Loading...
1989/02/28? r~ ~ City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. 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: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Jim Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Janet Botula ASSISTANT PLANNER: Linda Rios TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer FIRE CHIEF: Jeff Bowman A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting Of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 4:00 p.m. on February 24, 1989 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Hunter called the meeting to order at 12:00 noon. 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; City of Anaheim vs. Anaheim Hotel Partnership, O.C.S.C.C. No. 46-96-59. b. To discuss labor relations matters 54957.6. Government Code Section c. To discuss personnel matters 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 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: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (1:40 p.m.) INVOCATION: Father John Lenihan, St. Boniface Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Tom Daly led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 165 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. 119; PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Hunter and authorized by the City Council: Tree City USA Day in Anaheim, Wednesday, March 1, 1989, Save Your Vision Week in Anaheim, March 5-11, 1989. The Tree City USA proclamation was accepted by Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services; the Save Your Vision proclamation was accepted by Mark Wells. 119~ DECLARATIONS OF COMMENDATION; The City Council unanimously adopted Declarations of Commendation acknowledging and commending Kimberly McGowen and Marlo Advincula for their heroic actions on January 9, 1989 when a structure fire broke out in an apartment complex at 255 West Winston Road. Kimberly and Marlo discovered the fire and immediately began notifying the residents resulting in the evacuation of most of the residents before fire units arrived. Bob Young, Division Chief, briefed their actions in detail for the Council, emphasizing the importance of their assistance provided to the Fire Department. Mayor Hunter and Council Members, on behalf of the City, highly commended Ms. McGowen (Mr. Advincula could not be present) for her truly heroic actions. 119: DECLARATION OF COMMENDATION; The City Council unanimously adopted a Declaration of Commendation which the Mayor was subsequently going to present to Stella Sandoval upon her retirement from the State of California Employment Development Department, as well as acknowledging her active and long tenure as a member of the City's Housing Commission and her involvement in community organizations not only in the City of Anaheim but throughout Orange County. 119: PRESENTATION - CITIZENS COMMITTEE REPORT ON VISION 2000: Mr. Floyd Farano, spokesman for the Vision 2000 Citizens Committee first asked those members of the Committee who were present to stand as well as those residents and business people who were invited to be present today. Mr. Farano then gave an extensive presentation on the Vision 2000 program from its inception to its present status. His presentation was supplemented by slides. He reported on the many strategies that were formulated as part of the plan as well as the input received from citizens noting that literally hundreds of suggestions were brought forth. He emphasized that the number one priority on the citizens list of concerns related to traffic and transportation. He noted that no item was singled out as being a preference they wanted all of them. Mr. Farano briefed other major issues and subheadings under each - continued leadership, land use and planning, quality of life, economic development, housing and demographic change. A point emphasized under both land use and planning and quality of life was relative to Code Enforcement, i.e., that strict Code Enforcement is desirable in the future and that citizens overwhelmingly support strong proactive Code Enforcement. In concluding, Mr. Farano introduced Mr. Herb Leo to brief the actions that will take place at this point. Staff will then take all the suggestions and 166 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. changes presented and reprioritize those from the last four public meetings that were held. The Committee wants to maintain the interest of the citizens participating in those meetings. Mr. Herb Leo, 2906 Bellamy Avenue. He is speaking for the Vision 2000 Citizens Committee. The process has been a very thorough one with many citizens and City departments involved. The total City has been behind this project. Problems have been identified and strategies adopted which is a plan of action along with discussion on how to finance those strategies. No areas of the City have been overlooked in planning what they want the City to be in the year 2000. It will take approximately $178,000,000 to accomplish all the actions presented by the program to date, $85,000,000 of which has been identified and can be funded over the years. At least $92,000,000 will have to be considered for long-range financial planning. Because of this, they are suggesting that the City consider hiring a research consultant capable of researching the citizens acceptance of some long-range plan of financing, how to advertise it and how to ultimately accomplish it. They are also recommending that a redevelopment study area in the commercial/recreation area be considered. This was reported to the Council and the Committee in their January 4, 1989 report. They assume all the actions are within the current policy of the City Council because they have had no feedback to the contrary. The plan has unlimited possibilities for the City in the future if they have the fortitude to take the continued steps necessary to bring the plan to its ultimate fruition. He urged the Council to take affirmative action so that they can move forward with the job at hand. Floyd Farano. He extended a special thanks to members of City staff who have devoted the kind of time and effort it takes for such an undertaking. There is not a staff member in the audience who did not work on the project on their own time. The Council should recognize that Anaheim remains far and above anybody else in the field. Mayor Hunter. The entire City Council thanks the Committee and staff and anyone who has been and continues to be involved in this important and far reaching program and the Council very much appreciates the progress report. MINUTES; Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held January 31, 1989. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,631,046.54, in accordance with the 1988-89 Budget, were approved. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR; On motion by Councilman Hunter, 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. Al. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission meeting held February 1, 1989. 167 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P,M. 107: Receiving and filing the Building Division Statistical Report ending January 31, 1989. A2. 150: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of Manzanita Park Park and Recreation Building Improvements by Henry Construction Company, Inc., and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion. A3. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change order to Automated Office Products, for an additional amount not to exceed $15,968 (bringing the revised purchase order total to $25,000) for IBM and IBM compatible computer hardware maintenance services through June, 1989. A4. 160: Accepting the bid of McGraw Edison, Inc., in the amount of $1,867,310.02 for one 230 KV/72KV three phase power transformer, in accordance with bid #4636 as publicly advertised. A5. 123: Approving a settlement agreement with Michael Uren, in the amount of $12,164.40 for retroactive compensation owed (from January, 1986 through January, 1989) for his employment at the Convention Center as a Part Time Storekeeper. A6. