by Anaheim Memorial Hospital for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 22,
1990.
h. Claim submitted by Jacqueline M. Roza for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 8, 1990.
i. Claim submitted by Carolyn L. Seguin for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 17, 1990.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission
meeting held January 10, 1991.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Services Board meeting
held January 10, 1991.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board meeting
held January 23, 1991.
140: Receiving and filing Anaheim Public Library Monthly Statistical Report
for the month of January 1991.
157
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
107: Receiving and filing Statistical Report Summary ending January 31, 1991,
from the Building Division.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission
meetings held February 20, 1991, and February 27, 1991.
A3. 150: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of the Vermont
Tree Yard Trash Transfer & Parking Lot Improvements by Sully-Miller
Contracting Company, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to
file said Notice of Completion.
A4. 164: Approving a Notice of Completion of the Construction of Katella
Avenue Sidewalk Improvements, between Ninth and Walnut Streets, by Inland
Constructors, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file
said Notice of Completion.
A5. 175: Approving the Notice of Completion of the Construction of the Large
Water Valve Replacement - Phase V Project by Elser Constructors, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of
Completion.
A6. 167: Approving an extension of the contract completion date by five
working days or seven calendar days; assessing liquidated damages in the total
amount of $3,400; and approving a Notice of Completion of the Construction of
the Lincoln Avenue Street & Traffic Signal Improvements by Modern Aspahlt,
Inc., and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice
of Completion.
A7. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14267, and authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute same. Tract No. 14267 is located on the south
side of Lincoln Avenue, east side of Olive Street, north side of Center Street
and west side of Philadelphia Street, and is filed in conjunction with
Specific Plan No. 90-02.
A8. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-62: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS,
HIGHWAYS AND SERVICE EASEMENTS. (Setting a date and time to consider
abandoning a portion of that certain easement for storm drain purposes located
generally west of Anaheim Hills Road and north of Nohl Ranch Road.)
(90-10A). Suggested public hearing date: April 16, 1991.
A9. 131: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-63: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING CERTAIN INTERSECTIONS A COUNTY HIGHWAY DURING
BEACH BOULEVARD CONSTRUCTION. (That portion of Beach Boulevard from
approximately 600 feet north of Lincoln Avenue to approximately 1000 feet
south of Ball Road and lying within the city limits of Anaheim.)
Al0. 159: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM DIRECTING THE FILING AND POSTING OF PREVAILING RATES OF PER
DIEM WAGES PERTAINING TO PUBLIC WORKS.
158
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
John Prager, 440 Bridgeview Drive, Anaheim. Each year a resolution is adopted
relative to prevailing wages but he does not see anywhere in the resolution or
the procedure outlined that there is any place for changes in those wage rates
as determined by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. To
the extent that the figures are not included in the contract document but
instead refer only to the resolution, it is his opinion it is misleading the
public works contractors. Their contract is then geared to paying only what
the resolution says and not what the law says and the Director of the
Department of Industrial Relations with respect to what wage rates have to be
paid. He believes the City's administrative practices with respect to
prevailing wages needs to be looked at.
Mayor Hunter asked both the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and the
City Attorney if they wished to comment on the matter; both indicated they had
no comment other than to receive Mr. Prager's comments.
At the end of the Consent Calendar the resolution was approved as recommended
by staff.
Ail. 123: Approving a Second Addendum to Architects Agreement with
Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc., (HOK) in the amount of $103,500 for
concession design work on the Arena project.
Al2. 123: Approving a Second Renewal Agreement with Computer Services
Company Division for traffic signal maintenance services, and authorizing the
Mayor to sign said agreement.
Al3. 160: Accepting the bid of Central Moloney Company, c/o Young Company,
in the amount of $22,247.28 for twenty 37.5 KVA, single phase, current
protected transformers, and eight 37.5 KVA, single phase conventional
transformers, in accordance with Bid #4916.
160: Accepting the bid of General Electric Company, in the amount of
$17,675.00 for twenty-five 25 KVA, single phase, current protected
transformers,~in accordance with Bid $4916.
Al4. 160: Accepting the low bid of Whitney Machinery, Inc., in the amount of
$50,297 (including tax and options) for one each mobile hydraulic hammer, in
accordance with Bid ~4922.
Al5. 160: Accepting the low bid of ABB Power T & D Company, c/o WESCO
Company, in the amount of $65,571.00 for two each 69 KV, 2000 amp circuit
breakers, in accordance with Bid #4920.
160: Accepting the low bid of Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., c/o
Matzinger & Keegan, Inc., in the amount of $128,896 for four each 69 KY, 1200
amp circuit breakers, in accordance with Bid #4920.
Al6. 160: Accepting the bid of Clippinger Chevrolet, in the amount of
$41,923 for one 14,000 G.V.W. Step Van with bins and shelves, in accordance
with Bid ~4921.
159
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Al7. 123: Approving the Seventh Amendment to Agreement with Volt Energy
Systems, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $30,000 for conservation support
services, from March 19, 1991 to January 31, 1992, as recommended by the
Public Utilities Board at their meeting of January 17, 1991.
Al8. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-65: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING THE EXISTENCE OF A WATER SHORTAGE, ORDERING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER SHORTAGE PLAN II, AND ADOPTING A SCHEDULE OF
PENALTIES.
John Prager, 440 Bridgeview Drive, Anaheim. To his knowledge, no member of
the public has seen the revised proposed resolution as adopted by the Public
Utilities Board (PUB) at their meeting on Thursday, March 14, 1991. The
proposed resolution in the Council's agenda packet is the one the PUB reviewed
but does not contain any amendments thereto as adopted by the Board on
Thursday. At the PUB meeting, he made a suggestion to include a modification
dealing with the penalties. That modification is not in the copy of the
resolution he has or the one the City Clerk just handed to him. He is present
to ask the Council to carefully consider whether or not they are over-reacting
to the water shortage and whether it is necessary to make water conservation
cutbacks mandatory on the public in Anaheim. He referred to the ordinance
adopted by the Council on February 26, 1991 (Ordinance No. 5204) which
provided three water plan options (see minutes of February 12 and February 26,
1991 where discussion of those plans took place). Mr. Prager then briefed
provisions of the ordinance with which he took issue. He also reported on
information he received in a discussion with the Assistant General Manager of
Utilities and subsequently offered suggestions which he felt were better
alternatives than what is being proposed.
