1990/01/23City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES
January 23, 1990, 5:30
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Bob Simpson
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Flck
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annlka Santalahti
DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER: Art Daw
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 4:10 p.m. on January 19, 1990 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing
all items as shown herein.
Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION; City Attorney Jack Whtte requested a Closed
Session to consider the following items:
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.
bo
To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative
regarding labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6.
Co
To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant
to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1).
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.
AFTER R~GESS; Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (6:06
p.m.)
INVOCATION: Father Gary Goldacker, St. Michael's Episcopal Church, gave the
invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman William Ehrle led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
DECLARATIONS OF CONGRATULATIONS: Declarations of Congratulations were
unanimously adopted by the City Council congratulating the following Employees
of the Year for 1989:
108
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES
Ted Smeets, Anaheim Convention Center
Lorna Hills, Golf Operations
Frank Esquivel, Stadium
Armida Esqutvel, Stadium
January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
Mayor Hunter and Council Members personally congratulated each of the
employees and thanked them for their dedication and outstanding service
the City.
to
MINUTES; Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held December 12, 1989 and the adjourned regular meeting of December
27, 1989. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEM~DS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,663,188.09 for the week
ending 3anuary 19, 1990, in accordance with the 1989-90 budget, were
approved.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman 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. Councilwoman Kaywood
offered Resolution Nos. 90R-34 and 90R-35 for adoption; and Ordinance No. 5089
for adoption.
Al. 118 The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
a. Claim submitted by Joan Phyllis Minchin for property damage and
bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
3une 11, 1989.
b. Claim submitted by Donald Ray Carberry for bodily injury
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 9, 1989.
c. Claim submitted by Larry L. Bonine for property damage and bodily
injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December
6, 1989.
d. Claim submitted by Michael W. Steinkraus for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 11, 1989.
e. Claim submitted by Affiliated FM Insurance Group for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 6,
1989.
f. Claim submitted by Clark Equipment Company for indemnity for
damages sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 10,
1989.
g. Claim submitted by Martha Strickland for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 2, 1989.
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
10S
h. Claim submitted by Diane Blas for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August of 1989.
t. Claim submitted by Ron W. Cramer for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 16, 1989.
J. Claim submitted by Pacific Bell for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 31, 1989.
A2. 105. Receiving and filing minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting
held November 16, 1989.
Receiving and filing minutes of the Public Utilities Board meeting
held December 7, 1989.
Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment
Commission meeting held December 13, 1989.
114.
Receiving and filing correspondence from Sanity In Government Now,
requesting adoption of a Resolution similar to a Tustin resolution
requesting removal of diamond lanes on Orange County freeways until
an analytic comparison test is completed.
A3.
Approving Contract Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $23,148.85 in
favor of Ruiz Engineering, to provide a water and fire service line
to property on the southwest corner of Cypress and Claudine Streets,
as requested by the Redevelopment Agency.
A4. 161.123: Approving a request from King of California, Inc., to increase
the parking fee at the Civic Center parking facility (for Celebrity Theatre
events) from $3.00 per vehicle to $4.00 per vehicle.
A5. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 90R-34 Declaring the intention to vacate certain
public streets, highways and service easements, and setting a date for public
hearing to consider abandoning the sewer easements located on property bounded
by Anaheim Boulevard, Cypress Street, Claudine Street, and Lincoln Avenue
(Parcel Map No. 80-264). (89-9A.)
RESOLUTION NO. 90R-34: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND
SERVICE F.A$~$. (89-9A)
A6. 151. Approving an Encroachment License Agreement with All Bann Enterprises
for a telephone line under Coronado Street.
A7.
149/142: Ordinance No. 5089 (ADOPTION) Adding a new Subsection .2440 to
Section 14.32.190 of Chapter 14.32 of Title 14 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code relating to parking and stopping (no parking any
time on Weir Canyon Road, on both sides, from the North City
Limits to the South City Limits). (Introduced at the meeting of
January 16, 1990.)
84
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 5089: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING A NEW
SUBSECTION .2440 TO SECTION 14.32.190 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE
ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING AND STOPPING.
A8. 160:
Accepting the low bid of Reynolds Buick/GMC, in the amount of
$39,838.44 for two one-ton trucks with service bodies, (to be
used by the Utilities Department and Street Maintenance) in
accordance with bid #4773.
Ag. 128:
Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by
the Director of Finance for five months ended November 30, 1989.
Al0. 123/160: Approving an agreement with Omni/Lynton Enterprises, Inc., dba
Omni Telecommunications Co., in the amount of $309,503.40 for a
fiber optic backbone network and cabling system for the Police
2000 facility, in accordance with bid #4744.
All. 123:
Approving an agreement with Wackenhut Corporation, in an amount
not to exceed $13,000 to provide security guard services for the
Anaheim Senior Citizens Center and George Washington Community
Center.
Al2. 123:
Approving the Assignment, Acknowledgment of Assignment and
Modification Agreements with Pacific Equipment and Irrigation,
Inc., assigning to Chicorp Financial Services, Inc., the right
to receive payments from the Gtty for turf equipment (mowers).
Al3. 123:
Approving a Parkway Landscaping Easement Agreement (Canyon Glen)
with Wallace Ranch 450 Associates Ltd., granting an easement to
Wallace Ranch 450 Associates Ltd., to access and maintain
certain landscaped areas located within the City right-of-way on
Serrano Avenue adjacent to Tract 12994.
Al4. 155:
Approving a Negative Declaration, pursuant to CEQA findings, for
construction of Well Nos. 40 & 41 Standby Engine-Generation
System Project No. 0141.
Al5. 175.123
Approving the proposal from Robert Bein, William Frost &
Associates for providing consulting engineering services for the
Standby Engine-Generation System at Well Nos. 40 and 41 for a
fee not to exceed $55,500.
Al6. 175.123
Approving a twenty-year Pacific D.C. Intertie Firm Transmission
Service Agreement with the cities of Burbank, Pasadena and
Glendale, and authorizing the Public'Utilities General Manager
to execute said agreement and any other enabling documents.
Al7. 170.123
Approving reimbursement agreements with Robert P. Warmington
Co., dated July 26, 1977, and Canyon Heights, General
Partnership, dated April 24, 1984, for the assignment of
interest to Municicorp by Dr. Carole Bogue.
85
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990. 5:30 P.M.
Al8. 150:
Authorizing payment of $5,530 to the Anaheim Community
Foundation for the Emergency Assistance Fund to house the
homeless.
106:
Approving an increase in revenue account 73-3184, Talent Show
Contributions, by $6,877.
106:
Approving an increase in expenditure account 73-143-5115, by
$897.
106:
Approving an increase in expenditure account 73-143-6340, by
$5,980.
Al9. 158:
RESOLUTION NO. 90R-35 Accepting certain deeds conveying
certain real properties or interests therein to the City.
RESOLUTION NO, 90R-35; 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.
A20. 123:
Approving an agreement with Medeco Security Locks, Inc., for a
secure key system for the Convention Center, in connection with
the Betterment III project and Modernization project; and
authorizing the Convention Center General manager to execute
said agreement.
A21. 106/128: Approving revenue and expenditure appropriation increases of
$17,029,095 in FY 1989/90 to cover administrative and
construction costs relating to the establishment of the East
Anaheim Hills Mello-Roos Community Facility Districts.
A22. 157:
Approving the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions
and Easements for Anaheim Center and authorizing the Director of
Community Development to execute said documents with additions
or changes thereto, as approved by the Director upon
consultation with the City Attorney's office.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCE: The titles of the following
resolutions and ordinance were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos.
90R-34 and 90R-35, Ordinance No. 5089)
Counctlwo~n l~mywood moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions and
ordinance. Councilman Flckler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 90R-34 and 90R-35 and Ordinance
No. 5089 for adoption.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter
None
None
86
lO&
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 90R-34 and 90R-35 and Ordinance No. 5089
duly passed and adopted.