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar and acted upon separately. End of Consent Calendar. MOTION CARRIED. A6; 123/106; AGREEMENT WITH TOWNSEND ~ COMPANY TO CONDUCT PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH - VISION 2000: Approving an agreement with Townsend & Company in the amount of $50,000 plus an amount not to exceed $5,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, and appropriating $25,000 from the Council Contingency Fund to support the recommendation of the City Manager's Office Task Force on Vision 2000 to conduct public opinion research. Submitted were the following reports: Report dated February 21, 1989 from the City Manager's Office Task Force on Vision 2000 - subject: Task Force Recommendations; report dated January 4, 1989 from the City Manager - subject: Council Policy Direction on Proposed Vision 2000 Actions For Implementation (with attachments); report dated January 6, 1989 from the City Manager's Task Force on Vision 2000 - subject: Redevelopment As A Funding Mechanism (with attachment). Mr. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 West Palais, who asked to speak reported that during original hearings there was not sufficient funding for public awareness of the purposes of the proposed study. He is suggesting that a portion of the funding or additional funding be allocated from the Council Contingency Fund devoted to increased public education as to what choices are available and especially the financial consequences involved. Councilman Daly. While he does not have a concern with the basic recommendation, he does have questions that he would like to have answered before voting on the matter. He thereupon moved for a one-week continuance on the decision to approve the subject agreement with Townsend & Company. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 168 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. 173; CALIFORNIA/NEVADA SUPER SPEED TRAIN PROJECT: Submitted was report dated February 28, 1989 from the Assistant City Manager with supporting documentation relative to the subject project, recommending that the Mayor sign and submit a letter of support relative to the concept of providing a terminus for the train in Anaheim. City Attorney White stated that a motion would be necessary waiving the 72-hour posting provisions of the Brown Act. On motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the Anaheim City Council determined that the need to act on the following item arose after the posting of the agenda for this meeting, on Friday, February 24, 1989, at 4:00 p.m.; and consequently waived the Brown Act requirement relative to posting the item on the printed agenda. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: Councilman Daly moved to authorize the Mayor to sign and submit a letter of support to Assemblyman Richard Katz and members of High Speed Rail Commission indicating Council support for the California/Nevada Super Speed Train Project supporting concept of providing terminus in Anaheim. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 123; EXTENSION OF EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT - PAPIANO GROUP ARENA PROJECT; Submitted was report dated February 28, 1989 from the Assistant City Manager, James Ruth, recommending approval of the subject amendment. On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Daly, the Anaheim City Council determined that the need to act on the following item arose after the posting of the agenda for this meeting, on Friday, February 24, 1989, at 4:00 p.m.; and consequently waived the Brown Act requirement relative to posting the item on the printed agenda. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION; Councilman Hunter moved to approve the amendment to an exclusive right to negotiate agreement with the Papiano Group to develop an Arena in Anaheim, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said amendment. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted no. MOTION CARRIED. 114; COUNCIL ORIENTATION/TRAINING PROGRAMS; Considering the proposed Vision 2000 orientation/training programs for future Council candidates, newly-elected Council members, and existing Council members; and if approved, directing staff to implement these programs at an estimated cost of between $4,000 to $6,000. Submitted was report dated February 21, 1989 from the Vision 2000 Task Force on Council training and leadership. Cindy King, Assistant to the City Manager. The proposed program is a recommendation from one of the Task Forces presently in existence under the Vision 2000 program. Ms. King then briefed the information contained in the February 21, 1989 report (with attachment - Proposed Council Orientation Programs) and outlined the three proposed programs: I - Council Candidate 169 City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28. 1989. 1:30 P,M. Orientation, II - Orientation for Newly Elected Council Members, and III - Team Building/Goal Setting Sessions for Council which include Options A and B. At the conclusion of Ms. King's presentation, Councilwoman Kaywood stated she felt both Option A and B were needed (see Page 2 of the subject report); Ms. King answered that is a possibility and it could be a combination of both options rather than an either/or situation. Councilwoman Kaywood. The next annual training session offered by the League of California Cities for Members of the City Council and the City Manager is scheduled for January, 1990. She suggests that they proceed with Option A and be ready to go with Option B. City Clerk Sohl asked for clarification if the Council wishes to go with both options; Mayor Hunter stated that both options should be included and then the Council can make a decision. Councilman Daly. He suggests that the Council make that decision as they get closer to the budget period. MOTION; Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the Vision 2000 Orientation/Training programs for future Council candidates, newly elected Council Members and existing Council Members, directing staff to implement these programs at an estimated cost of between $4,000 and $6,000 including Options A and B with a final decision relative to Option B to be made at a later date. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 129/107/142; DISCUSSION INSTALLATION OF FIRE SPRINKLERS - NEW COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION/RETROFIT FOR HIGH RISE: Submitted was report dated February 14, 1989 from the Fire Chief, Jeff Bowman, recommending (1) a proposed ordinance requiring sprinklers in high rise buildings constructed prior to 1974 and, (2) a proposed ordinance amending the Anaheim Municipal Code adopting the 1988 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code including requiring sprinklers in all new commercial properties, new multi-family dwellings and new 1 and 2-story family dwellings. See minutes of May 24, 1988 where an extensive presentation was made by Chief Bowman, containing much of the information and data presented today. Fire Chief, Jeff Bowman. He first briefed his report dated February 14, 1989 which gave the background on the actions that had taken place since the Council meeting of May 24, 1988 (see minutes that date). Other issues relating to fire sprinklers were also addressed. Four different ordinances were subsequently proposed and submitted to Council for enactment. Fire Department staff was instructed to go out into the community and talk to those who would be most affected by the proposed ordinances which they did. He immediately scheduled meetings with owners of the 12 high rise buildings in the community relative to retrofitting their buildings with sprinklers. In talking to the building owners, the major issue of retrofitting is that it is an extremely expensive process. He (Bowman) subsequently spoke with the 170 City Hall, Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. City's Finance Director, George Ferrone about offering the owners an opportunity of the City assisting the hotels in financial planning for this large expense. (See memo dated September 15, 1988 from Mr. Ferrone - subject: Financing Pool for Hotel Sprinkler Systems). If enough building owners were likely to participate in a joint financing mechanism, City staff would be willing to look at that. Another formidable issue involves the need for asbestos removal before installation of sprinklers. Relative to residential properties, Chief Bowman feels this is an area where the debate will continue but he is recommending that the City should enact an ordinance which will include sprinklers in all new residential dwellings. They met with the development community to determine how such an ordinance would impact them. In meeting with all the principals of the Ranch developments in the East Hills area, it appears that those Ranches will be exempted from such a requirement because of development agreements executed with the City. However, as Fire Chief, it is something that should be looked at prior to