In concluding, Mr. Prager stated that now is not the time to impose mandatory
requirements, but if the Council does so, he would like to see the following
modifications: For any violation that a penalty be imposed only for willful
disregard of the provision of the ordinance rather than a penalty of $25.00
for first violation; that instead it be submission to a water audit to give
that person assistance on how to save water which would be more effective.
Lastly, that the time period when penalties are due run from the date of the
decision of the general manager rather than the notice of violation. In his
opinion, there are insufficient facts for the Council to find and declare an
existing water shortage exists today. It would be more appropriate to wait
until the drought surcharge proposal is before the Council on April 2nd before
adopting the proposed plan or Plan I.
Mayor Hunter asked to hear from the Public Utilities General Manager.
Mr. Ed Aghjayan, Public Utilities General Manager. At present, 50% of
Anaheim's water supply is being curtailed by the Metropolitan Water District
(MWD). Staff has had a very judicious exercise in water management and is in
a position were they have planned for such an occurrence, where they now draw
on their wells more and less on MWD. The department is, therefore, in a
position where it can avoid fines and penalties. The fact is they are
required to cut back substantially on MWD water. As General Manager, if he
does not have the water to supply, that constitutes a drought. As to whether
160
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
or not it is possible to wait until July 1, or some future date before
implementing the program, it is not possible to just push a button and have
conservation occur. Plan I is the voluntary step which basically has been in
effect for 1 1/2 years and has achieved approximately a 1.9% reduction.
Overall they are trying to achieve about a 25% reduction. Plan II is an
acceleration of the program. It is mandatory but not rationing any one.
Plan II will link three things together - make certain the public knows there
are mandatory water wasting measures and that some things cannot be done
anymore, and doing that in a positive and constructive way. There are
penalties which are in place to give some 'teeth' to the plan but they hope
never to write those kinds of citations. The second part is the drought
surcharge creating economic incentives and disincentives. They plan to go to
the PUB on Thursday with that part of the program and will come back to the
Council soon after that. The third and final phase is to do as good a job as
possible informing the public. The department is prepared to do thousands of
water audits for their customers and there is a very heavy public information
schedule. If it rains the rest of March and there is no drought, he will be
happy to come back and say that the process can be relaxed. Their
conservation efforts are ahead of most cities if not all. They are going to
study four or five different rationing approaches with the PUB and are not
going to recommend any unless it is something they have to do.
Council Member Daly then posed questions to Mr. Aghjayan relative to Anaheim's
underground water supply and what replenishes that supply.
Mr. Ed Aghjayan. Under the Orange County Water District (OCWD) Anaheim has 35
wells providing one of the finest water supplies around. The water district
has regulated the amount of water an agency they serve can take limiting it at
70%. If the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) cuts their supply in half and
OCWD keeps their percentage at 70%, the City gets reduced by 1/2 for all of
their supply because the 70% is a lower number. OCWD said they think they can
raise the percentage but not raise the total amount of water. They have
elevated the percentage up to 81% until June 30th which averages out to 75%
for the whole period of time. In July, the department believes they will
settle to around 75%. Out of 50% reduction by MWD, the department can live
with about a 25% cutback by their customers. That is what they are planning
on for July 1. He then clarified that Anaheim's underground water supply is
basically recharged water and has no tie in with MWD. Lack of rainfall
diminishes the water supply. A positive factor is that there are wells at the
1500 foot level. The drought does have an impact in that it reduces the
ability to recharge underground aquifers.
At the end of the Consent Calendar, the Council adopted the resolution as
recommended by staff.
Al9. 114: Approving the revision of Council Policy 007, transferring the
responsibility of coordination and final approval of Block Party Permits from
the City Manager to the Traffic and Transportation Manager.
A20. 123: Approving a Service Agreement with the County of Orange, in amount
not to exceed $337.64 a month, to provide the City computer time-sharing for
the JTPA Grant Management Information System from July 1, 1990 through
June 30, 1991, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement.
161
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
A21. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-66: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT TITLE II-B SUBGRANT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
A22. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-67: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REAL
PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN.
158: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-68: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN.
A23. 179: Approving the 90-day status update report reviewing the various
studies in progress by the Planning Department relating to the Commercial
Recreation Area.
A24. 150: Accepting a grant from the 1988 Bond Act Robert-Z'berg-Harris
Urban Open Space program (SB 174), in the amount of $88,356 for play equipment
improvements at Twila Reid, Boysen, La Palma and Stoddard Parks.
106: Amending 1990/91 Resource Allocation Plan by appropriating $22,089 into
each of the following expenditure accounts: 16-825-7107 (Twila Reid Park),
16-814-7103 (Boysen Park), 16-827-7107 (La Palma Park) and 16-826-7103
(Stoddard Park); and appropriating $88,356 into revenue account 16-3151
(SB 174).
A25. 123: Approving an Agreement with Magnolia Elementary School District to
provide Park Ranger patrols of school facilities from March 22, 1991 through
June 30, 1991.
A26. 150: Reallocating $50,000 of Community Services Agency Funding to the
following organizations: Anaheim Family YMCA ($5,000), Anaheim Interfaith
Shelter ($10,000), Boys & Girls Club of Anaheim ($15,000), Episcopal Service
Alliance ($10,000), Feedback Foundation, TLC ($5,000), and Orange County
Center for Health ($5,000), as recommended by the Community Services Board.
Sharon Phelps, Operations Manager, Feedback Foundation. Their main office is
located in Anaheim. She is appealing for an additional amount of money
although she is very appreciative of the Community Services Board (CSB)
recommendation to give $5,000 to the Feedback Foundation from the remaining
$5o,oo0 of community services Agency funds. She then gave the history of why
their request came about originally relaying the services they are providing
to Anaheim at two congregate meal sites. They provide nutrition and
supportive services specifically to seniors in Anaheim over 60 years old.
Anaheim has a long history of supporting the Feedback Foundation program.
They took a great deal of time with the 14 cities they serve in making a
specific budget request based on the cost of services provided to those
cities. When she reports that it takes 'xm number of dollars to provide
services, that is the exact cost. They found in preparing the budget they
were $12,000 short in being able to provide the level of service they now
provide. Anaheim is the second largest city the Foundation provides service
to. They have asked cities for additional funds anywhere from $400 to
162
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
$34,000. She is appealing to the Council because the $5,000 is not enough and
cities do not want to pay more than their fair share. Otherwise, they will
cut out services accordingly if they do not get the amount of money agreed
to. Of the fourteen cities thus far, ten have granted their request. They
are appealing to Anaheim to somehow find the money to grant $12,018. She is
not turning down the $5,000 but the need is for another $7,000.