City Attorney Jack White. It is recommended by Staff that the order of public
hearings be reversed and that the second public hearing be held before the
first scheduled Joint public hearing.
185; CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO, 289, GENERAl,
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 271. RECLASSIFICATION NO, 89-90-22, WAIVER OF CODE
REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3206. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO, 83-02
CAMENDED AND RESTATED). DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO, 89-02;
OWNERS: SAVI RANCH ASSOCIATES
c/o Hillman Properties
450 Newport Center Drive, Suite 304
Newport Beach, California 92660
AGENT: CSF
1717 South State College Boulevard, Suite 100
Anaheim, California 92806
LOCATION/REQUEST: 1001 to 1100 Pullman Street
PORTION A: For a change in zone from ML (SC) to CL (SC).
PORTION B: For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 (SC) to CL (SC).
The request is for an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan
proposing a redesignation from the existing General Industrial and General
Open Space designations to a General Commercial designation to permit and
govern the construction of a commercial retail center, an automotive repair
center, two freestanding restaurants with on-sale and consumption of alcoholic
beverages and entertainment, on a drive-through restaurant and a theatre with
building heights in excess of 35 feet with waivers of minimum number of
parking spaces, required site screening and required landscaped setback.
Request for amendment and restatement of Development Agreement No. 83-02
between SAVI Ranch Associates and the City of Anaheim; and approval of
Development Agreement No. 89-02 between Marketfaire Partners and the City of
Anaheim.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission recommended adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 271
(PC89-292).
Reclassification No. 89-90-22 was granted (PC89-293).
Waiver of Code requtremen~ granted.
Conditional Use Pe~it No. 3206 Granted (PC89-294).
Development Agreement 83-02 (Amended and Restated) was granted (PC89-284 (a).
Development Agreement 89-02 granted (PC89-319).
HEARING SET ON:
Set for public hearing before the City Council due to General Plan Amendment
No. 271 from the meeting of December 12, 1989 and continued from the meeting
of January 2, 1990 to this date.
87
City Hall, Anaheim, ~alifornia - COUNCI~ MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in the Anaheim Bulletin December 21, 1989.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 21, 1989.
STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 4, 1989.
Before the public hearing was opened, Joel Ftck, Planning Director, summarized
the items before the Council today. Both Staff and the Planning Commission
have recommended certification of the Environmental Impact Report with a
Statement of Overriding Considerations and also the Monitoring Program.
General Plan Amendment 271 would amend the current General Industrial
designation to General Commercial. The Reclassification would amend the
zoning to be consistent with that Commercial designation. The Conditional Use
Permit would allow the variety of actions as proposed in the commercial
center. There are also two Development Agreements proposed with the project
which have been prepared by the City Attorney's Office. The first, 83-02
would be a straightforward amendment to the existing Development Agreement
approved by the City Council a number of years ago for the Sari Ranch and
would allow the Commercial project rather than the Industrial project in the
old agreement. The second, 89-02, would address the project as proposed. In
accordance with the desires of the City Attorney's Office and the applicant,
staff understands that that Development Agreement may be withdrawn by the
applicant this evening in his presentation.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Marshall Krupp, President, CSA Real Estate Development Agency,
1717 South State College Boulevard, Suite 100, Anaheim, 92806.
He is also a principal partner in Marketfatre Partners and with
him is Mr. Steve Layton of , the Koll Company, who has been
their partner since the initiation of the project. Mr. Krupp
then gave a brief history of the project and a summary of what
the project entails. He also explained the six goals they had
in mind relative to the proposed development and tonight are
bringing to the Council a Site Plan that accomplishes those
goals. He then explained the Site Plan which was posted on the
Chamber wall. The site is 42.7 acres and consists of a Costco
Warehouse retailer consisting of 117,000 square feet, a Home
Club Warehouse Improvement Center consisting of 103,000 square
feet, a theatre multiplex facility consisting of 40,000 square
feet and 2500 seats, several restaurants and a variety of
in-line shops. There will be an Auto Improvement service
oriented center which will provide services within the buildings
of the structure. Total square footage of the project is
approximately 350,000 square feet with approximately 2200
parking spaces. Southern California Edison has an easement
which crosses the property which has placed constraints on them
in terms of their ability to utilize the property. In addition,
there are traffic problems because they could not get direct
access from Weir Canyon in the normal flow that would be
expected. They had to maintain traffic flows in conjunction
88
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5;30 P.M.
with the previous improvements. There is also the situation
with Weir Canyon itself being an overly traveled right-of-way
today and the project potentially creating a greater burden on
that traffic flow. They believe they have remedied all these
problems. They have made a substantial financial commitment to
reconstruct Weir Canyon from La Palma to the 91 Freeway with
appropriate signalization and right lane movements. They are
bringing to the City a retail development that will generate in
its second or third year over a million dollars in sales tax a
year.
Before concluding, Mr. Krupp named the principals involved in
the project who were present in the Chamber audience. They are
ready to move forward with the project and look forward to the
Council vote this evening in order to proceed. Relative to the
Development Agreement (89-02), they have been concurrently
processing an Owner-Participation Agreement with the
Redevelopment Agency at the same time as doing so with the
City. The attorneys have suggested there is no need for the
Development Agreement because the Owner-Participation Agreement
with the Redevelopment Agency will supersede that. They are
prepared to withdraw the application for Development Agreement
89-02.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION IN FAVOR:
None
PUBLIC DISCUSSION IN OPPOSITION:
Mr. Bruce Sanborn, So Cal Cinemas, 13 Corporate Plaza, Newport
Beach (Cinemapolis/Anaheim). He is not against the project, but
against the cinema feature of the project. He referred to his
letter dated December 27, 1989 (previously made a part of the
record) accompanied by attachment A which listed Cinema Approval
Comparisons between the proposed Marketfaire cinema (2500 seats)
and his theatre, Ctnemapolts (2500 seats).
City Attorney White. The speaker can ask that a letter be
incorporated into the record as part of the administrative
record of this hearing. If so, it will be so incorporated and
he could summarize various aspects. It is not necessary to read
the entire or letter or repeat everything.
Mr. Sanborn. Ctnemapolis was developed with all of its parking
on its parcel. He then briefed the comparisons outlined in
attachment A of his letter. Some of the points emphasized were
- construction of more movie theatre screens does not
necessarily mean more films are made. Ginemapolis and the
theatres at the Orange Mall divide up the first run films. An
additional movie theatre would divide it up even further.
Therefore, the increase in sales tax revenue generated will be
very small. The City will not be maximizing sales tax revenue
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
with another movie theatre, but will if more retail is added
instead. Cinemapolis has an adjacent parcel where they were not
allowed to count that parcel in their seating capacity. With
the proposed theatre, that is different. The adjacent parcels
are being used for the theatre capacity. He had a study done by
a traffic consultant, (Abrams Associates) which is attachment B
to his December 27, 1989 letter. He has an additional letter
which is a follow up to that letter (letter dated 3anuary 12,
1990) which he read.
The letter from Abrams questions some of the assumptions made in
traffic studies for the proposed project. If theatre parking is
100% at 8:00 p.m. as is typical, the parking analysis would show
a shortage of almost 200 spaces. They believe that is what will
actually occur with the project. The analysis of parking
demands conducted by the applicant also neglects to leave any
spaces in the lot for turn over of spaces, parking and unparking
maneuvers. A parking lot that is about 90% occupied at any
point in time is considered to be at capacity. At 90%
occupancy, vehicles will be circulating through the lot looking
for empty spaces. The only empty spaces will be in the remote
corner of the parking area. Parking will be even less adequate
than reported. Parking within the vicinity of the theatre
should have 350 more spaces than being provided. It can be
shown that there will be severe parking deficiencies in the
easternmost section of the parking area, particularly in the
vicinity of the theatres. In this area, there are approximately
430 spaces provided and the demand will be up to 895 spaces.
This corner of the project will have major problems and make the
viability of the shopping center very questionable. The letter
is signed by Charles M. Abrams. He also confirmed that he wants
his letter of December 27, 1989 incorporated into the record of
this hearing.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. The parking study presented
shows that there is adequate parking for the entire facility.
