1988/04/19City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, i988, 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler, Bay
ABS~T: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PR~SENY: CITY MANAGER: Bob Simpson
CITY ATTOrnEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohi
CITY ENGINEER: Gary E. Johnson
SENIOR PLANNER: Mary McCioskey
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Bay called the meeting to order at i2:09 p.m.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed
Session to consider the following items:
a. To confer with its attorneys 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, Orange
County Superior Court Case No. 46-96-59.
b. To discuss labor relations matters - Government Code Section
54957.6
c. To discuss personnel matters - Government Code Section 5495/.
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.
Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. Council~n Hunter
seconded the motion. M0~ION CARRIED. (12:10 p.m.)
AFTF~{ RECESS:. Mayor Bay called the meeting to order, ali Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(1:44 p.m.)
INVOCATION: Pastor Don Crider, Anaheim Free Methodist Church, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
409
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
119: PROCLA/~ATIONS: Yhe following proclamations were issued by Mayor Bay and
authcrized by the City Council:
Imagination Celebration, April 24 - May 1, 1988,
American Home Week in Anaheim, Apirl 24 - 30, 1988.
Gladys Wallace accepted the American Home Week proclamation.
119: DECLARATION: A Declaration of Appreciation was unanimously adopted by
the City Council and presented to Joe and Carrie Granado, recognizing their 25
years of providing assistance to the community by collecting food and clothing
and distributing those and other necessities to the poor of not only the
Anaheim community, but also to the southern California cities and Tijuana
Mexico.
119: PRESENTATION - CERTIFICATES OF ACHIEVEMENT TO CITY EMPLOYEES: The
following employees were presented with Certificates of Achievement issued by
the Employee Involvement Program Board of Directors along with monetary awards
ranging from $30 to $246: Dick ~yer, Park Planner; John Johnson, Substation
Test Technician Supervisor/Utilities; George Beals, Library Page; Jim Treece,
Park Maintenance Worker; Joan Perino, Laborer/Convention Center; Jon Fazzio,
Park Maintenance Worker II; Fred Villasenor, Park Maintenance Worker.
The suggestions submitted with either save City costs, improve service to the
public or prevent possible hazard.
Mayor Bay and Council Members congratulated those employees who were present
.for their suggestions/contributions.
MINUTES: Approval of the minutes was deferred to the next regular meeting.
FINA~NCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,856,529.i0, in
accordance with the 1987-86 Budget, were approved.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following
resolutions on the Consent Calendar were read by the City Manager.
(Resolution Nos. 88R-156 through 88R-i60 and Ordinance No. 4920)
Councilman Pickier moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances and
resolutions. Council,mn Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY I~%NAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONS~qT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickier,
seconded by Councilman ghrle, the following items were approved in accordance
with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council
Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilman Pickler offered
Resolution Nos. 88R-156 through 88R-100, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer
to Resolution Book. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4920 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended:
410
249
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Jacqueline Lesko for property damage and bodily
injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
December 18, 1987.
b. Claim submitted by Linda Sue Lombard for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 24, 1987.
c. Claim submitted by Mark Gerjets for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 21, 198~.
d. Claim submitted by Jerry Bohuslavizki for property damage sustained
purpcrtedly due to actions of the City on or about February 2, 198d.
e. Claim submitted by Rex Cruz for bodily injury sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about February 21, 1988.
f. Claim submitted by Raymond Comer III for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 15, 198~.
g. Claim submitted by Abdullah Azeem Asiami for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 6, 1988.
h. Claim submitted by Marta Ruth Mowery for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January id, 198~.
i. Claim submitted by Josef Benjemine for bodily injury sustained
'purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 19, 19~7.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Golf Course Advisory Commission
meeting held January 28, 19~8.
A3. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Golf Course Advisory Commission
meeting held February 16, 198~.
A4. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community ~edevelopment
Commission meeting held March
173: Receiving and filing Notice to Customers of filing application to
rais~ rates from Southern California Gas Company before the Public Utilities
Gommission.
A6. 175: A~mrding a contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder, Mel
Smith Electric, Inc. of Stanton, California, in the amount of $55,137.80 for
tb~ construction of Weir Canyon Road Electrical Ducts.
A7. 101: Awarding a contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder,
Pinner Construction Company, Inc. of Paramount, California, in the amount of
$3,370,000 for the Anaheim Stadium Exhibit Facilities, and approving the
addition of Bid Alternates 6, 9 and 10 subject to funding availability.
411
250
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
AS. 175: Accepting the Notice of Completion of Walnut Canyon Reservoir Slope
Protection Phase III, constructed by J. W. Mitchell Company of Irvine,
California, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the
Notice of Completion.