Dannue Mayo, Golden Opportunities Youth Association. This is the fourth year
he has been trying to get funds from Block Grant monies and the Community
Services Board. It is because of him they had to restructure how they were
going to use the $50,000. His organization has been working with no funds.
It is the only one working with gang members and gang member's families. He
submitted a copy of an article from the Register reporting on some of the work
of the organization. Today he is asking for funds in appreciation of the
services they have been providing in Anaheim.
At the conclusion of the Consent Calendar, the City Council approved the
allocation of funds as recommended by the Community Services Board, and as set
forth above.
A27. 123: Approving an Amendment to Agreement with Xeta Corporation,
providing tee time reservation services, to reduce the annual fee paid by the
City from $80,000 to $68,000, and authorizing the City Manager or his
designated representative to approve further reductions in fees during the
term of the contract.
A28. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with Medical and Safety
Management, Inc., to extend said agreement for emergency medical services
during events at Anaheim Stadium, and authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf
of the City.
A29. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with the Joiner-Rose
Group, Inc., to provide for an additional five site visits to monitor project
progress and to provide on-site direction to the contractor in connection with
sound system construction management services at Anaheim Stadium, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City.
A30. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-69: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 3, COMPENSATION, AS SET FORTH IN
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-166.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-70: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 6, PREMIUM PAY, AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO.
88R-166.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-71: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 12, REINSTATEMENT, AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION
NO. 88R-166.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-72: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 15, HOLIDAYS, AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO.
88R-166.
163
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-73: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 16, VACATION, AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO.
88R-166 AS AMENDED.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-74: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 19, BEREAVEMENT LEAVE, AS SET FORTH IN
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-166.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-75: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 90R-51, NUNC PRO TUNC.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-76: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING PERSONNEL RULE 33 AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO. 90R-153
PERTAINING TO POST RETIREMENT MEDICAL BENEFITS.
A31. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ADJUSTING RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ESTABLISHING PAY POLICIES
FOR CLASSIFICATION DESIGNATED AS EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT AND SUPERSEDING
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-362 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADJUSTING RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ESTABLISHING PAY POLICIES FOR
CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT AND SUPERSEDING
RESOLUTION NO. 89R-363 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-79: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADJUSTING RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ESTABLISHING PAY POLICIES FOR
CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS SUPERVISORY AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO.
89R-365 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-80: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADJUSTING RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ESTABLISHING PAY POLICIES FOR
CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS PROFESSIONAL AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO.
89R-366 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-81: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADJUSTING RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ESTABLISHING PAY POLICIES FOR
CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS MIDDLE MANAGEMENT AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO.
89R-364 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO.
A32. 158: Approving a Relocation Agreement with Robert and Karen Spaulding
dba The Old Mill, to provide compensation in the amount of $69,063, for being
displaced as a result of City action in conjunction with the purchase of
property located at Katella and Douglass Road.
A33. 177: Approving the acceptance of $56,000 in 1991 Emergency Shelter
Grant funds; approving the recommendation for funding of four non-profit
emergency shelter service providers with the (ESG) allocation; and amending
the FY 1990/1991 Resource Allocation Plan to increase revenue by $56,000 in
account number 25-215.
164
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
A34. 123: Approving an Affordable Housing Agreement with Andrew Homes,
Incorporated for I two-bedroom affordable unit (14 total project units)
located on property at 3238 West Ball Road, in connection with Variance No.
4063.
A35. 170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14391, and the Subdivision
Agreement with Andrew Homes, Inc., and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute said agreement. Tract No. 14391 is located at 3238 West Ball Road,
and is filed in connection with Variance No. 4094.
A36. 127: RESOLUTION NO. 91R-82: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION HELD ON MARCH 5, 1991, DECLARING THE RESULT AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS
PROVIDED BY LAW.
A37. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5208 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.02.034 OF CHAPTER 18.02 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
A38. 173: ORDINANCE NO. 5209 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING CHAPTER 14.60 TO TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION DEMAND.
A39. 123: Approving a First Amendment to Agreement with the Keith Companies
for the Santa Ana Canyon Road Environmental Impact Report (Santa Aha Canyon
Road widening from Imperial Highway to Roosevelt Road) and authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement.
A40. 123: Approving an Agreement with Phoenix Club German Association to
purchase and install replacement entertainer's quarters on the leased premises
located at 1566 Douglass Road, and authorizing the City Manager to execute all
documents required to complete the purchase and installation. (Council Member
Pickler voted no.)
Roll Call Vote on Resolutions:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 91R-62 through 91R-82, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTION CARRIED.
A41. 151: FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR
ACQUIRING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY ADJACENT
TO THE ANAHEIM ARENA (Scarbrouqh Trust): To consider finding and determining
the public interest and necessity for acquiring and authorizing the
condemnation of certain real property adjacent to the Anaheim Arena for
parking purposes, and authorizing use of eminent domain authority and the law
firm of Oliver, Stoever, Barr and Vose, Special Counsel to the City, to
proceed with said condemnation action.
165
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Submitted was report dated March 19, 1991 from the Community Development
Department recommending adoption of a resolution to initiate condemnation
proceedings.
Mr. Rob ZurSchmiede, Property Services Manager. This hearing is to give the
owners of the property at 1400 to 1479 South Douglass Road, comprising
approximately 2 acres of the proposed sports arena parking lot, an opportunity
to comment on the three items listed in the subject staff report. The
recommendation from staff is to open the hearing, receive testimony relating
to the three items - (1) Whether the public interest and necessity require
this project. (2) Whether the project is planned and located in a manner that
will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private
injury. (3) Whether the property sought to be acquired is necessary for the
project - close the hearing and then consider adopting the resolution of need
and necessity authorizing the City to proceed with eminent domain action to
acquire the property. The piece in'question is required to complete
construction of the arena parking lot. The EIR for the sports arena included
this site as well as numerous engineering studies which resulted in the
parking plan proposed. Also present tonight is Mr. Tom Stoever of Oliver,
Stoever, Barr and Vose, eminent domain Counsel for the City.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak.