His concern is with the distribution of the parking specifically
as it deals with the theatre. COstco stores has access to 730
parking spaces and the second major (Home Club) has in excess of
800 spaces to be shared with the retail areas and the theatre.
What makes the situation complex is that the theatre has two
enUire bays of parkins spaces =ha= will be underutilized,
thereby overflowing the area needed for =he retail. As he
expressed in the Planning Commission meeting, the theatre should
be another use. Working from the posted plan, he showed a row
of stores which block access to free parking. There is a large
slope leading to the freeway in the back of the stores facing
the parking area. He showed spaces which are "lost" to general
parking or even parking for the theatre because it is
inconvenient and will be dark. Therefore, most theatre patrons
will be parking in the area to be used for retail, thereby
9O
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30
creating a shortage of parking for the stores. The geometrics
do not flow well.
Bruce Sanborn. The parking variance granted for the entire
project, in his opinion, based on distribution is all for the
movie theatre. Each of the stores has what is required right in
front of the stores. He is asking the Council not to approve
the cinema feature of the project or if they do so, to grant So
Cal/Ctnemapolis the same concept of a parking variance and the
same concept of owner participation which they did not have when
their project was approved. That is the issue.
Bill Taraschi, 1201 North Melanie Drive, Anaheim. He read a
statement relaying concerns with the proposed project. The
Environmental Impact Report states that the traffic congestion
will cause the State carbon monoxide maximum level to be
slightly exceeded. What is unclear to him is the conditions
studied and evaluated to assess the air quality issue. He
elaborated on the current traffic congestion in the area
involving surrounding roadways. He questioned if those
conditions were in the Environmental Impact Report study. He
then compared the number of additional trips per week day as
stated in the study which conflicted with a recent newspaper
article (26,000 trips per day vs. 59,300 additional trips per
day).
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. A 56,000 ADT (Average Daily
Trip) on Weir Canyon Road is not additional traffic but the
cumulative traffic including the project. The project will
generate 26,000 trips over a 24 hour period. His (Taraschi's)
major concern is with regional traffic that overflows from the
Riverside Freeway, not traffic generated within the area. It is
ambient traffic. Regarding ambient traffic, he then relayed
Mitigation measures being proposed by the State Department of
Transportation which included the widening of the Riverside
Freeway (91) from the 57 Freeway to Magnolia in Riverside as
well as an additional freeway from Gypsum Canyon Road at the
intersection of 91 South to the I 5 thereby significantly
reducing the impact in that entire area. The impact being felt
today on La Palma, Santa Aha Canyon Road and Orangethorpe is the
r~ult of inadequate capacity on the 91 Freeway. It is a
regional problem not solvable by local jurisdictions, but only
by State and Federal agencies.
Mr. Taraachi. He noted that measure M which included widening
of the 91 Freeway was voted down and he does not believe that
there is a guarantee that the East Hills Freeway will be
constructed. The proposed retail center will add a great deal
more traffic to the area and make it worse than it is today.
They did not move to the area to have access to shopping.
91
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
Sharon Lazarro, 8136 Woodsboro. The back of her property faces
the proposed development. She is addressing the northern edge
of Marketfaire running parallel to their home. In the
Environmental Impact Report, the developer plans to use native
vegetation to provide a visual buffer. That will be
insufficient. There is a tremendous amount of noise from the 91
Freeway now and the proposed center will generate even more.
She is requesting that at least a 15 foot decorative block wall
be built on the northern edge beginning at Pullman
Street and ending at the far west corner of the development and
that trees and shrubs be added to the north side of the wall for
a more natural look. Block wall and landscaping will minimize
any negative effects of increased sound and lighting the
shopping center will bring to their residential area.
Ben Parikh, 8176 Woodsboro, Anaheim. First, the Environmental
Impact Report indicates there will be short-term construction.
In a project of the nature proposed, it is not short term but
perhaps will be one to two years. That issue should be
addressed. Further, he has an overall concern regarding the
project with regard to the architecture and design. The
residents are concerned about the value of their homes. The
architectural design of the project will effect that value. The
developer is proposing that the back of the project facing their
homes be plain white with no color. The project should blend
into the surrounding area. The residents prefer a Mediterranean
look for the shopping center. The height of the project is also
a concern The proposed tower looks nice on the sketch but is
about 53 feet high and their homes are 20 to 25 feet high. The
shopping center will be visible for a four or five square mile
area. It will not be pleasant. Whatever landscaping is
proposed will not obscure anything because of the big towers.
He also agrees with the Traffic Engineer relative to parking.
Only 2,200 spaces are being provided when a note on one of the
posted drawings says that the additional requirement of parking
spaces is approximately 2,600. He does not want to add anything
more to the parking problem.
Clifford Lester, 8187 East Woodsboro. He feels he speaks for
the com~%u~ity. They moved to the location to enjoy a peaceful,
rural type atmosphere and not the availability of shoppln§
centers. They have concerns with the lighting and signs from
the project. They want assurances that the lighting will be
directed in such a way that it faces down into the project and
not glaring into the back of their homes, that attention is paid
to the height of the light posts, and that the direction of the
lighting again faces down into the project. Relative to
stgnage, they want no signs facing from the back of the project
directed toward their homes. Since this is also the Scenic
Corridor, they want no signs placed on poles but on the
buildings themselves.
97
92
98
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JaDuary 23, 1990, 5:30 P,M.
Robert Koch, 8124 East Woodsboro. Traffic and air quality
concerns have not been dealt with properly by the project plan.
The Environmental Impact Report states those problems have not
been mitigated. He suggests that the City hold up the plan
until the concerns can be mitigated. They are also willing to
wait until the State makes the changes in the Freeway. Relative
to acoustical and aesthetic resource problems, these have been
dealt with only in the short term but not the long term problems
that will be present. Operating and delivery times are two
concerns. Operating times should be covered fairly well by the
stores that are present but the theatre is of special concern.
Noise travels easily across the space. The theatre should not
operate later than 11:00 p.m. on week nights and 12:00 p.m. qn
weekends if it is allowed to be included in the project. The
residents are also concerned about parking. Further they would
also like the City to be certain it attaches to the property
conditions that deliveries cannot be made between 11:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. on any day because of noise created by delivery trucks
and lack of concern generally experienced by the people living
around those areas. Answering Councilwoman Kaywood, he stated
if the theatre were not included, they would have no concern
regarding operating hours of the business establishments but
only delivery times.
Harold Schaffroth, 8183 East Woodsboro. He shares all the other
concerns expressed. Relative to the Autoplex facilities,
Attachment 2 - Mitigation Monitoring Program, it states that
open service bays shall be located in such a manner as to
minimize their visual impact on residential areas to the north
and the freeway to the south. It is not specific enough. They
do not want the service bays facing their homes. There is noise
associated with such businesses. Traditionally those types of
facilities also have more intensive lighting as a security
measure. They do not want that additional lighting. Junk cars,
which are usually in the back, will have a big impact on their
property values and quality of life. He wants something more
specific in the Mitigation Monitoring Program regarding the
location of the service bays as they relate to the restdent's
property.
SUMMATION BY APPLICANT:
Marshall Krupp. He addressed the issues/concerns broached by
the residents. ~L~k~: The City Traffic Engineer, Parking
Consultants and Staff have worked diligently to evaluate parking
concerns. Relative to concern that parking behind the retail
businesses would not be used by the theatre goers, the way the
lot is designed, there will be directional sfgnage as well as a
barrier to encourage people to use those areas. In terms of
screens, the theatre operator, Edwards Theatres, have concluded
that not only is the market there for additional screens, but
more importantly their contractual entities, those who supply
93
247
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23. 1990, 5;30 P,M,
the movies, have said that they want to come to the Anaheim
Hills area. Traffic: If it were not for the retail center they
are bringing to the Council today, the likelihood of the Weir
Canyon area improving in the immediate future would be slim.
It is their commitment to the community to improve Weir Canyon
to its maximum width and to install signals that are necessary.