A9. 107: Accepting the Notice of Completion of the building demolition work
in the area bounded by Lemon Street, Anaheim Boulevard, Zeyn Street and La
Pa]ma Avenue, completed by American Demolition, Inc. of Santa Aha, California,
and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file the Notice of
Completion.
Al0. 123/170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 12884, concerning the
property located on the west side of Loara Street south of 0rangewood Avenue.
Tne tract contains i.605 acres divided into seven lots in the Residential
Condominium Zone (RM-3000). The developer is Bartoli Corporation of
Huntington Beach, and the engineering is being provided by Valley Consultants,
Inc. of Santa Aha; and further approving the subdivision agreement with the
Bartoli Corporation.
All. i76: RESOLUTION NO. 88R-156: A XESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL 0~ THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INYENYiON TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS,
HIGHWAYS AND SERVICE EASEMENTS. (87-iSAAND 87-i8A-i) (Declaring the intent
to vacate and abandon a public utility and sewer easement located on the south
side of Orangethorpe, east of Lemon Street, and setting a date for public
hearing; Requestor: Northrop Corp. - suggested hearing date is May 17, 19~o,
3:00 P.M.)
Al2. 151: Approving the request from Emerald Village Joint Venture to allow
the encroachment of a private sewer within Medical Center Drive west of ~uclid
'Street to service a large closed structure on the north side of Medical Center
Drive. (Permit No. 87-14E.)
Al3. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to
issue a purchase order without competitive bidding to the Anaheim Public
Improvement Corporation in the amount of $14,545.32 for one each Integrated
Workstation with one mega byte main memory for the Police Department,
Detective Division.
Al4. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to
issue a purchase order without competitive bidding to the Anaheim Public
Improvement Corporation in the amount of $126,517 for one lot Disk Storage
Enhancement for the Police Department, CAD/RMS System.
Al5. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 88R-157: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM A/~ID~G RESOLUTION NO. 87R-365 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESI~qATED AS PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL
MA/4AGEMENT. (Amending Resolution 87R-365 to create and add the classification
of Safety Manager at a salary range of SR0O, effective April 15, 1988)
Al6. 156/153: RESOLUTION NO. 88R-158: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM AJ~PKOVANG THE EMPLOYM~T OF MARTIN MiTCHELL IN THE
CAPACITY OF CHIEF OF POLICE UND~ THE PRO'VISIONS OF SECTION 21151(g) OF THE
412
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 198d, 1:30 P.M.
GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (And that the need exists to
continue his employment beyond the time limitations set forth, (May 6, 1988),
until a permanent appointment is made to this position)
Al7. 139: RESOLUTION NO. 88R-159: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ~2~AHEIM SUPPORTLIG THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION FOR CONGRESSIONAL
AIJTHORIZATION TO LINE PORTIONS OF THE ALL-AMERICAN CANAL AND ITS COACHELLA
BRANCH. (Adopting a position of support for H.R. 3988, proposed legislation
for Congressional authorization to line portions of earthen sections of the
All-American Canal and its Coaclmlla Branch, and authorizing the Mayor to sign
letters to Senators and Congressmen)
AlS. 123: Approving the Affordable Housing Agreement with Roberson and
Vazquez, A California Limited Partnership, for a total of nine affordable
multifamily rental units out of the 106 developed on the property at 2765,
2775 and 2785 West Ball Road and 910 and 920 South Dale Street.
Al9. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 88R-160: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEY~IG TO THE CITY 0FANAHEIM
CERTAIN REAL PROPE~i~IES OR INTERESTS THEREIN.
A20. 149/142: 0RDIN~ICE NO. 4920: AN 0RDINMICE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEiM
REVISLqG CERTAIN SECTIONS OF TITLE i4 OF THE ANAHEIM MONICIPAL CODE TO
PROHIBIT STOPPinG OR PARKING VEHICLES ON ANY PORTION OF BEACH BOULEVARD.
(Amending Sections 14.32.189 and .190 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to
prohibit stopping at any time on both sides of Beach Boulevard from the norti~
to the south City limits; Introduced April 12, i988)
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 88R-156 through 88R-160:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickier and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 88R-156 through 88R-160, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 4920:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickier'and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4920 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTIONS CARRIED.
105: APPOhqTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY CENTE~ AUTHORITY BO~RD: Appointment to
fill the vacancy created by the passing of Burr Williams. The vacancy was
posted on March 10, 1988. This matter was continued from the meetings of
March 29, 1988 and April 12, 1988, to this date.
413
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Bay. He opened nominations and nominated Jim Riley to the Community
Center Authority (CCA) Board. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the nomination.
Councilman Pickler nominated Aidon Esping; Councilwoman Kaywood noted that Mr.
Esping would not have time to serve during the s,~mmer and the Board needed to
have someone available ali of the time.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to close nominations. Councilman Hunter
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A Roll Call Vote was then taken on the nominations in the order in which they
were nominated.