making that final decision. Sprinklers should be required in residential properties which will be borne out by the presentation he is going to make today. Chief Bowman once again narrated an extensive slide presentation as he did at the May 24, 1988 meeting with additions which covered all areas of concern with reEard to installation of fire sprinklers and how those problems and concerns could be mitigated, reduced or eliminated by the installation of fire sprinklers with emphasis on residential units, multi-family or single-family, since it is in that area where all fire deaths (25) have occurred from 1978 to 1988. Council Members posed questions to Chief Bowman after his presentation and subsequently Councilman Pickler offered the following ordinances (Ordinance Nos. 4998 and 4999) for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4998: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING CHAPTER 16.09 TO TITLE 16 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO HIGH RISE BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1974. ORDINANCE NO, 4999; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING CHAPTER 16.08 OF TITLE 16 OF THE ANA~EIMMUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING T~E UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1988 EDITION, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO. City Attorney W~ite explained that the first ordinance (4998), adding Chapter 16.09 to Title 16 of the Code would come back to the Council next week (March 7, 1989) for adoption, since it does not require a public hearing. The second ordinance (4999) which is adopting the 1988 Uniform Fire Code by reference including other amendments as discussed by the Fire Chief and discussed in his report would require a public hearing because it is adopting the State Code by reference with amendments. It is suggested that the public hearing take place on April 4, 1989. After that hearing, the Council would have the opportunity to adopt the ordinance. 171 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P,M. RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for ten minutes. (3:16 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (3:40 p.m.) 176; PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO, 87-17A; In accordance with application filed by Dennis Stanrod, 1811 1821 Cypress Street, Anaheim, CA 92805, public hearing was scheduled on proposed abandonment of a portion of Cypress Street, extending from Evelyn Drive to a point approximately 132 feet west of Coffman Street, pursuant to Resolution No. 89R-16, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. Report of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Gary Johnson, dated January 16, 1989 was submitted recommending approval of said abandonment. City Clerk Sohl announced that the subject abandonment has been amended and will be replaced because of size and legal description by a hearing which is advertised for March 21, 1989. It was not possible to delete the subject public hearing from the agenda since it was set for a public hearing this date. City Attorney White. On the agenda of March 21, 1989, both items will be shown. This is for part of the right-of-way. An additional part was also later requested by the applicant. Those will be combined and the Council can hold one hearing at one time and show the abandonment as two separate items. MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to continue public hearing on Abandonment No. 87-17A to Tuesday, March 21, 1989. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 179; PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 3107 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION; APPLICANT: OWNERS: Vivten Fermin and Edgare Fermin 1180 Hazelwood Street, Anaheim, CA 92802 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1180 Hazelwood Street. The request is to construct a 780 square-foot addition to an existing adult care facility for a maximum of ten (10) adults with waivers of (a) maximum lot coverage and (b) minimum rear yard setback. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Conditional Use Permit No. 3107 was denied by the Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-04: Waiver of Code Requirement was denied by the Planning Commission: approved EIR Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by Ambross B. Tison, authorized agent and Vivten Fermtn, owner, and public hearing scheduled this date. 172 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES February 28. 1989, 1~30 P.M. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 16, 1989. Posting of property February 16, 1989. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 17, 1989. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 4, 1989. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Vivten Fermin. She is the owner/care provider at 1180 Hazelwood Street. There is a very high demand for the more community-oriented board and care homes. She would like to expand the facility to accommodate four more clients to meet the high demands. Developmentally disabled citizens have a right to live as community members. She and her staff provide clients with good care 24 hours a day. They are not a detriment to the neighborhood. Some neighbors are focusing on an incident when a client went onto one of the neighbor's premises. The client did not exhibit violent behavior or any dangerous propensities. These are mentally retarded individuals with child-like behavior. There is a concern that they are a detriment to the children who attend Betsy Ross School. She has an affidavit from the school crossing guard on duty from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. stating there is no danger because of her (Fermin's) clients. Her clients live at the facility and go to their workshops from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Ambross Tison, 2021 Plaza de Madrid, Cerritos. He is the Engineer/Architect. With the proposed addition of 790 square feet, the total lot coverage will be 41% where 40% is permitted or only 1% over the minimum requirement. Relative to the minimum rear yard setback, they believe they meet the minimum requirement (10 feet required, 5 feet proposed). Their setback is 10 feet 6 inches from the rear property line. There is a 5-foot setback but it is measured from the existing garage. Regarding square footage, the new room addition of 790 square feet meets all the City, County and State standards for adding another four persons. The bedrooms are 154 square feet each. Regarding the behavior of some of the clients observed by local residents, he believes they are referring to the "cigarette butt chewing" incident. It was a one-time incident and Mrs. Fermin has promised it will never occur again. The person involved in that incident is no longer with the facility. In general, the clients of the facility are well behaved and peaceful individuals. It will not affect the community or cause disturbance to the neighbors. If there is opposition, they are not immediate neighbors because the immediate neighbors are in favor of approving the facility. 173 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION: Steve Hurst, 1158 West Hazelwood. He is in opposition because the facility is a detriment to the area. They did not even know it was established because a person can apply to the state and have six clients without the neighbors being informed. The request is for four more. They have had problems with six. It will decrease the value of their homes. He does not know who in the neighborhood is in favor. Sandy Dale, 1171 Hazelwood. The incident referred to happened three times. On two occasions she had clients come into her home when she was at home alone with her children. She should not have to keep her doors locked for fear they will come into her house. Saturday morning one came through the garage door and through her house. She tries to talk to those running the home but they feel it is no problem. They did not know that the clients were out. They are not being watched. One day the bus that drops off some of the adults had to stop further away from the home. No one watched to see that one of the clients got to the facility. The crossing guard is only stationed at Betsy Ross School for a short period and it is a new person. Speaking for herself'and other neighbors, they are not tryir~g to get Mrs. Fermin out of the neighborhood, but do not want her to have permission to bring in four more clients. SUMMATION BY APPLICANT: Mrs. Fermin. She is usually at the facility at 5:30 a.m. In the one incident that occurred, the person involved needed a lot of help but she was not dangerous. Clients are not placed in a community setting if they are dangerous. Parents have written on her behalf asking that she expand the facility because she gives good care to her clients and there is a need. Mel Rosenloff, 1177 West Beacon. He has known Mrs. Fermin for six years. She is extremely responsible and runs a top notch facility for children. He has had the opportunity to witness and see the type of operation Mrs. Fermin runs. He has never seen anything negative or that was a problem. He has a 9-year old son who attends Betsy Ross School across the street from the facility. He has never seen any of Mrs. Fermin's clients around or bothering anybody. Eileen Carillos, 5102 Bransford, La Palma. Her mother is the care provider for the homes. She (Eileen) is pursuing a degree in psychology at UCLA and works with mentally retarded people. She is appalled at the attitude of the neighbors. The residents of the facility are being provided with the care they need. She only knows of one incident that occurred. 