They cannot address the regional problems. Architecture; They
are staying within the objectives of the Scenic Corridor Plan
and maintaining compatibility not only with the residential area,
but also surrounding land uses. ~ The center should
be screened from the residential areas not only for the purposes
of noise, but also light. They do have a major landscape
program that will run along the Santa Aha River. Autoplex~
They do not want the kind of auto repairs that are found in
other portions of other communities. There will be no junk
cars. The kind of auto service they are focusing on will be car
phones, radios, detailing - clean type of auto services.
Deliveries: They want deliveries at times that will not affect
the neighborhood and more importantly when they will not affect
the retailers. They will have a very select period of time in
which deliveries are allowed and have no problem restricting the
times so they will not affect the residential neighborhood.
They want to be good neighbors and the only way is by
accommodating the concerns raised. In light of the comments
made, particularly as they relate to the theatre, there is a
direct relationship between the theatre, parking and traffic,
that the Council continue the matter - allow them to go back to
the architect and have them come up with a revised plan, forward
that to the Planning Commission for their concurrence, get a
reaction from the Planning Commission and bring back to the
Council a modified plan that addresses some of the concerns
raised. They do not want to do a project that affects the
residential neighborhood negatively but one that is economically
viable, physically practical and meets the land useage for the
area.
They have a time constraint because of Home Club and Costco. He
would suggest that 30 days would be an appropriate continuance.
Joel Flck, Planning Director, Not knowing how long it will take
to finalize plans, he suggests that the Council refer the
matters back to the Planning Commission if there are revised
plans. The Planning Department will schedule a meeting as
quickly as the plans are made available. They are looking at
about a three week turn around to have the meeting scheduled at
the Planning Commission.
COUNCIL CONCERNS:
Mayor Hunter. He is concerned with the theatre, parking and
concerns expressed by the neighbors. If the developer gets an
248
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES January 23, 1990, 5;30 P,M.
opportunity in the next 30 days he would like to have them meet
with perhaps Mrs. Lazarro and Mr. Koch, not to do everything
they are suggesting, but sit down and talk with them about the
concerns expressed. Being a Redevelopment Project they can talk
about aesthetics and in that respect will have some control over
the project. It is a project they are going to see for many
years to come.
Councilman Ehrle. He feels that it is necessary to go back to
the drawing board. The developer is a good one. He has
concerns about the theatre. He does not know if the theatre is
paramount to the success of the project. He is also concerned
about ingress and egress. The project needs to be fine tuned.
Councilman Pickler. He has a problem relative to parking and
the theatre. Even though it is indicated more screens would be
viable, he feels an area can be inundated. A good retail outlet
would be better for the project and the City.
City Attorney White. He recommends that the hearing be left
open if it is going to be continued. If continued to a date
certain, notice will be given tonight when that hearing will
be.
Joel Fick. They will need to take a look at the site plans in
the revisions. If there are new items that require action by
the Planning Commission, then there will need to be advertising
for both the Planning Commission and subsequently Council
hearings, particularly if there are deletions and a change in
use.
City Attorney White. Staff would recommend then that the
hearing be continued and renottced at a subsequent date
following receipt of revised plans. It is not necessary to
establish a date today. Everyone who legally received notices
for this hearing will receive an additional notice and any one
who wishes to receive notice that did not receive one previously
can leave their name this evening or contact the City Clerk's
Office. Their names will be included for notification of the
Council hearing and go forward to the Planning Commission
Secretary so that they will also be notified first of the
Plannin~ Commission meeting.
Councilwoman Kaywood. It is preferable not to have a theatre at
all and if there is one it should have a maximum of two to three
screens and that the hours be monitored so that the neighborhood
will not suffer in their living environment.
MOTION; Councilman Hunter moved to continue the subject public hearing which
will be readvertlsed and notice given as required by law when a date for the
public hearing before the Planning Commission and the City Council is
95
245
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
determined. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS;. By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes (7:25 p.m).
AFTER RECESS; Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present (7:35 p.m.).
179; PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
3227 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: B. U. PATEL, TARSADIA, INC.
650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1910
Costa Mesa, California 92626
AGENT: Farano and Kieviet
100 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 340
Anaheim, California 92805
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1326 South West Street. The
request is to permit a 4-story, 166 room hotel with waiver of minimum number
of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission DENIED Conditional Use Permit No. 3227 (PC89-320),
DENIED Waiver of Code Requirement and DENIED the Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by the Agent, Farano and
Kieviet and public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in the Anaheim Bulletin, January 11, 1990.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - January 10, 1990.
Posting of property, January 12, 1990.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 18, 1989.
City Clerk Sohl announced that a request for continuance was submitted by the
Agent, Farano and Kleviet, dated January 18, 1990, asking that the public
hearing be continued to February 6, 1990.
Mayor Hunter first asked if anyone was present to speak; no one was present
with the exception of Tom Kieviet of Farano and Kieviet.
MOTION: Counctl~n Hunter moved to continue the subject public hearing to
Tuesday, February 6, 1990, 6:00 p.m. Coumcilman Ehrle seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
179: PUBLIC HF~ING - VARIANCE NO. 3717 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION. REOUEST FOR
RETROACTIVE EXTF~N~0~ OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Request by Neville D. Libby for a retroactive extension of time involving the
subject Variance for property located at 1651 West Cerrttos Avenue.
96
246
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
The extension of time for Variance No. 3717 was GRANTED until November 25,
1990.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler and Councilman Daly at the meeting of January 2, 1990 and public
hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in the Anaheim Bulletin, January 11, 1990.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - January 10, 1990.
Posting of property, January 12, 1990.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Zoning Administrator dated November 19, 1987 and
Zoning Administrator decision (ZA87-35) of November 25, 1987.
City Attorney White. Since this matter was set for a hearing, it
is his understanding that the owner has complied with all the
conditions previously approved and has recorded the parcel map,
making the extension of time previously requested unnecessary.
This would also make the public hearing that would otherwise be
held tonight moot. Action before the Council is no longer
necessary due to the recordation of the parcel map. On that
basis, the hearing could be withdrawn from the calendar at this
time.
Councilman Daly. He would like to request that the Council
consider the rezontng of this stretch of Cerrttos. He views
this as over building in a single family neighborhood. The lots
are large and are zoned RS-7200, the problem being that three
houses can be built on these deep lots. He feels that is wrong
in a predominantly single family neighborhood.
Mayor Hunter. If someone else came in and wanted to do the same
thing, they would have to come back before the Planning
Commission and possibly the Council.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. All the lots are very
narrow and a waiver would be needed for not having frontage on
the public street. There are two other actions in the area but
neither has been utilized.
Councilwoman Kaywood - In Mr. Libby's case, he split his
property into three parcels for homes for his sons and he
(Libby) has been living on the property. The neighbors did not
object to his final plan.
Councilman Pickler. He has the same concerns as Councilman Daly
relative to this area.
97
243
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30
MOTION: Councilman Daly moved to remove the item from the agenda since the
public hearing is no longer necessary on the requested extension of time.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179; PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO,
3220 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION;
OWNER: LARRY R. SMITH
17046 Marina Bay Drive
Huntington Beach, California 92649
AGENT: Spongberg, Klrkland and Associates, Inc.
Attention: Gayle Ackerman
11409 Carson Street
Lakewood, California 90715
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 919-959 South Knott Street.
request is to permit an expansion of a commercial retail center and a
drive-through restaurant with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces,
minimum distance between buildings and required site screening.
The
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Conditional Use Permit No. 3220 GRANTED (PC89-308), waiver of Code requirement
GRANTED, Negative Declaration approved.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission decision was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood and Councilman Pickler, and public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in the Anaheim Bulletin, January 11, 1990.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - January 10, 1990.
Posting of property January 12, 1990.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated December 4, 1989.
City Clerk Sohl announced that a letter was received dated January 22, 1990
from Gayle Ackerman, Project Manager, Spongberg, Ktrkland and Associates,
requesting a four week continuance of the public hearing.