Roll Call Vote on James Riley:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrie, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
Councilman Pickier moved to declare a unanimous ballot. Councilman Bay
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. James Riley was thereupon unanimously appointed to serve on the Community
Center Authority Board.
123: CINCO DE MAYO FIESTA: Submitted was staff report dated April 12, 1938,
from Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation & Community Services,
recommending that the Council approve an agreement with the Cinco de Mayo
'Comm~ ttee for the promotion of their Eighteenth Annual Fiesta, and considering
a request from the Committee for $1,500 in support of the Fiesta's
activities. The Committee is also requesting permission to conduct an amateur
boxing contest as part of the Fiesta.
Councilman Pickier moved to (1) appropriate $1500 from the Council Contingency
Fund to support the Cinco de Mayo Fiesta; (2) approve an agreement with the
Cinco de Mayo Committee covering teams of funding for the event; (3) granting
permission to the Cinco de Mayo Committee to conduct an amateur boxing contest
as part of the event, as recommended in report dated April 12, 198d from the
Director of Marks, Recreation & Community Services. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
123/156/153: APPOiNTMENT OF CHIEF OF POLICE: Submitted was report dated
April i2, 1988 from the Human Resources Director, Gary McRae, recommending
that the Council approve the appointment of Joseph T. Molloy to the position
of Chief of Police, effective June 6, 1988, authorizing the City Manager to
execute an agreement relating to supplementary retirement benefits, and
approving certain employment provisions as listed in his report.
Mr. Molloy was present; the City Manager stated it would be an opportunity for
the new Chief of Police to introduce himself and his family who were also
present in the Chamber audience.
414
245
C%ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL M~UTES - April 19, 198d, 1:30 P.M.
James T. Molloy. He expressed his and his family's gratitude for the honor of
the appointment which is a highlight of his law enforcement career. He is
looking forward to a long, exciting and challenging career with the City of
Anaheim and its Police Department. He then introduced his wife Pam and their
youngest son Michael. In concluding, he expressed his appreciation for the
confidence shown in him.
124:- RESULTS OF THE BETTERMENT III BOND SALE - COMMdNITY CENTER AUTHORITY -
LEASE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES E - $64,635,000 ISSUE: Finance Director, George
Ferrone introduced Mr. John Fitzgerald of Seidler & Fitzgerald to report on
the subject bond sale.
Mr. John Fitzgerald of Seidler & Fitzgerald, the City's Financial Advisors,
reported that six bids were received at 10:00 a.m. today and the Community
Center Authority opened the bids on the $04,635,000 revenue bond sale. The
low bid was submitted by Smith Barney Harris Upham Company with a net interest
rate of 7.8622%. The low bid came in at 39/100 of 1% below the index. It was
extremely strong bidding and a very good interest rate. Bill Currier, on
behalf of the Community Center Authority awarded the bonds to the iow bidder
Smith Barney Harris Upham Company.
Mayor Bay. He thanked Mr. Fitzgerald for his report and also thanked Mr.
Ferrone and his staff who had worked on the issue and stated, on behalf of the
Council, that he is looking forward to seeing Betterment III start to happen.
RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for ten minutes. (2:07 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (2:20 p.m.)
127/164: STORM DRAIN BOND ISSUE: Request from Councilwoman Kaywood to
discuss placing the Storm Drain Bond issue on the November ballot.
Councilwoman Kaywood. With about $40 million worth of storm drain needs, a
$10 million bond issue was passed by the voters in 1980 and that work is
presently in progress. There is still a deficiency of approximately $35
million. That being the case, sl~e is asking that a storm drain boad issue be
placed on the November ballot which~ if successful will help to alleviate this
deficiency.
Gary Johnson, City Engineer. (See his report dated April 5, 19~ along with
his previous report of March 7, 1988 attached to which was a Storm Drain
Deficiencies list which showed 32 projects that needed to be done). They are
progressing well with the bond issues they now have, the largest project being
the Euclid Street storm drain to be advertised in early May which they wiil be
bringing to the Council for award in late June. They will be drawing down on
the $10 million easily within the next 3-year period.
Mayor Bay. He questioned the Walnut Canyon Channel Project in the amount of
$1,500,000 being on the list. He believed that was planned into this year's
2-year budget. He does not question it being a high priority but thought it
was already planned in the budget.
415
246
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES -April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
Gary Johnson. He confirmed t~mt was correct but they have been seeking other
funds for that as well, federal funds, county flood control funds, etc. it
was included because they do not have the funds in hand. He also clarified
that the projects shown on the list were not in priority order. Therefore,
the first project listed is not necessarily the most important.