Mr. Craig Kennedy, Hillgren and Kennedy, 1400 Quail, Suite 270, Newport
Beach. He represents Clayton Eugene Scarbrough and Donna Eugene Scarbrough
Trustees of the Clayton E. Scarbrough Trust, the owners of the underlying fee
of the property in question. With respect to the lion's share of the parking
which is going to be for the arena, it has been provided by the Orange County
Flood Control District (OCFCD) pursuant to a Parking Concession Agreement
entered into in June and July of 1989 between the City and the OCFCD. In this
instance, the City did not acquire a fee interest in the land for the 17 acres
of parking surrounding the arena. Rather they obtained a license agreement
that was to last between 55 and 65 years. Mr. & Mrs. Scarbrough as trustees
of the trust are willing to work some kind of similar arrangement with the
City in order for there to be a long-term license or lease agreement so that
they will not have to give up the entire fee. Inasmuch as the City has
already given the same kind of offer and made a deal with OCFCD, they feel it
is a reasonable request. In light of the fact that the majority of parking is
being provided by a lease rather than a fee interest, he feels this to be the
lowest amount of private injury that would befall the Scarbrough Trust with
respect to this matter. Relative to the 2.1 acres included within the Parking
Concession Agreement, at this point the County is taking the position the 2.1
acres is not included in the Parking Concession Agreement, a position that is
disavowed by the City. At this time it is premature to be making a decision
about the acquisition of this interest when the interests are still a matter
of controversy and litigation between the Scarbroughs, the City and Flood
Control District. He is requesting that the City find that the public
interest and necessity not require the acquisition of fee interest in the
property and it can be acquired for purposes of parking through the
Scarbroughs in a manner that would reduce their private injury and obtain
parking for the City on terms similar to those carved out with the Orange
County Flood Control District.
166
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Jack Stanaland, President, Campanula Properties. He asked if the letter
delivered today from Mr. Coldren dated March 19, 1991 with exhibits attached
has been made a part of the public record.
Mayor Hunter. The letter and attachments have been received and is made a
part of the public record.
Mr. Stanaland continued stating he does not know exactly what the City is
condemning since it has a license to park and has the use of the property.
The Flood Control District says it is not included as part of their Parking
Concession Agreement and it cannot be used for parking. Either the City
already has the right to use it or the Flood Control District said it cannot
be used for parking. He questioned, therefore, what is the public necessity
of condemning either the lease hold or the fee interest. That is his question
for the record.
Tom Stoever, Special Counsel, Oliver, Stoever, Bart and Vose. They have
received the letter from Attorney Coldren which Mr. Stanaland referred to. It
is quite voluminous and deserves consideration and thought. He also feels
that the issues raised by Mr. Stanaland will also require consideration and
further thought. The Council has before it as part of their consideration on
the resolution, the EIR, all of the studies that went into that report, the
engineering reports which have been presented both by staff and the
consultants as well as the staff reports. All of these matters are properly
considered by the Council and are in front of the Council for purposes of the
resolution. Attorney Kennedy's comments regarding a potential for the
proposed leasing of the subject property is an alternative which should be
given consideration. He believes that negotiations or discussions along that
line could be held between Mr. Kennedy and Mr. ZurSchmiede or someone else
designated by the City. Considering all of these things and the amount of
material involved he suggested that the Council give consideration to
continuing the hearing to a future date for further deliberation.
Mayor Hunter. The public hearing will remain open at this time.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to continue the subject hearing to
Tuesday, April 9, 1991. Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
A42. 178: APPOINTMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF
DIRECTORS:
Appointment to the Orange County Water District Board of Directors (Division),
effective April 1, 1991, to fill the vacancy of August F. Lenain.
Mayor Hunter moved to appoint Mayor Pro Tem Ehrle to the Orange County Water
District Board of Directors.
Before further action was taken, Council Member Daly suggested that the matter
be continued for a few weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Ehrle is certainly qualified and
he (Daly) is pleased that he is interested in pursuing such an important
assignment. The Council has had a couple of expressions of interest from
others who would like to serve on the Board and he would like a chance to go
167
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
to the General Manager of Utilities to discuss the demands of the assignment.
Council Member Daly thereupon moved to continue the appointment to the Orange
County Water District Board of Directors to Tuesday, April 9, 1991. Council
Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS Bi - B5 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 25t 1991,
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH 19, 1991:
B1. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 90-91-21, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3380t WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 543, TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 14401 AND MITIGATED DECLARATION:
OWNER: JOHN G. PRENTICE, 280 N. Ott Street, Corona, CA 91720
AGENT: NEWPORT PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT, Attn: A1 Marshal, 14400 Mac
Arthur Blvd., ~900, Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 2941 E. Jackson Ave. Property is approximately 1.1 acres
located on the north side of Jackson Ave. approximately 750 feet east
of the centerline of Vista Street.
For a change in zone from RM-1200 TO RM-2400.
To permit an 'affordable" 24-unit RM-2400 condominium complex with
waivers of minimum site area per unit, maximum structural height and
minimum landscape area.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 90-91-21 GRANTED (PC91-24) (7 yes votes).
CUP NO. 3380 GRANTED (PC91-25).
Waiver of Council Policy No. 543 APPROVED.
Tentative Tract No. 14401 APPROVED.
Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOTE: AT THE MEETING OF MARCH 5, 1991, (ITEM B10) THERE WAS NO
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL ON TT 14401.
B2. 185: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 271 (PREY. CERT.), AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 87-01:
OWNER: HANOVER REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES, Attn: C. D. Abramson, 9300
Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 500, Beverly Hills
LOCATION: 1284 E. Katella Ave. and 1301-1395 E. Pacifico Ave.
Property is approximately 17.1 acres located on the south side of
Katella Ave. and approximately 661 feet west of the intersection of
Katella Ave. and State College Blvd.
Request for recommendation to the City Council for approval of
Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 87-01 between Hanover
Real Estate Associates and the City of Anaheim to further provide for
the implementation of the Hanover/Katella Office Park development
previously approved for subject property.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 87-01 GRANTED (PC91-26)
(7 yes votes).
EIR NO. 271 (previously approved).
SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING - SEE ITEM D5 ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
168
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
B3. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3384 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: WILLIAM & CYNTHIA TAORMINA, P.O. BOX 309, Anaheim, CA 92805
AGENT: SET FREE CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP, 320 N. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim,
CA 92805
LOCATION: 320 N. Anaheim Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.80
acre located at the southeast corner of Anaheim Blvd. and Adele
Street.
To retain an existing church with waiver of minimum number of parking
spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3384 GRANTED (PC91-27) for 2 years (6 yes votes, 1
abstained).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3386 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: GRACE RESTAURANT CO., 2701 Alton Ave., Irvine, CA 92714
LOCATION: 1751 S. State College Blvd. Property is approximately
2.05 acres located on the west side of State College Blvd. and
approximately 250 feet north of the centerline of Katella Ave.
To permit an outdoor dining area including on-sale alcoholic
beverages with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3386 GRANTED (PC91-28) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B5. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3388 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: DOMINIC C. ETCHANDY, 1241 N. Lakeview, Ste. "H", Anaheim, CA
92807
AGENT: RICK MANOS, 3622 Trey Ave., Riverside, CA 92503-1849
LOCATION: 1261 N. Lakeview Ave., Ste. WD". Property is
approximately 6.2 acres located at the southwest corner of Miraloma
Ave. and Lakeview Ave.
To permit a martial arts school with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3388 APPROVED (PC91-29) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
ITEM B6 - B7 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 11, 1991,
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH 21, 1991:
169
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
B6. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4115, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 90-107 AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: BROOKHOLLOW APARTMENTS (ANAHEIM) ASSOCIATES, A CALIFORNIA
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 4490 Yon Karman, Newport Beach, CA 92660;
ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, 400 Civic Center West, Santa
Aha, CA 92701; City of Anaheim, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92803.
LOCATION: Property is approximately 5.59 acres located at the
northeast corner of Crescent Avenue and Brookhurst Street.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, maximum structural eight
and required elevators to construct a 124-unit, #affordable~, 2 and 3
story, apartment complex and to establish a 2-lot subdivision.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Tentative Parcel map No. 90-107 APPROVED.
Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOTE: Variance No. 4115 has a 22-day appeal period and will appear
on the April 2, 1991 Council agenda.
B7. 170: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 273 (PREY. CERT.}, TENTATIVE TRACT
NO. 12694 AND SITE PLAN:
OWNER: PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Attn: Steve Riggs, 19
Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: Property is approximately 44.18 acres generally bounded by
open space to the north, the Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan
Development Area 3 to the northeast, The Summit of Anaheim Hills
Development Area 102 to the east, The Highlands at Anaheim Hills
Development Areas 7 and 8 to the south and The Highlands at Anaheim
Hills Development Area 3 to the west and further describes as
Development Area 6 of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan
(SP87-1).
To establish a 30-lot (including 11 lettered lots), 276-unit air
space condominium subdivision and requests site plan review and
approval.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Tentative Tract Map No. 12694 and Site Plan Approved.
EIR NO. 273 previously certified.
End of the Planning Commission Items.
ITEMS B8 - B9 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF MARCH 7, 1991 -
DECISION DATE: MARCH 14, 1991, INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH
29, 1991:
B8. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3393 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: INVESTOR REALTY COMPANY, I Civic Plaza Suite 100, Newport
Beach, CA 92660.
AGENT: BAMBINO'S RISTORANTE, 1731 W. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA
92804
LOCATION: 1731 West Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 2.67
acres located at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and Euclid
Street.
170
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
To permit on-sale beer and wine in a 2,317 square foot restaurant
(Bambino's Ristorante).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3393 APPROVED (ZA91-12) modified conditions.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B9. 179:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3394, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 3:
OWNER: SHU LIN AND YA-YIN CHEN, 765 S. Ridgeview Road, Anaheim, CA
92807.
AGENT: O'KAIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Attn: Paul O'Kain,
132-A South Imperial Hwy., Anaheim, CA 92807.
LOCATION: 199 Ferrari Way. Property is approximately 1.13 acres
located on the west side of Ferrari Way approximately 335 feet north
of the centerline of Crescent Drive.
To permit a ground mounted satellite dish antenna.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
CUP NO. 3394 APPROVED (ZA91-13).
End of the Zoning Administrator Items.
B10. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 86-87-14 AND VARIANCE NO. 3611, REQUEST FOR
EXTENSIONS OF TIME:
Request submitted by Thomas Kieviet, Farano & Kieviet on behalf of
the Desai Family, 100 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 340, Anaheim,
CA 92805.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 2240 West Lincoln
Avenue. Property consists of approximately 0.8 acres located 160
feet southerly of the south side of Lincoln Avenue and 530 feet west
of the centerline of Brookhurst Street. The petitioner is requesting
an extension of time for Reclassification No. 86-87-14 and Variance
No. 3611, retroactive to February 3, 1990, and to expire February 3,
1992.
Reclassification No. 86-87-14 is for a change in zone from CL to
RM-1200 and Variance No. 3611 is to construct a 34-unit affordable
apartment complex with code waivers of required lot frontage, minimum
site area per dwelling unit, maximum building height and maximum site
coverage.
This matter was continued from the meetings of December 4 and
December 18, 1990, February 5 and February 26, 1991 to this date.
Jeff Farano, Farano and Kieviet. He is representing the petitioners who at
this time are the property owners, the Bucalas. The request is for an
extension of time for one year to provide an opportunity to complete the
project. It remains the same project is was a year ago and is in compliance
with all ordinances and code.
Council Member Pickler. They have been looking at the project for quite
sometime. He lives in the immediate area and has concerns with the project as
proposed. There is an opportunity now to do something about the project to
171
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
make it a more beneficial one for the area. Considerable time has passed
since the project was first approved. He would like to see a better project
and one that would benefit the community and the City as a whole. The
proposed project is going to be a duplicate of what is there. If the Council
has not seen it, they should look at it and also look at the project on
Broadway and Brookhurst which he feels is something that deteriorates an area
rather than enhances it. He will vote against any extension.
Council Member Ehrle. He assumed that before any final action is taken
relative to the project, that it would again be before the Council.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. She clarified that is not the case.
If the Council grants the request for extensions of time, the extensions will
be to February 1992 and the Council would not see the proposal again. The
project would be built as previously approved. The last extension included
revised plans.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to approve the requested extensions of
time on Reclassification No. 86-87-14 and Variance No. 3611 retroactive to
February 3, 1990 to expire February 3, 1992. Council Member Ehrle seconded
the motion. Council Members Daly and Pickler voted no. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Arlene Casaw, Paramount Precision Skating Team, 590 Paseo deLuna, Anaheim.