Mayor Hunter asked if anyone was present who wished to speak on the public
hearing: there was no response.
MOTION; Councilman Daly moved to continue the public hearing on Conditional
Use Permit No. 3220 and Negative Declaration to Tuesday, February 27, 1990,
6:00 p.m. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman/Mayor Hunter reconvened the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (7:51 p.m.)
for a Joint public hearing with the City Council and the Community
Redevelopment Commission.
98
244
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
PRESENT: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Paul Mcmillan,
Robert Anthony, Robert Dory, Doug Rennet, Fernando Oltvares, Steve Bristol
ABSENT: COMMISSIONER: Donna Berry
Paul McMillan, Chairman of the Community Redevelopment Commission, reconvened
the Commission meeting of January 17, 1990, which was adjourned to this date
and time, Commissioner Berry absent. (7:51 p.m.)
161,155, JOINT pUbLIC HEARING BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/AND
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED FIRST AMENDMENT TO
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT: Submitted
was report dated 3anuary 16, 1990, from the Community Development Department
recommending approval of the proposed First Amendment to the Redevelopment
Plan for the River Valley Development Project and approval of the necessary
actions relating thereto.
City Attorney White. For those who wish to speak, any
testimony, evidence, comments or the Staff responses to comments
that were entered into the hearing on item D2 on the Council
agenda of today, January 23, 1990, (public hearing on
Environmental Impact Report No. 289, General Plan Amendment No.
271, Reclassification No. 89-90-22, Waiver of Code requirement,
Conditional Use Permit No. 3206, Development Agreement No.
83-02, Amended and Restated and Development Agreement No. 89-02)
will be deemed incorporated in the subject public hearing. It
is not necessary for anyone to make comments that they would
otherwise need to repeat in this hearing. Those will be part of
the administrative record of this particular hearing. Anyone
who has new or additional information that they wish to put in
the record may do so at the appropriate time.
Lisa Stipkovich, Director of Community Development. The reason
they are going forward with this amendment even though the
General Plan Amendment (GPA) under D2 was not approved today,
but continued, is because this plan amendment relates to an
alternative land use. The plan considers an alternative land
use on the site as indicated by the posted map which is
currently industrial land use both in the General Plan and the
Redevelopment Plan. They are asking that an alternative of
commercial use be permitted. It is not specific to any project
and does not reflect any approval of the Marketfaire Project
under the public hearing previously held and continued. It
simply allows for the plan to be amended when and if the General
Plan is amended to commercial. The law requires that both the
Redevelopment Plan and the General Plan be consistent.
Mrs. Stipkovich then outlined the actions to be taken by each
entity relating to certification of the Environmental Impact
Report and making findings regarding the environmental impacts
of the proposed Marketfatre Project including a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program
99
241
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23. 1990, 5;30 P.M.
and approving adoption of the First Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley Redevelopment Project.
Relative to the Owner Participation Agreement, that Agreement
has been withdrawn by Staff and no action is required at this
time.
Chairman/Mayor Hunter opened the public hearing.
Robert Koch, 8124 Woodsboro. They feel that many of the
mitigating measures that have been outlined have not entirely
addressed the problems that will develop in the area even in a
general way. Most important is the modification of Weir
Canyon. Those changes in the traffic flow will not be
sufficient for any general changes in the area whether
industrial or not. They would like to see CC&Rs placed on the
land use that would specifically be relevant to the statements
made by the residents under the previous public hearing on
Environmental Impact Report No. 289, General Plan Amendment No.
271 and related actions.
COUNCIL/AGENCY ACTION: Chairman/Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing.
Before taking action, Commission Chairman McMtllan asked if there were any
comments relative to the proposed actions by Commission Members.
Commissioner Rennet offered Resoluton No. CRCgO-1 for adoption, approving and
recommending to the City Council the approval and certification of
Environmental Impact Report No. 289 for the proposed Marketfatre at Anaheim
project and making findings regarding the environmental impacts of the
proposed Marketfaire project including a Statement of Overriding
considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. CRC90-1: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION APPROVING AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE CERTIFICATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 289 FOR THE PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE AT ANAHEIM
PROJECT AND MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE
PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE PROJECT INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Rennet, Bristol, Dory, Anthony, Oltvares, McMillan.
None
Berry
The Chairman declared Resolution No. CRC90-1 duly passed and adopted.
Agency Member Hunter offered Resolution No. ARA90-4 for adoption, approving
and recommending to the City Council the certification of Environmental Impact
100
242
City Hall, Anaheim. California COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5'30 P.M.
Report No. 289 for the proposed Marketfaire at Anaheim project and making
findings regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed Marketfatre
project including a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation
Monitoring Program. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. ARA90-4; A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APPROVING AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE CERTIFICATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 289 FOR THE PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE AT ANAHEIM
PROJECT AND MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE
PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE PROJECT INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler, Hunter
None
None
The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA90-4 duly passed and adopted.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 90R-36)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 90R-36 for adoption, certifying
Environmental Impact Report No. 289 for the proposed Marketfaire at Anaheim
project and making findings regarding the environmental impacts of the
proposed Marketfaire project including a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO, 90R-~; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 289 FOR THE
PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE AT ANAHEIM PROJECT AND MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE pROpOSED MARKETFAIRE PROJECT INCLUDING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
ABSENT:
COUNGILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMB~R~:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler, Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 90R-36 duly passed and adopted.
Commissioner Rennet offered Resolution No. CRC90-2 for adoption, approving and
submitting to the City Council of the City of Anaheim the report to the City
Council on the proposed first Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the
River Valley Redevelopment Project; and recommending adoption of said first
amendment. Refer to Resolution Book.
101
City Hall. Anaheim. California COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23. 1990. 5'30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. CRC9Q-2: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
APPROVING AND SUBMITTING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THE REPORT
TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF SAID
FIRST AMENDMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Renner, Bristol, Dory, Anthony, Olivares, McMillan
None
Berry
The Chairman declared Resolution No. CRC90-2 duly passed and adopted.
Agency Member Hunter offered Resolution No. ARA90-5 for adoption, approving
and submitting to the City Council of the City of Anaheim the report to the
City Council on the proposed First Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the
River Valley Redevelopment Project; and recommending adoption of said first
amendment. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. ARA90-5; A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APPROVING AND SUBMITTING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THE REPORT
TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF SAID
FIRST AMENDMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler, Hunter
None
None
The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA90-5 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5091 for adoption, approving and
adopting the First Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley
Development Project. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 5091: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
As stated by Mrs. Stipkovich, the Owner Participation Agreement with
Marketfaire Partners/The Koll Company (Marketfaire) was withdrawn by Staff at
this time.
Celeste Stahl Brady, Agency Special Counsel, clarified for Agency Member
Kaywood that the actions today are not approving a specific project but
certifying the Environmental Impact Report. It addresses development of a
commercial nature but not a specific project.
239
102
City Hall, Anaheim. CalSfornta - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5;30 P.M.
ADJOURNMENT - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY;
Agency Member Hunter moved to adjourn.
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (8:06 p.m.)
Agency Member Pickler seconded the
ADJOURNMENT - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION:
Commissioner McMillan moved to adjourn. Commissioner Renner seconded the
motion. Commissioner Berry was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (8:06 p.m.)
RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes (8:06 p.m.).
AFTER RECESS; The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present (8:15 p.m.).
B21, 101/155/179; REQUEST FOR REHEARING ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.
Z99, RgCLASSIFICAT%ON NO, 89-90-29, WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 3224: Public hearing was held on December 15, 1989 and
adjourned to December 27, 1989, relative to the approximate 26 acres of
property located north and east of the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and
Douglass Road. The request was for a change in zone from RSA-43,000(FP), ML
and ML(FP) to PR and PR(FP) on the westerly approximately 9 acres and to
permit a parking area to be accessory to a multi-purpose sports facility with
waiver of maximum fence height on the easterly approximately 17 acres. At the
meeting of December 27, 1989, extensive testimony and input was received (see
minutes that date) at the conclusion of which the City Council certified
Environmental Impact Report No. 299 as being in compliance with CEQA with a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, approved Reclassification No.