Mayor Bay. He has noproblem putting a storm drain bond issue on the November
ballot, just the question of how much based on what priorities. He personally
feels it should not be less than $20 million which would take care of the
higher priority projects. He does not know how they are going to make up
deficiencies in the storm drains in the City without the people approving it
and making it a bond issue. No-one on the Council has ever been against storm
drains and the need for them.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved that a $20 million storm drain bond issue
be placed on the November 1988 ballot. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Bay noted that the issue must pass by a 66 2/3 percent Vote;
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she would be happy to write the ballot argument
once again.
ITemS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Helen Payne, 1406 Castle Avenue, Anaheim, Ca. 92802. As a member of Anaheim
HOME ~he was present to read a Notice of Intention to circulate a petition
within the City of Anaheim for the purpose of amending the Anaheim Municipal
Code which would add a tax on admission to entertainments. She thereupon read
the Notice of Intention (previously submitted to the City Clerk).
'Councilwoman Kaywood felt the way it was written would lead one to believe
that Anaheim had a utility surcharge and that was not the case nor had such a
clmnge been considered; Betty Ronconi, 124i So. Walnut stated that although
Anaheim does not have a utility surcharge it was considered - if not
considered, it was discussed.
Later in the meeting, Councilman Pickler stated that he wanted the HOME group
to know tlxat he does not approve of what they are tryir~g to do. It would not
be of benefit to the City. Walt Disney Productions alone is the 9th larsest
producer of tax in the County of close to $3 million. The~ pay for roads,
fire and police. Past Mayor Bill Thom and Steve White are influencing this
group. He feels what they are trying to do is a detriment. This attempt is
"killing the goose that laid the golden egg." Citizens should know it is only
a small group trying to do something detrimental. It will cause Disneyland,
the Angels and the Rams to turn away from Anaheim. The City is what it is
today because of these entities. If the petition initiative should happen to
be successful, he wants people to know what is happening and to think before
they vote what they will be doing to their community.
Hugo Vazquez, 619 So. Live Oak Drive. He referred to Ordinance No. 4913
recently adopted by the Council as it relates to Reclassification No. 86-87-14
for which the recordation of the Parcel Map is now pending. (2238-2240 West
Lincoln Avenue) - the property on which his offices are located. Yhe 3-acre
416
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
property took almost two years to acquire. One of the principals lives in
Tipei. The Parcel Map cannot record since they cannot reach that beneficiary
who has to sign the Parcel Map before it is recorded. They are desperately
working to get that signature. One of the conditions on the project is to
have two readings of their zoning ordinance but this cannot be done until the
Parcel Map is filed. The new park in-lieu fees adopted under Ordinance No.
4913 will be in effect at 12:01 a.m. on April 29, 1988. He is requesting a
30-day extension of time to allow the two readings to take place and for the
Parcel Map to become finalized enabling them to pull their building permits,
thus avoiding the large increase in park in-lieu fees for a project which
started two years ago.
Mayor Bay. The Council cannot take action without waiving the Brown Act if
they choose to do so. Otherwise, the request should go through staff and then
through the Council so that they will have staff information.
Councilman Pickier. There tmve been many developers who have submitted their
plans to Plan Check where they have had to wait a long period of time. The
new park in-lieu fee schedule was adopted on March 29, 1988 with the ordinance
soon to go into effect whereby many developers will have to pay the increased
fees. He would like the matter on the agenda for discussion with the idea of
clarifying which direction they may want to go. The situation is not fair not
only to this developer but others whose plans have been in process. He does
have a concern and would like the matter to be placed on the agenda for review
and a conclusion. He will not be present for the next two Council meetings so
would suggest a 2 to 3-w~ek delay.
City Attorney, Jack White. The ordinance that has been adopted will take
effect 12:01 a.m. on April 29, 1988 which will be prior to the Council's
-second meeting after today. The ordinance as it exists would apply to any
building permits that are issued on and after April 29, 1988 and will require
the fee to be paid as it will change on tim 29th of April. The only Council
action that could forestall or change that would be to amend the ordinance
recently adopted to change the effective date or provide some other
administrative relief from the payment of those fees. If a change is made
later, they cannot retroactively go back and adopt the fees that have been
paid. If there is any thought of changing the ordinance, he feels it would be
better to address that before it takes effect.
Gouncllwoman Kaywood. The Mayor had pointed out there is always someone
caught during the time an ordinance is adopted and when it takes effect. The
fact that it has been i2 years since the fees have been changed, everybody has
been getting a large bargain. She would be opposed to changing anything at
this point in time.
Council discussion followed on the issue during which Councilman Hunter
pointed out that it is not when plans are approved that the fees are to be
paid, but when the building permit is issued. They made a decision to have
the park in-lieu fees go into effect at a certain date and they should stick
to tfmt. If not, it will cause a lot of unnecessary problems.