174 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Councilman Pickler. Mrs. Fermin is to be commended for her work but he believes it is too soon for her to be asking to have four additional people at the facility. Councilman Ehrle. He agrees that Mrs. Fermin and those running such facilities are to be commended. There is a reason why the state has limited the number to six. He has a friend whose daughter is a client in one of the homes and knows of the fine care provided but it is important that the neighborhood have time to adjust to the situation before adding any more people. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilman Hunter, 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 - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-58) Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 89R-58 for adoption, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 3107, upholding the findings of the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO, 89R-58; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3107. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-58 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3, SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 88-04, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 280 AND ADDENDUM: APPLICANT: OWNERS: Santa Fe land Improvement Company 3230 E. Imperial Highway, Suite 100, Brea, CA 92621 175 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES February 28. 1989. 1:30 P.M. AGENT: Phillips Brandt Reddick 18012 Sky Park Circle, Irvine, CA 92714 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is approximately 26.3 acres located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Tustin Avenue. The petitioner requests adoption of a Specific Plan (including Zoning and Development Standards), a Redevelopment Plan Amendment (to consider an amendment from a designation of Industrial to Industrial with an alternative of Commercial, subject to a General Plan Amendment providing for such use), and a Development Agreement for the proposed Santa Fe Pacific project to provide for the development of 500,000 square feet of office area, 24,000 square feet of support commercial, a 4,000-square foot fast-food restaurant, an 8,000-square foot restaurant, a 150-room hotel and 2 parking structures. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Specific Plan No. 88-3 was approved by the Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-21; Specific Plan Zoning & Development Standards were approved by the Planning Commission under % Resolution No. PC89-22; Development Agreement was deferred, future action to be taken by the Planning Commission; Reapproved EIR No. 280 with Addendum and statement of overriding considerations. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by Chuck Christensen, Project Manager for Santa Fe Pacific Realty Corporation, and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 16, 1989. Posting of property February 17, 1989. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet February 17, 1989. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989 from Janet Botula and excerpt from the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 30, 1989 dated February 16, 1989 to the City Council. City Clerk Sohl announced that prior to the beginning of the hearing, she received a letter from Chuck Christensen dated February 28, 1989, indicating that Santa Fe Pacific Realty Corporation is requesting to withdraw their appeal of the Planning Commission's decision. A copy of the letter was submitted to the Council. Mayor Hunter. He acknowledged the letter of withdrawal but noted that since the public hearing was scheduled for this date, those in attendance wishing to speak will have an opportunity to do. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- Paul Williamson, 3450 East La Palma. He asked if the 26.3 acres extends from Tustin Avenue to the 91 Freeway. Also later in the meeting he stated as a property 176 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. owner close to the subject property, he is in support of the project. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. He answered it is between La Palma Avenue to the 91 Freeway and from Tustin Avenue to the railroad tracks. Rosemary Parks, Manager of the property across the street from the subject proposal. Their concern is that all the traffic problems and the ramifications of the project have not been resolved between the developer, property owner and the City. Phillip Decurion, one of the owners of Bessie Walls Restaurant, also directly across the street. He is generally supportive of the project as it is envisiOned. His concern, and he has written to the City, is that traffic control is necessary in front of his property in the form of a street light so that people can get out of the restaurant driveway safely as well as getting into it safely from different directions. Otherwise it is a well-founded project. Chuck Christensen, representing Santa Fe Pacific Realty Corporation. He filed the appeal as well as the withdrawal. He will be happy to meet with both Mr. Decurlon and Mrs. Parks to discuss exactly what has been approved. He has met with them several times in the past. Mr. Parks has attended each of the Planning Commission hearings and spoken in favor. He is dismayed and confused about the concerns broached today. The project was approved unanimously by both the Planning Commission and Redevelopment Commission. He is asking that the Council approve the project as presented today. Mayor Hunter stated even though the Council is well apprised of the project, he would like a brief summary by staff; the summary was provided by the Traffic Engineer, Paul Singer. Janet Botula, Associate Planner. She clarified there is no redevelopment plan amendment associated with the project. One was originally proposed but on February 14, 1989, the Redevelopment Commission determined that a redevelopment amendmentwould not be required. Staff would also like to read several corrections and additions into the record relative to Planning Commission Resolution No. 89R-21. The Electrical Engineering staff has requested that Condition No. 33 be revised as follows: 177 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P,M. That as required by the Electrical Engineering Division, the existing overhead power lines and poles along the La Palma Avenue frontage shall be relocated to conform to the proposed street improvements, or at the developers request said lines will be placed underground at the developers expense per the Electrical Rules, Rates and Regulations. Also pursuant to AB3180 which became effective January 1, 1989, the City is required to establish a reporting and monitoring program to ensure compliance with EIR mitigation measures. Anaheim, along with most cities statewtde is now in the process of determining how best to implement the legislation. Therefore, the following condition is recommended for inclusion in PC89-21 as Condition No. 57: The developer shall be held responsible for complying with the future monitoring and reporting program established by the City in compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Furthermore, the developer shall be responsible for any direct costs associated with the monitoring and reporting required to ensure implementation of those mitigation measures identified in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 280 that have been incorporated as Conditions of Approval for subject project. She also noted that Commissioner McBurney was absent and not an aye vote as indicated. Councilman Pickler asked what type of hotel was to be developed. Mr. Christensen answered that it will be a business type hotel or a Hapenny or Day's End with a room rate of approximately $69 per night. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed concern over the possibility of using the word Disneyland as part of the hotel name such as the Disneyland Embassy Suites which she feels is false advertising and will bring tra£~ic into the area which they are trying to avoid. City Attorney White explained that "Dtsneyland" is a proprietary right and the Council does not have the authority to grant or deny approval of the use of the name. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO, 280 WITH ADDENDUM - CERTIFICATION: Environmental Impact Report No. 280 and Addendum, having been reviewed by City staff and recommended by the City Planning Commission, to be in compliance with City and state guidelines in the State of California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council, acting upon such information and belief as outlined in the staff report to the Planning Commission dated January .30, 1989 178 City Hall. Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. dose hereby certify on motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilman Hunter, that EIR No. 280 and Addendum is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City and state guidelines and adopted a statement of overriding considerations as recommended by the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS; The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 89R-59 and 89R-60) Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 89R-59 approving Specific Plan No. 88-3 including the findings as referenced in staff report dated January 30, 1989 pursuant to Section 18.93.070 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and with revision to Condition No. 33 and addition of Condition No. 57. RESOLUTION NO, 89R-59: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3 (AWAITING TITLE) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-59 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 89R-60, approving Specific Plan Zoning & Development Standards. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 89R-60: SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (AWAITING TITLE) Roll Gall Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-60 duly passed and adopted. City Attorney White. Staff will prepare two ordinances to bring back to the Council at a later date, one of which will establish zoning regulations, pursuant to the Zoning and Development Standards approved today. The second will be to rezone the property into the SP88-3 zone and the applicant will be preparing a final specific plan document and submitting that to the staff prior to returning the ordinances to the Council for adoption. 179 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. 179; PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO, 88-89-34, VARIANCE NO. 3900 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION; APPLICANT: OWNER: Blash Momeny 2082 Business Center Dr. #185, Irvine, CA 92715 AGENT: Michael K. Frazter 18200 Yorba Linda, #501, Yorba Linda, CA 92606 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 3625 Savanna Street. The request is for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 or a less intense zone, and to waive (a) maximum structural height and (b) maximum site coverage to construct a 3-story, 12-unit apartment complex. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Reclassification No. 88-89-34 was granted to RM-2400 by the Planning Commission to the RM-2400 zone under Resolution No. PC89-31; Variance No. 3900 was denied by the Planning Commission under Resolution No. PC89-32; approved EIR Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal was submitted by the owner, Blash Momeny, and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 16, 1989. Posting of property February 17, 1989. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 17, 1989. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1989. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Michael K. Frazier, Agent, 18200 Yorba Linda, #501, Yorba Linda, CA 92606. A number of lots along Savanna Street have been reclassified to RM-1200. The request is for a waiver of the maximum height limit or the 3rd-story which is also consistent with some of the construction already in progress. They attempted to bring lot coverage within 55%. Relative to the 2% overage, they had discussions with staff regarding the interpretation and that is how they came up with the 2% over. If that has to be given up, he could adjust the size of the units slightly to bring them within Code compliance. On the overall site plan, there are some factors which exceed the minimum standards the City would impose relative to the size of the units. Each is 100 square feet more than the minimum. Recreation area is some 2,700 plus square feet greater than is required. The front setback has been increased to 20 feet. The project is consistent with the 180 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. area. It does not overload the present conditions such as traffic and water supply. He understands the developer will have to participate in the cost of constructing new water service. The peculiarity in the configuration of the lot has predetermined what can be done. Mayor Hunter. He referred to a letter received from the City of Buena Park relative to having a 3-story complex adjacent to single-family homes. He asked Mr. Frazier to address that issue. Michael Frazier. The property immediately adjacent to the project is an 81-unit apartment complex which is 3-stories high. The property on the other side was just reclassified. There are no single-family homes on either side. The only single-family homes he is aware of are on the south side of Savanna Street. At the far end, or cul de sac end of Savanna, that is property which falls within Buena Park city limits. He was not aware of the problem. It did not come up at the Planning Commission hearing. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The property to the east has a resolution of intent to RM-1200. Between the time the staff work was done on this project, the resolution was finalized and permits issued. There is a project under construction. The height waiver, as it pertains to the area to the north is a 135-foot distance from the subject building to the zone boundary in Buena Park. Anaheim's code standard at 150 feet to single-family also applies to the single-family zoning in other cities. The carbon creek channel to the north is somewhere in excess of 64 feet wide. She does not recall anyone in opposition at the Planning Commission hearing; however, the Commission has not been enthusiastic about RM-1200 on Savanna Street so they have denied projects which were subsequently approved by the Council. In terms of the height waiver to the north, the Council and Commission, in other projects, have not objected to the setback being less than 150 feet if within that 150 feet any walls facing the single-family area have no windows or doors or other areas where people could look out. She notes the wall facing north does include windows. That has been brought up in connection with other projects. The staff report did not bring it up. Michael Frazier. He does not recall anyone making that comment. They did not know it was a point of contention. They would be willing to eliminate those windows if it is something that would affect the ultimate approval of the project for privacy of persons across the channel. 181 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28. 1989, 1;30 P.M. Blash Momeny, 2082 Business Center Drive, Irvine, Ca. 92715. On January 26, 1988, the Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 234 which permitted neighboring properties to rezone to RM-1200. His property is among all the apartments. Working from an illustration, he pointed to the 3-story project adjacent to his property that was approved with the same variances he is requesting but with windows overlooking the single-family residents even though his architect Just agreed to eliminate the windows. During the Planning Commission hearing, there was no opposition. At the December 24, 1988 Planning Commission meeting, the Chairwoman offered favorable comments regarding his project and did not feel his 12-unit proposal would impact the area nor did the Traffic Engineer. Any other residential use would be impossible to market and sell. He has cooperated with the City. What he is proposing is consistent, conforming and compatible with the existing character of Savanna Street. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN FAVOR: None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION: Art Stahovich, 805 Rambowood Drive. He has attended all hearings regarding this project. The only reason there has not been opposition from the people to the east is that they feel at this point there would be no use in expressing that opposition. He is opposed to a rezone to RM-1200 and would like it kept to RM-2400 or that condominiums be built. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Answering questions posed by the Council, Ms. Santalahti reported that 6 units would be permitted under RM-2400 zoning assuming no other waivers are introduced. Approximately 4 or 5 condominiums could be built on the property. Savanna Street has a long history of all kinds of zoning. According to the site plan, there are three'other lots to the east, two on the north side, 9 and 15 units and one to the west of the units. She thought the project at the end of Savanna currently in process of being annexed to the City or in the City might be condominiums. There are three projects on the street. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the City Council approved the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. 182 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 89R-61 and 89R-62) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-61 for adoption, granting Reclassification No. 88-89-34 to the RM-2400 zone as approved by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO, 89R-61; 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. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-61 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-62 for adoption, denying Variance No. 3900, upholding the City Planning Commission's decision. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO, 89Ro62: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 3900. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-62 duly passed and adopted. 179/155; PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO, 273 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED), REQUEST TO AMEND CONDITION NO. 87 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO, 87R-253/ORDINANCE NO, 4861 PERTAINING TO THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN (SP87-1): APPLICANT: OWNER: Presley of Southern CalifOrnia 17991 Mitchell South, Irvine, CA 92714 AGENT: Franklyn Elfend, Elfend and Associates, Inc. 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 660, Newport Beach, CA 92660 183 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. LOCATION/REQUEST: Subject property, which is described as the 816-acre The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1) development area, is bounded on the north by the East Hills Planned Community, on the east by the Sycamore Canyon and The Summit of Anaheim Hills developments, on the west by the existing Anaheim Hills Planned Community, and on the south by the City of Orange and unincorporated land within the County of Orange. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 16, 1989. Posting of property February 17, 1989. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 17, 1989. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See detailed report dated February 22, 1989 from the Planning Department recommending approval of the subject request and that the City Manager's Office prepare an ordinance to set forth the amended wording of the subject condition as specified in the report (see Page 1 of the February 22, 1989 report). Joel Fick, Planning Director. He gave a brief overview of the item and request. One of the primary goals was to preserve the ridge line area abutting Weir Canyon Regional Park. What was found by County staff, there was an interchange in the specific plan wording that meant the same thing to the City in terms of land exchange and fee dedication which apparently in County circles has differing meaning and that language was used interchangeably in the Specific Plan documents as well as in the conditions of approval. City staff has been working with County staff and the County has submitted a letter and are in full agreement with the revised wording being recommended today. The County did add one or two words to the original request by the developers reflected in the recommendation and the developers are in agreement and the language is satisfactory to them as well. Frank Elfend, Elfend & Associates, 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 660, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660. Mr. Fick is correct. They agree with the modified wording. Both the County, Fresley and City staff agree the chan~e is acceptable. COUNCIL ACTION: There being no further persons who wished to speak either in favor or in opposition, Mayor Hunter closed the public hearing. Councilman Daly. He asked if Planning Staff was completely supportive of the proposed action and if the City's interests were entirely protected. 184 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. Joel Fick. He answered yes. takes place. Nothing can be built until the land exchange ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO, 273: Environmental Impact Report No. 273 was certified by the City Council on June 23, 1987 in conjunction with the approval of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan SP87-1. Environmental Impacts and mitigation measures associated with the subject Weir Canyon land exchange were addressed through the certification process, therefore, on motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Ehrle, the Council finds that the initial study prepared and submitted by the applicant indicates that no additional impacts would result from the amendment of subject condition and EIR No. 273 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-63) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-63 for adoption, amending Condition No. 87 of Resolution No. 87R-253/Ordinance No. 4861 relative to Specific Plan No. 87-1 - The Highlands at Anaheim Hills. Refer to Resolution Book. ~ RESOLUTION NO, 89R-63; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-1 FOR THE HIGHLANDS AT ANAHEIM HILLS AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 87R-253 ACCORDINGLY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COI/NCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-63 duly passed and adopted. MOTION; Councilman Hunter moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 4861 (SP87-1) regarding Condition No. 87. MOTION CARRIED. 179/155; PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO, 283 (PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED), REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 18,71,060,020 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE (TITLE 18 ZONING) PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENT AREA 3 SYCAMORE CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN (SP88-1) RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: APPLICANT: OWNER: Woodcrest Development 17911 Mitchell South, Irvine, CA 92714 185 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. AGENT: Franklyn Elfend, Elfend and Associates, Inc. 4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 660, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION/REQUEST: Subject property, which is described as the 328.9-acre Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan (SP88-1) development area, is located southeast of the southerly terminus of Weir Canyon Road and southwest of Santa Aha Canyon Road, and is bounded on the northwest by the East Hills Planned Community, on the southeast by The Summit of Anaheim Hills Planned Community, and on the southwest by The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan development. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 16, 1989. Posting of property February 17, 1989. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 17, 1989. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated February 27, 1989. Frank Elfend, Elfend & Associates. He first explained how it was that the item came before the Planning Commission yesterday and the City Council today and also gave an historic overview on the issue. A majority of the development standards are identical to those already approved by the Council for the Sycamore Canyon project. Also as noted in the staff report these standards are similar to those approved or almost identical to those approved for Development Area No. 1 of their Specific Plan and also similar standards have also been approved for The Summit project. The standards they are proposing have already been approved within the Sycamore Canyon project and/or the The Summit project for condominiums. Councilwoman Kaywood. She posed a question relative to the minimum building site area. She remembered hearing that it would be a minimum 3,000 square feet. Joel Fick, Planning Director. When the project was originally submitted, it was submitted as an apartment project. There was no mention to staff at the time the project would be a condominium project and as it is designed it does meet the standards for which a condominium project has been approved on another portion of the Woodcrest Ranch. There will have to be a tract map for the condominium project to be submitted for Planning Commission review if the standards are found to be acceptable. The major provisions are compatible with a condominium project elsewhere on the Ranch. 186 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P M. Councilwoman Kaywood. She is very concerned relative to parking. To claim one space rather than 1.5 on bachelor units and two spaces for each 1-bedroom or larger, 2.5 is required and for the larger units 3.5 spaces. There would be no guest parking and not enough parking for the residents. Extensive discussion and questioning with staff followed wherein Councilwoman Kaywood reiterated her concern relative to parking. During the discussion, Councilman Daly noted that the concern stems from the fact that the attachment to letter dated February 7, 1989 to the City Clerk and letter dated February 8, 1989 to the Planning Department from Mr. Elfend, Item i on Page 2 states, "Parking - Not less than one (1) off street parking space for each bachelor unit; and not less than two (2) parking spaces for each 1-bedroom or larger unit. One (1) parking space per dwelling unit shall be covered. One-half (0.5) space per dwelling unit shall be reserved for guest parking." Joel Fick. He confirmed that item/wording was subsequently changed and what is reflected in the staff report, Page 7, Item i addressing parking actually reflects the current proposal and what the Planning Commission approved yesterday. "1.5 space per bachelor unit (including 1 covered space), 2.5 spaces (including 2 covered spaces) per 1 bedroom or larger unit unless said unit is in excess of 1,225 square feet in area and gains access from a private street, then 3.5 spaces per said unit required." ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 283 - CERTIFICATION: Environmental Impact Report No. 283 was previously certified by the City Council in conjunction with the Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan SP88-1 Approval. Environmental Impacts and mitigation measures associated with the development of residential structures within Development Area 3 were addressed through the certification process. On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Pickler, it was determined that the applicant has prepared and submitted an Initial Study which indicates that the previously certified Environmental Impact Report is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the subject request as the Initial Study indicates that no additional impacts would result from the approval of the amended zoning and development standards. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-64) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Hunter offered Resolution No. 89R-64 for adoption, approving the amendment to Sycamore Canyon Specific Plan SP88-1 including the findings as 187 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. referenced in the staff report and pursuant to Section 18.71.060.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 89R-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-1 AND THE ZONING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RELATING THERETO HERETOFORE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NOS. 88R-69 AND 88R-70, RESPECTIVELY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler, Kaywood and Hunter None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-64 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 4909 (SP$8-1). MOTION CARRIED. 105: APPOINTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD; Appointment from the list of candidates to fill the unscheduled vacancy of Sheri Pignone for the term ending June 30, 1990 on the Community Services Board. This item was continued from the meeting of February 14, 1989, to this date. Mayor Hunter declared nominations open. Councilman Daly nominated Michael Yawn; there being no further nominations, Councilman Hunter moved unanimous approval of Michael Yawn as appointee to the Community Services Board for the term ending June 30, 1990. Mr. Yawn was thereupon unanimously appointed to the Community Services Board. 105; APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION: Recommendation from the Youth Commission concerning the replacement of a second alternate, and appointing a third alternate. Recommendation is for Thoy Yann as second alternate with third alternate position to be filled from list of candidates. Councilwoman Kaywood nominated Thoy Yann as second alternate to the Youth Commission and Duy Nguyen as third alternate. There being no further nominations Thoy Yann and Duy Nguyen were unanimously appointed to the Youth Commission as second and third alternates, respectively. 179: ITEMS BI B2 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 1989 - DECISION DATE; FEBRUARY 13, 1989 FEBRUARY 28, 1989: INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS Bi. VARIANCE NO, 3864, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS-3: OWNER: MATTHEW W. GREENE & MARIE E. GREENE, 9115 Flower Street, Bellflower, CA 90706 188 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. LOCATION: 120 South Mohler Drive Petitioner requests waivers of (a) maximum structural height and (b) minimum structural setback to construct a 32-foot high single-family residence. Variance No. 3864 APPROVED IN PART (32 foot requested, maximum 30-foot high dwelling approved) by the Zoning Administrator, Decision No. ZA89-08. A review of the Zoning Administrator's decision was requested by Council Members Pickler and Hunter and, therefore, public hearing will be set at a later date. B2, VARIANCE NO, 3902, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS-Il: OWNERS: JERRY STIEFEL AND LINDA STIEFEL, 315 S. Illinois, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 315 South Illinois Street To construct a 637 square foot room addition with waiver of minimum side yard. Variance No. 3902 APPROVED by the Zoning Administrator, Decision No. ZA89-09. End of the Zoning Administrator Items. 179: AMENDING RESOLUTION NO, 88R-142 AND 88R-143; Amending Resolution Nos. 88R-142 (Reclassification No. 87-88-24) and 88R-143 (Variance No. 3746), nunc pro tunc, pertaining to property located at 1925 West Lincoln Avenue. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 89R-65) Councilman Daly moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Daly offered Resolution No. 89R-65 for adoption, amending Resolution Nos. 88R-142 (Reclassification No. 87-88-24) and 88R-143 (Variance No. 3746), nunc pro tunc, pertaining to property located at 1925 West Lincoln Avenue. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO, 89R-65: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NOS. 88R-142 AND 88R-143, NUNC PRO TUNC. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter Kaywood None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 89R-65 duly passed and adopted. 189 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1;30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she voted no on this resolution because she voted no initially and she is also concerned that it is only a 20-year affordability. 179; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2651 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Requested by: Dwight R. Beldon, 450 Newport Center Drive, Suite 304, Newport Beach, CA 92660-7640. LQCATION; 2400 East Katella Avenue; Petitioner requests a one year extension of time to expire on February 26, 1990. Conditional Use Permit No. 2651 is to construct an Il-story, 128.5-foot high hotel with on-premises sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and with accessory uses; and to construct a 12 and 15-story, 182 and 222.5-foot high Commercial office complex. MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time on Conditional Use Permit No. 2651, to expire February 26, 1990, as recommended in memorandum dated February 15, 1989 from the Planning Department. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 179; VARIANCE NO. 3709 EXTENSION OF TIME: Requested by: Paul D. Williamson, 3450 E. La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806. LOCATION: Northeasterly corner of the intersection of Nohl Ranch Road and Copa de Oro Drive (Lot 32 of Tract No, 12576); Petitioner requests an extension of time, retroactive to December 8, 1988, and to expire on December 8, 1989. Variance No. 3709 is to construct a 35-foot high, 2-story single family residence in the Scenic Corridor, with waivers of maximum structural height and minimum rear yard setback. MOTION; Councilman Pickler moved to approve the requested retroactive extension of time on Variance No. 3709, to expire December 8, 1989. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 179; ORDINANCE NOS. 5000 THROUGH 5002 (INTRODUCTION): Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance Nos. 5000 through 5002, both inclusive, for first reading. ORDINANCE NO, 5000; ~AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4932, NUNC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO ZONING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-45. ORDINANCE NO, 5001; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (Amending Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 87-88-35 at 106, 107, 110, 111, 112, and 113 Teri Circle from the RS-7200 to the RM-1200 zone) ORDINANCE NO, 5002; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (Amending Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 88-89-09 located at 2011 West Ball Road from the RS-A-43,000 to the RM-1200 zone) 190 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. 128/142; ORDINANCE NO, 4996 - (ADOPTION) 1989-1 - SYCAMORE CANYON; COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. WAIVER OF READING -ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 4996) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4996 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO, 4996; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-1 (SYCAMORE CANYON). Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter Kaywood None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4996 duly passed and adopted. 128/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4997 - (ADOPTION) 1989-2 - THE HIGHLANDS: COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCE: The title of the following ordinance was read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance No. 4997) Councilman Hunter moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinance. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4997 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO, 4997: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1989-2 (THE HIGHLANDS). Roll Gall Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Pickler and Hunter Kaywood None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4997 duly passed and adopted. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Rashmi Desai. She is present to request a retroactive extension of time to finish processing a 34-unit apartment project under Reclassification 85-86-05 and Variance No. 3509. The property is located at 2238 Lincoln Avenue. She 191 City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, ~:30 P.M. applied within the proper time schedule but due to receiving incorrect information, the application was misfiled leading to this last minute request which is of great urgency to them. It is imperative they receive the extension since it will enable them to record a parcel map on either February 28 or March 1, 1989 which will then enable them to sell the property to Mr. and Mrs. Bucaro whose funds will pay for the existing beneficiary's mortgage payments which are delinquent and put a stop to the foreclosure procedure on the property. It will also facilitate their construction financing on the Roadway Inn located next to the project. The loan commitment expires March 7, 1989. She respectfully urged Council's cooperation in this regard. City Attorney White. Since the matter'is not on the Council's agenda today the first matter is to determine whether it is legally appropriate to consider it at all. The provision of the Brown Act relating to the 72-hour posting requirement does not differentiate between whether the item to be acted upon is either a private or public benefit only that it is necessary to act at a meeting occurring with 72-hours after agenda posting. In his opinion, the Council would have the discretion to agendize this with the required 4/5 vote to waive the Brown Act. Secondly it still remains unclear to him what the extension of the zoning action has to do with the legal ability to record a parcel map. If Council does wish to consider this, one of the disadvantages the Council would have, the Planning Department was preparing a staff report, recommending additional conditions be imposed relating to some of the policies the Council has established in connection with this type of project since the time the application was originally approved, specifically adding a covenant relating to limiting occupancy to two persons over the age of 2 years per each bedroom and extending the affordability requirement to 30 years. Councilman Pickler was in favor of waiving the Brown Act and discussing the matter. Mayor Hunter. What may be considered an emergency to the petitioner is not necessarily so for the Council. He is not in favor of starting such a precedent. Councilwoman Kaywood. It is necessary to have staff's input. The public is also not present because it was not advertised. It is the "back door" approach that is of concern to her. Councilman Pickler moved to waive the 72-hour posting provision of the Brown Act. The motion died for lack of a second. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. She has the staff report but the numbers given by Ms. Desai are different from the ones she had received inquiries about, which is the apartment piece. Staff is going to have to get a report together for next Tuesday as well as for the project Ms. Desat referred to which is a different proposal than the one she (Santalahti) has letters for. 192 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 28, 1989, 1:30 P.M. Rashmi Desai. She referred to the City Attorney's comment that staff may have changes to add to the requirements. They have no problem with that. It is something the Council approved two years ago and one year ago. The Council can impose additional conditions but that is a separate matter. They have a project in the City and are asking that the Council let them proceed to finish it. Councilwoman Kaywood. If the Council approves an extension, it will be done as is stated and it is also without staff's additional conditions that need to be brought forth. She suggested that Ms. Desat ask for an extension from whoever she is dealing with which should not be a problem since it will be considered on next week's City Council agenda. 114: ANALYSIS OF URBAN LAND INSTITUTE (ULI) REPORT: Councilman Daly stated he has spoken to the Assistant City Manager relative to the Anaheim Plaza situation and the Urban Land Institute Report. The Council received a brief and concise summary report from the Director of Community Development, Lisa Stipkovich, shortly after the ULI refinished their study. He understands there was to be a more comprehensive report submitted to the Council on the analysis done by ULI and also a recommendation by staff as to the next steps to be taken. He asked when the in-depth report will be submitted to the Council. James Ruth, Assistant City Manager. The ULI was late getting the report back to staff. Mrs. Stipkovich will have a report forthcoming to the Council within the next two weeks. 119; LETTER OF CONDOLENCE: Councilwoman Kaywood requested that a Letter of Condolence be prepared and signed by the Council for the family of Ken Clements, former Public Information Officer for the City of Anaheim. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Hunter moved to adjourn. the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:45 p.m.) LEONORA N. $OHL, CITY CLERK Councilman Pickler seconded 193