89-90-29, and granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3224.
Subsequently, requests for a rehearing were submitted by the following:
Request for rehearing submitted by William D. Ross, Ross and Scott, on behalf
of Anaheim Stadium Associates, dated January 10, 1990.
Request for rehearing submitted by Peter N. Scolney, Loeb and Loeb, on behalf
of Los Angeles Rams Football Club, dated January 11, 1990.
Supplemental request for rehearing submitted by Julie Kane-Rttsch, Loeb and
Loeb, on behalf of Los Angeles Rams Football Club, dated January 11, 1990.
Request for rehearing submitted by Lawrence W. Horwitz, Hart, King and
Coldren, on behalf of Jack Stanaland, the Orange Tree Mobile Home Estates,
dated January 11, 1990.
Supplemental request for rehearing submitted by Robert S. Coldren, Hart, King
and Coldren, on behalf of Orange Tree Mobile Home Estates, dated January 12,
1990.
Request for rehearing submitted by Donald L. Morrow, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky
and Walker, on behalf of Golden West Baseball Company, Inc., dated January 12,
1990.
103
237
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
Supplemental request for rehearing submitted by Donald L. Morrow , Paul,
Hastings, Janofsky and Walker, an behalf of Golden West Baseball Company,
Inc., dated January 15, 1990.
Request for rehearing submitted by Gary B. Roach, Laskin and Graham, on behalf
of the petitioner, Richard Tozer, dated January 17, 1990.
Mayor Hunter. Council has received a large packet of material today relating
to the subject requests. He has not had an opportunity to read and consider
the material thoroughly. He would like to move that the requests for
rehearing be continued for an appropriate period of time or to the next
Council meeting.
City Attorney White. The next Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,
February 6, 1990.
MOTION; Councilman Hunter moved to continue the foregoing requests for a
rehearing to Tuesday, February 6, 1990. Councilman Daly seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney White. He asked for clarification if the motion includes all of
the requests received as written on the agenda; Mayor Hunter replied that was
correct.
Councilman Ehrle noted that the meeting of February 6th was a heavy agenda as
confirmed by the City Clerk.
City Attorney White. It is appropriate to indicate that the Council
traditionally does not take testimony on requests for rehearings but decides
the issue based upon the applications and declarations of merit. Unless the
Council significantly deviates from past policy, they do not anticipate on
February 6th that public response will be received, but Council will make the
decision based upon the applications.
Councilman Pickler. He wants noted that he would be inclined to grant the
rehearing requests.
179, ITEMS Bi - B12 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 3. 1990:
BI, RE¢I~$IFICATION NO, 89-90-30 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: SANDERSON-J-RAY DEVELOPMENT, 2699 White Road, Suite 150, Irvtne, CA
92714
AGENT: JAMES W. RAY, GENERAL PARTNER, 2699 White Road, Suite 150, Irvine, CA
92714
LOCATION; %320 South Sanderson Avenue
For a change in zone from ML to GL or a less intense zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 89-90-30 APPROVED (PC90-01)(6 yes votes, 1 no vote).
Approved Negative Declaration.
104
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
B2. SUPPLEMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 28% (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED),
REOUEST TO AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 4976 PERTAINING TO THE SUMMIT OF ANAHEIM HILLS
SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-2). ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT AREAS
104. 203. 206. AND 207 ¢Sp~8-2 CODE SECTION NO. 18.72.070.040) AND DEVELOPMENT
AREA 202 (SP88-2. CODE SECTION NO, 18,72,070,060):
OWNER: THE BALDWIN COMPANY, 16811 Hale Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714
AGENT: JEFFREY A. WARMOTH, 16811 Hale Avenue, Irvtne, CA 92714
LOCATION: Subject 591-acre property (The Summit of Anaheim Hills Specific
Plan SP88-2) is located approximately 1.1 miles southeast of the Weir Canyon
Road/Riverside Freeway intersection and is bounded on the north by the
Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan development, on the west by The Highlands at
Anaheim Hills Specific Plan development, and on the south and east by
unincorporated Irvine Company property within the County of Orange.
Petitioner requests an amendment to Ordinance No. 4976 pertaining to The
Summit of Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP88-2) Development Areas 104, 203,
206, and 207 zoning code standards (SP88-2 Code Section No. 18.72.070.040) to
additionally provide for the development of detached single-family residences
(currently said Development Areas provide zoning standards for the development
of only attached single-family units) and Development Area 202 zoning code
standards (SP88-2 Code Section No. 18.72.070.060) to additionally provide for
the development of condominiums, townhomes, stacked flats, or row houses
(currently said Development Area provides zoning standards for the development
of only community apartments and apartments).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Request to Amend Ordinance No. 4976
APPROVED (PC90-02) (7 yes votes).
Supplement to EIR No. 281 APPROVED.
Set for public hearing before City Council on February 6, 1990, at
6:00 p.m. due to code amendment.
B3. WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 3230 AND NEGATIV~
DECLARATION:
OWNER: CHUNG-CHIA CHiN AND MEI-HWA tHEN, 11455 Culebra Street, Cypress, CA
90630
LOCATION: 2111 E. Lincoln
To permit an office use of a residential structure with waiver of minimum
sideyard setback.
ACTION TAKEN BY T~R PIANNINC COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3230 APPROVED (PC90-03) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of min~um sideyard setback APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4. WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3231 AND NEGATIVE
OWNER: JERRY FIELDS, TRUSTEE OF THE FIELDS TRUST, 21 Tiburon Bay Drive,
Corona Del Mar, CA 92625
105
235
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
AGENT: ROBERT KOPENY, 563 E. Palm Drive, Placentia, CA 92670
LOCATION: 3454 East Orangethorpe Avenue (Lake CenterShoovtng Center)
To permit a church with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3231 APPROVED for a period of 3 years (PC90-04) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces APPROVED.
Negative Declaration APPROVED.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council
Members Pickler and Daly, and a public hearing will be scheduled at a later
date.
B5. WAIVER OF CODE REOUIREMENT. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 3232 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
OWNER: JAMES Y. TONG AND AMY P. TONG, 2744 N. Vlstacrest, Orange, CA 92667
AGENT: JAROENCHAI LIMJARDEN, 1001 Dresden Street, Anaheim, CA 92801
LOCATION; 1729 W, L~ ~alma Avenue
To permit on-sale beer and wine within an existing billiard hall with waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ~NNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3232 APPROVED (PC90-05) (7 yes votes).
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces APPROVED.
Approved Negative Declaration.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler and Councilman Daly and, therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled
at a later date.
B6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3044 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: CHANH NGUYEN AND PHUC VO, 17341 Irvlne Blvd., Ste 203, Tustin, CA
92680
AGENT: Alan S. Zall, 17341 Irvlne Blvd., Ste 203, Tustin, CA 92680
LOCATION: 505-509 S. Brookhurst $~
Amendment to conditions of approval pertaining to days and hours of operation.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
cup NO. 3044 D~I~IED ~tmendment to condition no. 2 (PC90-O6) (6 yes votes,
absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B7. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 283. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 89-90-39
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
INITIATED BY THE CITY OFANAHEIM, 200 $. Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92805
106
236
City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5;30 P.M.
LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN 6MENDMENT NO, 283: Subject area consists of
approximately 20.89 acres located on the west side of Knott Street, having a
maximum depth of approximately 613 feet, beginning approximately 665 feet
south of the centerline of Ball Road and extending south approximately 1,590
feet to the southern City limits.