417
244
City Ball, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. Staff has been expediting plan checks for the
residential projects that are subject to the ordinance. By the end of the
week, or prior to the ordinance taking effect, staff will have gone through
and completed ali plan checks for single-family and multiple family projects
eligible to pull building permits. There are projects including that of Mr.
Vazquaz that have unique situations where they have not been able to pull
permits and he feels that is what the Council is hearing about. He
reiterated, on those projects eligible to puL1 permits, staff nas been working
with the development community to expedite those. If there are any they have
missed, they will work with the developers between now and the effective date
of the ordinance.
Hugo Vazquez. He made a recommendation if at all possible that any plans
submitted six months ago to the Building Department that these projects could
potentially be exempt from the new fees. The reason he is proposing that,
there was no developer who knew the new fees were coming. He feels that six
months is a reasonable time period and is recommending that those be looked at
in a different light.
Mayor Bay. He is going to move on with the Council agenda unless there is a
motion to put something on the agenda on this subject. There was no further
action taken by the Council and there were no further persons who wished to
speak to the matter..
CITY PLANNING CO~MISSION ITM4S: The following actions taken by the City
Planning Commission at their meeting held March 28, 1988, pertaining to the
following applications were submitted for City Council information.
Cl. G~ERAL PLAN AMFaqDMENT NO. 227 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
INITIATED BY TNg CITY OF ANAHEIM, 200 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD, Ai~AHEIM,
CA 92805
LOCATION: Area generally bounded by La Palma Avenue to the north, the
Union Pacific Railway on the east, Cypress Street to the south and
Anaheim Boulevard to the west (excluding the area bounded by Wiiheimina
Street, Sabina Street, Sycamore Street and the Union Pacific Railway).
%0 consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan
proposing redesignation from Medium Density Residential to Low-Medium
Density Residential.
APPROVAL of Exhibit A recommended by the Planning Commission, PC88-83.
APPROVED Negative Declaration.
See Public Hearing set this date.
C2.
VARIANCE NO. 3749AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OWNERS: LUIS GONZALES & MARIA DEJESUS GONZAI,ES, 2240 W. Lincoln Avenue,
Anaheim CA 92801
AGENTS: DENMIS DIAMOND/HUGO VASQUEZ, 2240 Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA
92801
418
241
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
LOCATION: 426 N. Claudina Street
Waivers of (a) req'uired coverage of parking spaces and (b) maximum
structural height to construct a 4-unit apartment building.
WITHDRAWN by the Applicant.
C3.
VARIANCE NO. 3750AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OWNERS: DENNIS DIAMOND '& SANDRA DIAMOND,' 2240 W. Lincoln Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 92801
AGENT: HUGO VASQUEZ, 2240 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801
LOCATION: 524 N. Olive Street
The Variance is for waivers ot (a) maximum site coverage, (b) minimum
recreational/leisure area and (c) permitted access for parking to
construct a 4-unit apartment building.
WITHDRAWN by the Applicant.
C4. CONDITIONAL USE PEIIMIT NO. 2995 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
OWNERS: CHEVY CHASE ANAH~LM PARTNERS, 200 North Harbor Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: Subject property consists of approximately 15 acres located
south of the 91 (Riverside Freeway), north of Romneya Drive, west of
Manzanita Park and east of Patrick Henry Elementary School.
To permit approximately 15 acres of existing apartments to be
rehabilitated as a planned residential development with waivers of (a)
type, size and screening of carports, (b) minimum setbacks adjacent to
streets.
GRANT~D, IN PART, CUP NO. 2995 by the Planning Commission, PC88-87
GRANTEO, IN PART, Waiver of Code Requirement
APPROVED Negative Declaration
C5. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2992 AND NEGATIVE
DF, CLAKATION
~S:
92802
GAIL VARY AND MURIEL V. VARY, 1616 S. Euclid, #14, Anaheim, CA
LEONARD JOE CHAIDEZ, 721 N. Morse Drive, Santa Aha, CA 92703
LOCATION: 507 S. Lemon Street
To permit a contractor's storage yard with waivers of (a) minimum
landscaped setback, (b) required screening adjacent to residential zone,
(c) required enclosure of outdoor uses.
GRANTED IN PART, waiver c of CUP NO. 2992 by the Planning Commission
?C88-85
GRANT~) ~l PART, waiver of code requirement
APPROVED Negative Declaration.
/;i9 '
24'2
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 198~, 1:30 P.M.
CO. VARIANCE NO. 3773 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL
NO. 68-01
OWNER:
AGENT:
TRIDER CORPORA'lION, 12 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA
GARY MC CANN, i2 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92660
92660
LOCATION: 270 S. Mohler Drive
The Variance is for a waiver of maximum structural height to construct
11 single-family residential units (7 exceeding maximum structural
height), and request for removal of i1 specimen trees.