She is representing a group of young Ice Skaters who will be competing in the
United States National Precision Skating Competition in Anchorage, Alaska,
April 9-13, 1991. She is present tonight representing the intermediate team
and is asking for support to sponsor the team in order for them to attend the
competition. Although the team has been involved in several fundraising
projects, the figure raised is $2,000 short of what they need to cover the
cost of the air fare to Anchorage. She is urging the Council's support.
Cheryl Bolton. When the organization went to the City of Paramount and asked
for assistance, the City brought to their attention that no team members
resided in the City of Paramount. They shared the fact that the girls travel
long distances to skate in Paramount because there is no local rink in
Anaheim. They are trying to raise $2,000 and only have a couple of weeks to
do so.
Mayor Hunter interjected at this point and asked Council Member Ehrle to
address the issue noting that the City does not donate public funds to private
organizations.
Council Member Ehrle. The City generally does not give public funds to
private organizations. Council Members may assist in helping to raise needed
funds by providing organizations with names of individuals in the private
sector who make contributions to worthy causes. As a public servant, he would
not vote to give funds to private organizations. It would not be appropriate
to give taxpayer's funds to a select group. He suggested that the
organization call Council Members who could in turn lead them to people who
could assist.
172
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Mayor Hunter. The Council cannot approve the funding request. It would be a
misuse of public funds, but the Council can assist. He suggested that the
organization contact the City Clerk and the Council will supply names of those
who might be contacted.
City Clerk Lee Sohl. She does have a letter from the organization and with
the help of the Council she can prepare a response with some leads.
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 90-17A: In accordance with application
filed by RARP, L.P. public hearing was held on the proposed abandonment of a
certain easement for slope purposes located adjacent to the east side of State
College Boulevard north of Katella Avenue, pursuant to Resolution No. 91R-21
duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in
accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated January 24, 1991, was submitted recommending
approval of said abandonment with slopes meant to be exchanged for the
following items as outlined in the City Engineer's report: (1) The dedication
and construction of a critical intersection easement, to be approved by the
City Engineer. (2) A site for a water well, as determined by Public Utility
Department. (3) Electrical utility easements, as determined by Public Utility
Department.
Richard Santo, Senior Real Property Agent. Staff recommends approval of the
subject abandonment.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
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
V, 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. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 91R-83)
Council Member Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 91R-83 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 90-17A in accordance with the report of the City Engineer
dated January 24, 1991. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-83: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING THAT CERTAIN EASEMENT FOR SLOPE PURPOSES LOCATED GENERALLY AT
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF STATE COLLEGE BLVD AND KATELLA AVENUE. (90-17A)
173
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991~ 5:00 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 91R-83 duly passed and adopted.
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 89-13A: In accordance with application
filed by Trider Corporation a public hearing was held on proposed abandonment
of two electrical easements located at the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch Road
and Anaheim Hills Road, pursuant to Resolution No. 91R-34 duly published in
the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated February 1, 1991, was submitted recommending
approval of said abandonment.
Richard Santo, Senior Real Property Agent. Staff recommends approval of the
subject abandonment.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Council
Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Daly, the City Council determined
that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01 Class
V, 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. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 91R-84)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 91R-84 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 89-13A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-84: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR ELECTRICAL PURPOSES. (89-13A)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 91R-84 duly passed and adopted.
179:
PUBLIC HEARING - ARCADE PERMIT NO. 1007:
REQUESTED BY: MIKE MIN-HUNG CHUNG, MC ARCADE
510 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92804
174
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 510 South Beach
Boulevard and the request is to permit 50 amusement devices.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Arcade Permit No. 1007 APPROVED (ZA91-10).
HEARING SET ON:
Two members of the City Council requested review of the Zoning Administrator's
decision approving the subject arcade permit.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 7, 1991
Posting of property March 8, 1991
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Mr. Mike Min-Hung Chung, 12042 Cerritos, Anaheim, 90701.
present to answer questions.
He was
Mayor Hunter. The hearing was set by Council Members Pickler
and Daly. The permit was approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Council Member Pickler asked to hear why the Zoning
Administrator approved the permit.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The procedures for an
Amusement Arcade permit are such that the arcade application has
to be approved if there is opposition of less than 50% of
surrounding properties. Staff notified all businesses and
residential addresses within the 300 foot radius as shown on the
posted aerial map. Thirty-one notices were sent out. Nine
letters as well as phone calls were received in opposition or
29% of the total notifications which is higher than they usually
receive, but not 50%. Therefore, she could not deny the
application. The City Council can act as they wish on the
matter.
Council Member Daly. That is why he seconded the request for a
hearing. He feels an expression of opposition from nine
businesses in the neighborhood is stronger than they usually
hear and strong enough to warrant a denial.
Council Member Pickler. Because of the number of letters
received in opposition, he believes that the proposed use will
be contrary to the public interest, health, safety morals or
general welfare. He knows the area quite well and it leaves a
lot to be desired. Putting 50 arcade machines into the area
will deteriorate the shopping center.
Mr. Min-Hung Chung he wants to open the arcade where it is
proposed because he likes the area. It is for fun and
175
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
relaxation. He has lived right in the area for three or four
years. He also answered questions stating that he is going to
run the business, and the square footage is 1,650 square feet.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. For Council's
information relative to the 300 foot radius, normally they see a
property line situation which pushes the notification out
somewhat. With business premises, it is a smaller notification
which in the case of a shopping center can be really valid. In
this instance because of the size of the site, the notification
went only to the northeast corner of Orange and Beach
Boulevard. Of the individuals who responded negatively, five
had business addresses in the shopping center, 506-518 South
Beach Boulevard, and the other four were addresses in the
residential areas nearby, Laxore and Rowland. There was some
additional opposition but outside the 300 foot radius.
Council Member Ehrle. He asked if the permit could be granted
for one year and at that time come back for a review by the
Council.
City Attorney White. There is nothing explicit in the ordinance
that talks about granting permits with conditions. Because the
Council can deny the permit, he would not have any problem
drafting into the enabling legislation the right of the Council
limiting a permit to a number of years. The permit will then
expire at the end of the term and a new application filed. It
would not simply be granting the permit and then saying it would
be reviewed.