LOCATION; RECLASSIFICATION NO, 89-90-95: Subject property is a
rectangularly-shaped parcel of land consisting of approximately 2.43 acres,
having a frontage of approximately 266 feet on the west side of Knott Street,
having a maximum depth of approximately 400 feet and being located
approximately 395 feet north of the centerline of Cerritos Avenue.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 283: A City-initiated amendment to the Land Use
Element of the General Plan redestgnating subject area from the Medium Density
Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density designation.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 89-90-35: A City-initiated reclassification of subject
property from the RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) zone to the RM-2400
(Residential, Multiple-Family) or a less intense zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GPA NO. 283 APPROVED (PC90-07) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Reclassification No. 89-90-35 APPROVED (PC90-08).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Set for public hearing before the City Council on February 6, 1990,
at 6:00 p.m. due to General Plan Amendment No. 283.
B8, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 284. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 89-90-36 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
INITIATED BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA
92805
LOCATION; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 284: Subject area is approximately 3
acres generally bounded by the alley south of Lincoln Avenue to the north,
Grand Avenue to the east, Del Monte Drive to the south and Topanga Drive to
the west, excepting the southerly 365 feet.
LOCATION: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 89-90-36: Subject area consists of 2 parcels
of land bounded by the alley south of Lincoln Avenue to the north and Harding
Avenue to the east, having combined approximate frontages of 135 feet on the
south side of said alley and 99 feet on the west side of Hardin§Avenue.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 284: A City-initiated amendment to the Land Use
Element of the General Plan redestgnating subject area from the Medium Density
Residential designation to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 89-90-36: A City-initiated reclassification of subject
properties from the RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-family) Zone to the RM-2400
(Residential, Multiple-Family) or a less intense Zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
GPA NO. 284 APPROVED (PC90-09) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
107
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
Reclassification No. 89-90-36 WITHDRAWN.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Set for public hearing before the City Council on February 13, 1990,
at 6:00 p.m. due to General Plan Amendment No. 284.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
B9. AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 17.06 - CRIB WALLS AND RETAINING WALLS:
Report dated December 13, 1989 from the Public Works/Engineering Department to
the Planning Commission recommended that the Planning Commission approve the
subject amendment and subsequently recommend adoption by the City Council.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission approved the amendment to Chapter 17.06 and
recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance.
Councilman Ehrle. He noted that on the southeast corner of Imperial Highway
and Nohl Ranch Road that plastic is always applied to the slopes when it
rains. He asked if that is an area that would be a candidate for crib walls.
Art Daw, Deputy City Engineer. He does not know what the specific problem
is. If they are having continuous slippage problems a crib wall or retaining
wall could probably help alleviate the problem. That slope would be within a
Homeowner's Association and it would be their responsibility. He will look
into the matter; Mayor Hunter suggested that he contact the Master Association.
Councilwoman Kaywood. She would like to discourage the use of crib walls
wherever possible and that they only be used minimally. The natural hills
should be retained as much as possible. She would like to see crib walls done
as minimally as possible.
ORDINANCE NO. 5092 (INTRODUCTION) Adding Section 17.06.048 relating to crib
walls and retaining walls to Chapter 17.06 of Title 17 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code.
Councilman Ehrle offered Ordinance No. 5092 for First Reading.
ORDINANCE NO, $09~; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION
17.06.048 RELATING TO CRIB WALLS AND RETAINING WALLS TO CHAPTER 17.06 OF TITLE
17 OF THE ANAREIMMUNICIPAL CODE.
BI0. ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY - REOUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE
WITH THE GENERAL PLAN:
Proposed sale of surplus Flood Control property near the southwest corner of
Crescent Avenue and Brookhurst Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
APPROVED.
108
City Hall, Anaheim. Ca%ifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P,M.
Bll, ORANGE COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY - REOUES% TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE
WITH THE GENERAL PLAN:
Proposed transfer of Parcels 801.51, 801.7, 801.8 and 801.6 (near the
southwest corner of Crescent Avenue and Brookhurst Street).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
APPROVED.
B12. OIL~NGE COUNTy GENERAL SERVICES AGENCY - REOUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE
WITH THE GENERAL PLAN:
Property is located at 714 North Brookhurst Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
APPROVED.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The titles of the following resolutions were
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 90R-37 and 90R-38)
Councilman Hunter moved to waive reading in full of the resolutions.
Councilman Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
B13, 179, RESOLUTION NO, 90g-37; TERMINATING PROCEEDINGS - VARIANCE NO.
2501; Terminating all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 2501 and
declaring Resolution No. 73R-241 null and void. (Property located at the
southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Anna Drive - 1532 East La Palma
Avenue.)
RESOLUTION NO. 90R-37: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NO. 2501 AND
DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-241 NULL AND VOID.
B14, ~79: RESOLUTION NO. 90R-38 - TERMINATING PROCEEDINGS ON VARIANCE NO.
2534; Terminating all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 2534 and
declaring Resolution No. 73R-145 null and void. (Property located on the west
side of Miller Street, north of Miraloma Avenue - 1371 North Miller Street.)
RESOLUTION NO. 90R-38: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM TERMINATING AI~- PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE 2534 AND
DECLARING P,~$OLUTION NO. 73R-405 NUI~AND VOID.
Councilman Hunter offered Resolution Nos. 90R-37 and 90R-38 for adoption,
terminating all proceedings in connection with Variance No. 2531 and Variance
No. 2534.
Roll Call Vote:
109
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Daly, Ehrle, Kaywood, Pickler and Hunter
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 90R-37 and 90R-38 duly passed and adopted.
B15, 179, ORDINANCE NO. 5090: Amending Title 18 to rezone property under
Reclassification No. 89-90-18, located at 502 South Rio Vista Street, from the
RS-A-43,000 zone to the CO zone. (Introduced at the meeting of January 16,
1990).
Submitted was report containing background information dated January 17, 1990
by the Zoning Administrator requested by the Council at the meeting of January
16, 1990 when the Ordinance had its first reading.
Mayor Hunter. He thought they were taking the residential structure and
making it commercial.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. She understood just this afternoon,
the owner in looking at the house to determine whether it could be converted
into a commercial structure, may be having difficulties and will not be
looking to utilize the Conditional Use Permit at all but developing under the
Commercial Office Zone or filing some kind of action if they want to do
something else.
Councilman Pickler. If they start putting Commercial in that location , it
will be inundating a corner that cannot take all that traffic. It is also the
dividing line between residential properties.
Mayor Hunter. If the change is going to be to CO or CL with use that will be
used during the day and not on weekends and does not bother the neighbors,
that will be fine, but to just change it to CO, they will probably be coming
in and putting up a building right next to a residential house.
Anntka Santalahti. CO standards have a setback that requires building height
be one half the setback. If a 20 foot building, they would have to have a 40
foot setback on both the east and south property lines.
Councilwoman Kaywood. If they used the house as is, they would not have to
move anything and one very small sign would suffice, so that it would not be
obvious with no inundation of parking.
Councilman Daly. If approved as recommended and the owner decides not to
rehabilitate the one story but tears it down and rebuilds, he asked how high
the structure could be.
Anntka Santalahtt. Technically, fairly high, but the property is 150 feet
deep. They would have to maintain the setback and allow for parking. Her
guess would be a two-story structure. Theoretically, it could be higher if
they could meet parking.
110
City Hall. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES January 23. 1990. 5:30 P,M.
Councilman Daly asked if there was a way to limit commercial use to the
existing one story residential structure; Anntka Santalahti. The Council
would have to set the Reclassification for a public hearing to consider adding
a condition consisting of either a covenant being recorded or the Council
placing a covenant on the property limiting development to one story or ten
feet or the like. Regardless of what happens today, the Council may wish to
initiate a zoning action to downzone it to a Residential zone; Councilman
Pickler. He feels it should be downzoned so that it fits into the surrounding
environment.
Councilwoman Kaywood. If rezoned to Commercial, if there was a medical use,
the neighborhood could be inundated with parking. With a Conditional Use
Permit, it can be reviewed and revoked if necessary.
MOTION; Councilman Hunter moved to deny adoption of Ordinance No. 5090.