DENIED Variance No. 3773 by the Planning Commission, PC88-84
DENIED Specimen Tree Removal No. 88-01
APPROVEDNegative Declaration.
Received letter of appeal on this decision from Trider Corp and public
hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
The Planning Commission's decision was appealed by the applicant and,
therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
C7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2993AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
OWNERS: ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CORPORATION, 17315 Studebaker Rd., Artesia,
CA 90702-6411
AGENT: W. F. Reynolds, 24785 Lagrima, Mission Viejo, CA 9Z692
LOCATION: 1037 West Ball Road
To permit the expansion of an existing convenience market with gasoline
sales with a waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
DENIED CUP NO. 2993 by the Planning Commission, PC88-86
DM~IED Waiver of Code Requirement
APPROVED Negative Declaration
A letter of appeal was filed from Atlantic Richfield Company and public
hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
REPORTS AND REC0~%ENDATIONS
C7. EVALUATION OF CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROVISION OF
RECREATION-LEISURE AREA IN MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES
C8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1515 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION
Request from R. S. Minnick (property owner) for termination o~
Conditional Use permit No. 1515.
TERMINATED by the Planning Commission, PC88-94
C9. VARIANCE NO. 35~3 - EXTk~SION OF TIME
Request from Linda aorning of Kaufman, Broad for retroactive time
extension for Variance No. 3563 (which expired on May 28, 1987) in order
to comply with conditions of approval.
420
239
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, .198~ 1:30 P.M.
APPROVED by the Planning Commission.
CiO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2602 -AMEND CONDITION
Petitioner requests amendment of Conditional Use Permit No. 2602,
(specifically Condition No. 11 of Council Resolution No. 84R-393)
pertaining to the restriction of nonambulatory persons only. The
amendment is requested so as to allow ambulatory persons as well as
nonambulatory persons.
APPROVED by the Planning Commission
Since this is a request to amend conditions of approval in a Council
Resolution, a public hearing wiii be scheduled before the City Council
at a later date.
Cll. CONDITION CONCERNING 0VERCKOWOED SCHOOLS - NOTICE OF:
Proposed condition to be included in Planning Commission actions
requiring disclosure of overcrowded schools to future property owners
and tenants. (Requested by Planning Commission at the March 14, i~88,
meeting.)
City Planning Commission instructed staff to initiate.
015/114: REQUEST FOR JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL: See last portion
of City Council minutes for additional information and discussion.
C12. LAND USE STATUS REPORT FOR EUCLID STREET BETWEEN CRIS AVENUE
KATF~3.~ AVENUE (Inf0rmatidn only) (~equeste~ by Planning Commissiod at
the March 14, 198~, meeting).
NO ACTION by the Planning Commission.
CITY Pi~INING CO~4ISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City
Planning Commission at their meeting held April Il, 1988, pertaining to the
following applications were submitted for City Council information.
C13. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 281 (PREV. CERTIFIED), TENTATIVE T~ACT
NOS. 13267,1345§,13459,13460,13461 AND $?E¢IM~N TR~E F~/MOVaL NO. 88-02
OWNER: BALDWIN BUILDING COMPANY, A GENERAL PARTNEKSHIP, 16611 Hale
Avenue, Irvine, CA 92714
AGENT: DIANA HOARD, THE BALDWIN COMPANY, 16811 Hale Avenue, Irvine, CA
92Y14
LOCATION: Property is approximately 56 gross acres, located within the
the northwestern portion of the Summtt of Anaheim Hills (formerly Oak
Hills Ranch), to the north and west of the future northerly expansion of
Serrano Avenue, bounded on the west by the Highlands at Anaheim Hills,
and bounded on the north by Sycamore Canyon (former Wallace Ranch).
Request for removal of 47 specimen trees.
'42I
240
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 198~, 1:30 P.M.
Request for conditional exception to permit Lot No. 30, Tentative Tract
No. 13267 at less than 120 feet in depth adjacent to Serrano Avenue and
tentative tract maps are listed below:
TENTATIVE TRACT No. 13267, 30-lot plus two landscape easement
lot's/single-family residential detached subdivision.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13458, 30-lot plus one open space lot and one
landscape easement lot/sfngle-family residential subdivision.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. i3459, 29-1ot plus one open space lot/single-family
residential subdivision.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13460, 37-1ot plus one open space lot and one
landscape easement lot'/si'ngle-famiiy residential detached subdivision.
Th2NTATIVE TRACT NO. 1346~, 30-lot plus two open space lots and one
landscape easement lot/single-family residential detached subdivision.