Council Member Ehrle. He would agree to a one-year permit with
review at the end of that year.
Council Member Pickler. He reiterated, the Zoning Administrator
had no alternative but to approve the permit whereas she may
have disapproved it if she had the authority to do so. He
talked to the business people in the area - the tailor, donut
shop and the market. They are all concerned with what is
already there. Putting 50 amusement devices into a small area
is not in the public interest. It will hurt an area that is
already having problems. There is also a little restaurant and
a dry cleaning establishment in the center. An arcade does not
fit in that corner.
Mike Min-Hung Chung. He told the owner of the shopping center
he wanted to rent the space for an arcade. He asked the
business owners and they did not have any comment. One business
said that his business would bring a lot more business to the
center. When he got zoning approval, he talked to over half of
the owners and he did not hear any concerns.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION IN FAVOR: NONE
PUBLIC DISCUSSION IN OPPOSITION: NONE
176
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
~OTION: Council Member Pickler moved to deny the request for an Arcade Permit
allowing 50 amusement devices at 510 S. Beach Boulevard. Council Member Daly
seconded the motion.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to approve Arcade Permit Application
No. 1007 for 50 amusement devices at 510 S. Beach Boulevard, for one year.
Council Member Ehrle seconded the motion.
City Attorney Jack White. There was first a motion to deny. The second
motion is inconsistent with the first. He is ruling that the second motion
made by the Mayor would need to be acted upon only in the event the first
motion to deny fails.
A vote was then taken on the motion to deny, which failed to carry by the
following vote: AYES - Daly, Pickler, NOES - Simpson, Ehrle, Hunter.
A vote was then taken on the motion to approve the Arcade Permit Application
for one year only and carried by the following vote: AYES - Simpson, Ehrle,
Hunter, NOES - Daly, Pickler.
City Attorney White clarified that the permit is good for only one year and if
the applicant wishes additional time, he will need to file a new application
in order to continue his business.
134/179/155: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 316,
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 90-91-20, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 3379 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: WEST ANAHEIM COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, Attn: John Hanshaw, Exe.
Dir., DBA: Humana Hospital, 3033 W. Orange Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located approximately 11.2 acres
divided into three parcels with the following descriptions: PARCEL A
is an irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately
9.2 acres located at the northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and
Orange Ave., having approximate frontages of 945 feet on the north
side of Orange Ave. and a frontage of 145 feet on the west side of
Beach Blvd., with a maximum depth of approximately 620 feet and
further described as 3033 West Orange Ave.; PARCEL B is an
irregularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 1.47
acres located immediately north of the Carbon Creek Channel which is
immediately adjacent Parcel A; PARCEL C is an irregularly-shaped
parcel of land consisting of approximately 0.57 acres located
immediately adjacent and north of Parcel A and is further described
as the Carbon Creek Channel.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 316: An amendment to the Land Use Element
of the General Plan proposing a redesignation of Parcels B and C from
the existing designation of flood control channel and low-medium
density residential to commercial professional.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 90-91-20: of Parcels B and C from the
RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) Zone to the CO (Commercial,
Office) Zone.
177
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3379: To permit the expansion of an
existing hospital parking lot with waiver of minimum number of
parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GPA NO. 316 GRANTED (PC91-08) (7 yes votes).
Reclass No. 90-91-20 GRANTED (PC91-09) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of code requirement approved.
CUP No. 3379 GRANTED (PC91-10) (7 yes votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item at the meeting of 2/12/91 (Item BS).
HEARING SET ON:
Required since the General Plan Amendment is involved.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 7, 1991
Posting of property March 8, 1991
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 28, 1991.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. Primarily the reason the item is before the
Council today is that a General Plan Amendment is involved. The Planning
Commission recommended approval.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Jim Hanshaw, Hospital Executive Director.
answer questions.
He is present to
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak either in favor or in opposition; there being no response he
closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council
Member Pickler, 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. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The title of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 91R-85 through 91R-87, both
inclusive)
Council Member Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 91R-85 for adoption, approving
General Plan Amendment No. 316, Resolution No. 91R-86 for adoption, approving
178
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
Reclassification No. 90-91-20 and Resolution No. 91R-87 for adoption,
granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3379 subject to City Planning Commission
conditions. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-85: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL
PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 316, EXHIBIT #A.#
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-86: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF
CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
RESOLUTION NO. 91R-87: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3379.
Roll Call Vote on Resolutions:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT=
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Simpson, Daly, Pickler, Ehrle and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 91R-85 through 91R-87, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
155/185: PUBLIC HEARING ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 271 PREVIOUSLY
CERTIFIED AND AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 87-01:
OWNER: HANOVER REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES, Attn: C. D. Abramson, 9300
Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500, Beverly Hills, CA.
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1284 E. Katella Avenue
and 1301-1395 E. Pacifico Avenue and is approximately 17.1 acres
located on the south side of Katella Ave. and approximately 661 feet
west of the intersection of Katella Ave. and State College Blvd.
The request is for approval of Amendment No. 1 to Development
Agreement No. 87-01 between Hanover Real Estate Associates and the
City of Anaheim to further provide for the implementation of the
Hanover/Katella Office Park development previously approved for
subject property.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GRANTED Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 87-01 (PC91-26)
(7 yes votes).
EIR NO. 271 Previously Certified.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 7, 1991
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 7, 1991
Posting of property March 8, 1991
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Steve Freedman, 9300 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills. He is
representing Hanover Real Estate Associates. They are in a
position where they are going forward with the development of
179
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
the project. They are attempting to seek build-to-suit tenants
as well as strengthen the business park they are currently
seeking to redevelop. He thanked the Planning Department and
individual staff members for the assistance given them
culminating in the matter being brought before the Council
today.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. The amended agreement has
important provisions which are of benefit to the City. The
project was originally approved in 1987, a 1.2 million square
foot development. Due to economic conditions, the timing will
be amended but in addition the City has secured important and
significant items including accelerated dedication of major
streets, Development Agreement fee which could mean up to 1.2
million dollars potentially, provision for child care and
provision for art work. It is consistent with the other
agreements that have been enacted. Approval is recommended by
staff but he wanted to point out the significant benefits to the
City.
Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing and asked to hear from anyone who
wished to speak either in favor or in opposition; there being no response he
closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED: On motion by Council
Member Hunter, seconded by Council Member Pickler it was determined that EIR
No. 271 Previously Certified by the City Council for the project and
Development Agreement No. 87-01 with the statement of overriding
considerations pursuant to a motion made on October 27, 1987 is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for this first amendment to
the Development Agreement and satisfies all the requirements of CEQA and that
no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the first
amendment to the Development Agreement. MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 5210 - (INTRODUCTION}: (i) Approving Amendment No. i to
Development Agreement No. 87-01 between the City of Anaheim and Hanover Real
Estate Associates, (ii) Finding that the Amendment is consistent with the
General Plan and (iii) Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to Execute said
Amendment for and on behalf of the City.
Council Member Daly offered Ordinance No. 5210 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 5210: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(i) APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 87-01 BETWEEN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AND HANOVER REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES, (ii) FINDING THAT THE
AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND (iii) AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
DISCUSSION - SETTING AGENDA ITEMS FOR HEARINGS:
Mayor Hunter. He is directing the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance
providing that it will take a Council majority to pull an item from the agenda
180
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
for a hearing or further action no matter where the item is located on the
agenda, or whether or not it is on a Consent Calendar. When the proposed
ordinance is brought back, the Council can then discuss it and vote on it.
Counci Member Pickler. He does not feel that the Council wants to change so
that it would take a majority vote to pull items for hearing or for further
action. Originally it took only one Council member and at present it is two.
There have not been as many items pulled in recent months. He sees no reason
for the change. The present system has been working well. He doesn't feel
the City Attorney should be working on preparing an ordinance unless a
majority wants it done.
Council Member Ehrle. He has always felt it should take three Council
Members. It is good government and it works that way in other legislative
branches. It forces committee members to talk to each other to make sure
there is interest or support.
Council Member Pickler. This item was not on the printed agenda and no one
had an opportunity to look at it. Further, if three out of five members
discuss an issue before hand, it would be a violation of the Brown Act.
Leaving it at two avoids the problem.
City Attorney White. He would recommend that the Council regardless of
whether it takes two, three or even more votes to appeal an item to the
Council from the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator that the Council
not poll each other or meet outside of the Council Chamber Public Session to
gain a consensus as to whether or not an item is going to appealed. That is
why the items are listed on the 'B" portion of the agenda so that it can be
determined whether Council members (currently two) wish to set the matter for
a hearing or not. Regardless of whether it takes two, three or more,
individual members of the Council always have the right as an individual to
appeal an item. There is a filing fee involved in some cases. If one member
is opposed, that individual member has the right to appeal. He believes the
purpose tonight is to determine whether or not the Council wants to agendize
the matter. Drafting the ordinance is not that big of a task. It is just to
put the item on the agenda for discussion.
Mayor Hunter stated that is what he wants.
Council Member Daly. He appreciates the Mayor's intent is to curb abuse and
frivolous hearings.
Mayor Hunter interjected and stated that in the five years he has been a
Council Member he has, in his belief, watched thousands of dollars of public
money wasted on frivolous meetings. Me is not going to sit for another two or
three years and watch the same thing happen. He reiterated he is directing
the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance and the Council can discuss it and
vote on it when it comes back - that it takes a majority to pull an item and
set it for a public hearing.
Council Member Daly. He feels some of the Mayor's concern may be leveled at
him; Mayor Hunter stated absolutely not. Council Member Daly continued that
181
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
he takes the City Council's Agenda very seriously and any questions he asks or
items he pulls he does so with the complete intention of shining a light on
the City's business. Tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer's money passes
through the Council. The City budget is $600,000,000. He does not think it
is unreasonable at all to pull items off the Consent Calendar. He feels any
one member should be able to pull an item off or put one on the agenda. He
respects the Mayor's intent for a business like meeting and he believes that
is what they have had especially in recent months. They do not spend needless
time on trivia, but quality time on important subjects and he hopes it will
continue.
Mayor Hunter. His proposal is not meant to be a negative. He does not want
the Council to be technicians but the policy makers they were elected to be.
There is a Planning Commission, Zoning Administrator and staff. The Council
has been working well on looking at the priority items and spending its time
and energy on those rather than items technical in nature.
Council Member Pickler. He has not seen any abuse of what the Mayor is
talking about with the present Council. When a person lives in an area and
lives with something on a daily basis and that person wants to take a closer
look at a particular proposal or development, that is important. He still
feels only one Council member should be able to pull something from the agenda
and set it for further review. Currently, it takes two and now the Mayor is
proposing three which he does not favor.
Council Member Simpson. He feels that Council Member Pickler is making an
assumption that it will require three. He does not feel anyone has been
denied the right to set a meeting lacking a second vote. He suggest that the
matter be dropped at this time if they cannot make a decision on the issue.
No further action was taken at this time relative to the Mayor's
recommendation.
PLANNING AND LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING STAFF AND ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR:
Council Member Daly. The Council has talked in the past about improving the
quality of planning and land use decisions and minimizing, for example, three
hour hearings on a two foot setback. He asked when they would be able to
institute the new system where the Planning Department will be making a formal
recommendation on most items especially major items.
City Manager Ruth. There was discussion on the issue yesterday. The Planning
Director is ready to begin implementing that system almost immediately.
Mayor Hunter stated they should also be talking with the Zoning Administrator
and that the Zoning Administrator and Planning Department come to the Council
with specific recommendations.
Council Member Daly. He clarified that rather than mere analysis that staff
provide an actual formal recommendation on a project.
182
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1991, 5:00 P.M.
ADJOURNMENT: Council Member Hunter moved to adjourn. Council Member Ehrle
seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White explained that next Tuesday is a
regular meeting but previously the Council announced its intention probably
not to meet. However, due to pressing business, there is intended to be a
Closed Session for personnel matters. At the moment, there is not going to be
a formal agenda prepared. In order to avoid having to prepare any agenda, he
suggest that the Council adjourn this meeting to next Tuesday at 3:00 p.m.,
March 26, 1991, and all items listed on the Closed Session meeting today would
automatically carry over, one of which was personnel matters.
A vote was then taken on the motion to adjourn todays meeting to Tuesday,
March 26, 1991, at 3:00 p.m. to discuss the balance of the items on the Closed
Session Agenda which include personnel matters. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: (7:15 p.m. ).
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
183