Councilman Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Later in the meeting, City Attorney White explained that relative to the
subject, the zoning process consists of two steps. The Council previously
adopted a resolution to rezone the property from RS-43,000 to CO subject to
conditions the applicant has met as a condition of bringing forward the
Ordinance to the Council. If the Council intends to continue the property in
the RS-43,000 zone and not rezone it to CO, he recommends that the matter be
set for public hearing to consider rescinding the existing resolution of
intent in order to remove it from the books and afford the owner of the
property due process. He has paid the fees, gone through the process and now
the property will not be rezoned. In order to undo the process he reiterated
he recommends that the matter be set for a public hearing to consider
rescinding the existing resolution on the property.
MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to set the subject matter for a public
hearing to consider rescinding the existing resolution of intent to rezone the
property. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
B%6, 179, ORDINANCE NO. 5093: Amending Title 18 to rezone property under
Reclassification No. 66-67-64 (17), located at 4527 East La Palma Avenue, from
the RS-A-43,000(SC) zone to the ML(SC) zone.
Councilman Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5093 for First Reading (Refer to
Ordinance Book).
ORDINANCE NO. 5093: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
179. ITEMS B17 - B20 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF JANUARY 11.
%990 - DECISION DATE: JANUARY 18. 1990
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS FEBRUARY 2. 1990
111
229
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23. 1990, 5:30 P.M.
B17, VARIANCE NO. 4015 AND NEGATIVE DECJ~%RATION:
OWNER: FRANK FELDHAUS, JR. 612 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION; 61~-616 South Harbor Boulevard
Waiver of minimum structural setback to construct a 2,165 square-foot, 2-story
addition to an existing 1,532 square-foot office building.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Variance No. 4015 APPROVED (ZAg0-01).
B18, VARIANCE NO, 4016. CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT. CLASS 5:
OWNER: FRANK & ARVADA SPINA, 805 North Helena Street, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION; 805 North Helena Street
Waiver of minimum side yard setback to construct a room addition and attach an
existing garage.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Variance No. 4016 APPROVED (ZAgO-02).
B19. VARIANCE NO. 3977 - AMEND CONDITION:
OWNERS: MARCIA ANN HALLIGAN, RAYMOND G. SPEHAR AND ESTELLE K. SPEHAR, 6937
Aventda de Santiago, Anaheim, CA 92708
AGENT: A & E PARTNERSHIP, INC., ATTN: TIMOTHY VIRUS, 3002 Dow Avenue #106,
Tustin, CA 92680
LOCATION: 5755 E. La Palma Avenue
Amendment nunc pro tunc to Condition No. 4 of Zoning Administrator Decision
No. ZA89-73. Variance No. 3977 is for waiver of (a) minimum number of parking
spaces and (b) prohibited roof-mounted equipment to construct a 9,500 sq. ft.
addition to an existing supermarket (Lucky Food Center).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Amended Condition No. 4 of Variance No. 3977 (ZA90-03) nunc pro tunc.
B20, ADMINISTR6TIV~ ~EJUSTMENT NO. 0042. CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT. CLASS 5:
LOCATION: 5100 East CoDa De Oro Drive
Waiver of minimum rear yard setback to construct a single-family residence.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Adjustment No. 0042 APPROVED (ZA90-04).
END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS.
No action was taken by the Council on items B17 through B20.
C1, ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Lois Gardener: 1241 North East Street, Anaheim. She is speaking on behalf of
112
230
CSty Hall, Anaheim. California COUNCIL MINUTES - January 23, 1990, 5:30 P.M.
the Anaheim Political Action Committee. January 15th is Dr. Martin Luther
King's birthday and a national holiday. Security Pacific Bank was open on
that day for buainess as usual. They feel it was insensitive and arrogant.
Dr. King struggled for a better America for all people and not just for
African-Americans. He understood it was not possible to have democracy
without first-class citizenship for everyone. The struggle is not yet over.
Because, in their opinion, the City Council sets the moral standards for the
community, they should inform Security Pacific Bank that Dr. King's birthday
is a national holiday and should be observed as such. The Council should
issue a proclamation in support of the national observance of Dr. King's
birthday in January of each year.
Mayor Hunter. He agrees that Dr. King's birthday should be a national holiday
for everyone. It would be better for the soul of America that they take that
day off for everybody.
OPPOSITION TO MALATHION SPRAYING: Mr. Ron Bengoshea, 1751 South Nutwood,
Anaheim. He addressed his opposition to the Malathion spraying that is being
done in various parts of Orange County. The newspaper printed numbers to call
which he did and expressed his concerns. He was assured that there are no
problems relative to the spraying of the chemical. Sooner or later Anaheim is
going to be sprayed. He is asking the Council to contact the Orange County
Supervisors to let them know that there are concerns and determine if there
are alternatives to conquer the problem. He does not believe that finding one
Medfly condones the spraying of 36 miles.
Councilwoman Kaywood. She too is concerned with the Malathion spraying and
its long term effects. She feels anything that removes and damages paint on
cars cannot be considered perfectly safe. She also acknowledges the fact that
a great deal of damage can be done by the Medfly and its devastating
implications on agriculture in the County. She would like to see some action
taken regarding the spraying which is scheduled for Thursday night, south of
Anaheim in Garden Grove - that it be stopped and that a study take place.
Mayor Hunter. It is a State problem where the City does not have
jurisdiction. He suggested that State Senator Seymour be contacted.
Councilman Pickler. He noted that other cities have taken action and he feels
that a resolution from Anaheim stating its opposition to the spraying would be
in order so that the City is on record as being opposed.
City Attorney White. It is the State that controls the program. Although he
does not have any specific information, Just before the meeting started he was
told the CiTy of Huntington Beach apparently proposes to seek through court
action some sort of injunctive relief to prohibit spraying within Huntington
Beach. How successful that will be remains to be seen.
Councilman Daly. There is a lot of information and misinformation relative to
the issue. He suggests that on the Council's next agenda that they ask the
County and State Agricultural Departments to give a presentation on the
spraying. Malathion is commercially available. It is a poison. He is also
concerned. He is willing to discuss a Resolution of Opposition but he does
113
City Hall. Anaheim, California - COUNCI~ MINUTES - January 23. 1990, 5:30 P.M.
not think it will have any effect on the spraying that is to take place
Thursday night.
After further Council discussion, Mayor Hunter suggested that the matter be
placed on an agenda and in the interim direct the City Attorney to contact
Huntington Beach to determine the course of action they are taking. Council
Members Pickler and Kaywood emphasized that time was of the essence and
Council would not be meeting again until February 6, 1990.
MOTION; At the conclusion of further discussion, Councilman Daly moved to
direct the City Attorney to explore and research the feasibility and
effectiveness of Anaheim either separately or in conjunction with Huntington
Beach asking for temporary restraining order or injunction and direct staff to
attempt to arrange a brief presentation by the State Department of Food and
Agriculture and possibly County Department of Agriculture on February 6, 1990.
Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White asked for clarification. As he
understands the direction, he is to report back to the Council on February 6,
1990, but not to file any action until the Council authorizes it at a
meeting. He is not to file any action or restraining order at this time but
to report back to the Council his recommendation on the Council options.
Councilman Ehrle. That is correct. The Council may authorize the City
Attorney to take further action after the February 6, 1990 meeting; Councilman
Daly. He wants to know the legal grounds for the Huntington Beach action.
City Attorney White. The other choice would be to authorize him tonight to
file an action and go to court in the next 48 hours; Councilman Pickler stated
that is what he would like to see.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion by Councilman Daly. Councilman
Pickler voted no. MOTION CARRIED.
142/114; $~tu~ of Charter Review: Councilman Ehrle asked for
clarification of the time lines of the Charter Review Committee work.
City Clerk Sohl. The committee is meeting tomorrow evening to discuss the
input received at their two Public Hearings held on January 10, 1990 in the
Council Chamber and January 11, 1990 at Anaheim Stadium. The committee's next
meeting will be February 7, 1990. They are optimistic and hopeful they will
have a final report completed by February 7, 1990 and thereafter will be
transmitting it to the Council early in February. Once the Council receives
the recommendations, they can go forward in whatever manner they wish.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Hunter moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (9:10 P.M.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
114