APPROVED TRACTS by t~e Planning Commission
APPROVED SPECIi,~N TREE R~0VALN0. 88-02
C14. T~qTATIVE TRACT NO. 10982 (REVISION NO. 2)
Request for review of specific plans from Linda Homing, Kaufman and
Broad, on property located south and west of the intersection of Bauer
Road and Monte Vista Road.
End of Planning Commission Informational Items.
'179: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION - MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1988:
C15. VARIANCE NO. 3765 - CATEGORICAIiY EXEMPT, CLASS 3a
OWNERS: JAMES T~STILLAND MAUREEN TUNSTILL, 6215 New Haven Court,
Yorba Linda, California 92680
LOCATION: 7415 East Hl,mminsbird Circle
The Variance is for a waiver of maximum structural height to construct a
30-foot high, single-family residence.
A~PROVED, IN PART, by the Zoning Administrator, with'the highest portion
not to exceed 27 feet, ZA88-1!
C16. VA~LIANCE NO. 3766 - CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 3E
OWNER: ~4BEE MANAGEMENT INC., 1411 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805
AG~qT: PAUL BOSI~WICK, 1411 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92~05
LOCATION: 1411 S. Anaheim Boulevard
The Variance is for waivers of (a) minimum front setback and permitted
encroachments and (b) maximum fence height to construct an 8-foot high
wrought iron fence adjacent to Midway Drive and Anaheim Boulevard.
APPROVED by the Zoning Administrator with 2 added conditions, ZA88-18
422
237
City ~a!l, Anaheim, California - COUNCiL MINUTES -April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
C17. VAALIANCE NO. 3769 - CATEGORICALLY EXk~qPT~ CLASSES ~ AND i
OWNER: JACK E. KRUGER, 'i0i9 N. 6ambria Place, Anaheim, CA 92801
LOCATION: 1019 North Cambria Place
Waivers of ga) minimum dimensions of parking spaces, and (b) minimum
"front-on" garage setback to construct a 1-story, 982 square-foot,
addition to an existing single-fmm~ly residence.
APPROVED by the Zoning Administrator, ZA88-19
VARIANCE NO. 3775AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OWNER: GENERAL FOODS CORPORATION, Attn: W. C. Kessler, 1515 E. Katella
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92B05
AGENT: SHOOK BOILDING SYSTEMS, iNC., Attn: Chris Quesada, 2055 S.
Baker Avenue, Ontario, CA 91761
LOCATION: 1515 East Katella Avenue
The Variance is for a waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to
retain an approximately 153,612 square-foot warehouse and wholesale
distribution facility.
APPROVED by the Zoning Administrator, ZA88-20
End of the Zoning Administrator Informational Items.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINA~qCES: The titles of the following ordinances were
read by the City Clerk. (Ordinance Nos. 4922 and 49Z3)
Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the ordinances.
.Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CAR/~ED.
185: ORDINANCE NOS. 4922 AND 4923 - OEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 88-01 (WOOOCREST)
AND 88-02 (PKESLEY): Councilman Bay offered Ordinance Nos. 4922 and 4923 f~r
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4922: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(i) A~PROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGtLEEMENT BYAND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANANEIMA/qD
THE PKESLEY COMPANIES, (ii) FINDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SAID DEV~0PMENT
AGKEEMENT APsE GONSISTENT WIT~ THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF ANAhEiM, AND
(iii) AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT FOR AND
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
ORDINANCE NO. 4923: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(i) APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIMAND
WOODCREST DEVELOPMENT, INC., (ii) FINDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SAID
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ANO (iii) AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR~D CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREFA~NT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
Roll Call Vote:
423
238
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MIJ~UTES - A?ril 19, 1988~ 1:30 P.M.
AYES:
NOES:
ABS~T:
COUNCIL MEMBFAiS: Ehrle,
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MgMBf2{S: None
Hunter, Kaywood,
Pickler and Bay
The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 4922 and 4923 duly passed and adopted.
174: ORDinANCE NO. 4924: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4924 for first
reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4924: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHE~AMEND~NG THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE KELATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18 to rezone property under Reclassification No. 86-87-12
located at 402, 415 and 419 South Helena Street)
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4925: Councilman Pickier offered Ordinance No. 4925 for
first reading.
ORDINAaNCE NO. 4925: AN ORDinANCE OF THE CITY OF ~AHEIMAMENDING THE ZONiNG
MAP REFERRED TO iN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE ~'.~T~G TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 1~ to rezone property under Reclassification No. 87-8~-19
located at 1660-i664 West Broadway)
RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for ten minutes. (2:55 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, ail Council Members
being present. (3:07 p.m.)
134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PL~2~AMENDMENT NO. 227 - ~qD NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
INITIATED BY
The City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA 92~05
REQUEST/LOCATION: To consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the
General Plan proposing redesignation from Medium Density Residential to
Low-Medium Density Residential. The area generally bounded by La Pm]ma Avenue
to the north, the Union Pacific Railway on the east, Cypress Street to ti~e
south and Anaheim Boulevard to the west (excluding the area bounded by
Wilhelmina Street, Sabina Street, Sycamore Street and the Union Pacific
Railway).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Kesolution No. PC88-83 recommended approval of
Kxnibit "A" - iow medium density residential in the 95.~ acre study area.
PO~LIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin April 7, 198~.
Posting of property April 8, 1988.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 11, 1988.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 28, 1988.
424
235
City Hall, AnAheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
STAFF PRESENTATION:
Mary McCloskey, Senior Planner.
The subject General Pian Amendment was initiated by the City of
Anaheim at the request of the Central City Neighborhood
Council. The study area encompasses approximate 96 net acres
with 610 lots and 966 dwelling units. She then briefed portions
of the staff report s,~mm~rizing the characteristics of the
lots within the study area (see Page 2 of the report) as weli as
the theoretical maximum number of units that could be allowed
under the medium density residential designation whici~ is the
existing General Plan (3,442); and the number that theoretically
could be built under the low medium density residential
designation (1,72i).
The Planning Commission on April 11, 1988 has considered a
recommended approval of a Reclassification for the majority of
this study area to RM-2400 subject to the General Plan Amendment
being considered today. The Reclassification portion will be on
the City Council meeting agenda Consent Calendar on May 3,
1988. Keith Pepper of the Central City Neighborhood Council
(CCNC) is present to discuss the results of the survey made in
the neighborhood regarding the redesignation. She also later
confirmed for the Mayor that the current General Plan for the
area was set in 1963 and the Zoning has been in place since 1951.
Keith Pepper, 8i7 North Lemon Street. Member of the Board -
Central City Neighborhood Councii. He explained that over a
year ago, the Planning Commission generated the proposed General
Plan Amendment at the request of numerous long-time property
owners. It was determined that the proposed change wouid be to
RM-2400 which would allow for double the number of existing
units in the area. It was considered to be a reasonable
alternative to strictly single-family which would halt any
growth.
At the request of the Planning Commission and the Council, they
set out to survey the property owners. The survey was conducted
strictly with the property owners who were on record. Whe
initial mailins was in June, 1987, and a second mailing in
August, 1987. In August and September, they also attempted to
make personal contact with owners who had not previously
responded. In addition, the CCNC newsletter was mailed monthly
to over 300 properties describing the boundaries and encouraging
response.
In March, 1988, they delivered notices of the public heariug to
all properties, held a neighborhood meeting a~d last week agai~
delivered notices notifying the properties themselves. As noted
by the letter included in the Council packet from Ms. Terri
Young of J2 Marketing, a survey such as this would normally
achieve a one and one-half to 5% response. With their efforts,
they achieved a 34% response rate and a 46% response rate in the
425
236
City Hall, AnAheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April .19, 1988~ 1:30 P.M.
area that is subject to the Reclassification. Eighty-four
percent of those responding were in favor of the change. The
General Plan Amendment is supported by both on and off-site
owners, the elderly, Hispanics, the Police and Fire Association
and residents in the surrounding area. It provides the City
with an opportunity to implement several strategies of Vision
2000 ~nich are geared to maintaining the integrity of the City's
neighborhoods.
Mr. Pepper then clarified for the Mayor that in the two mailings
to ail of the property owners they took in the entire area and
mailed twice. There was a 34% response. Then they physically
went to the property owners and tried to talk to them on a
one-to-one basis. For that, they dealt strictly with the area
subject to the Reclassification which is the smaller area.
Within the area indicated by the darker brown on the posted map,
those are the people they tried to contact personally subject
not only to the General Pian Amendment but also the
Reclassification and within that area achieved a 46% response.
The 84% favorable response was figured against the total.
The following people then spoke to the proposed General Plan Amendment. Their
reasons for either opposing or favoring the change to the General Plan are
s-mmarized below.
Josephine Montoya - Opposed.
She is asking for an exception to be made in her parents' case
at 3i0 North Philadelphia Street, one house from the corner of
Philadelphia and Cypress. This property has one foot in the
Redevelopment Project Area and one foot in the subject area. A
letter lms been supplied to the Council by LenLawicki along
with photographs (previously made a part of the record). She
briefed the background leading to her request today,
specifically that her parents have been living on the property
for 32 years and ~mve an opportunity to sell it to a developer
who wants to put three units on the property, if the proposed
change is approved, only 2 units can be allowed. No one
contacted her parants who speak only Spanish.
Leonard Lawickl, Realtor - Opposed.
He had the property at 310 North Philadelphia Street for sale.
The property had been on the market for almost a year and prior
to that another year. The property is 42 feet wide and 157 feet
deep. They lost l0 feet due to the widening of the alley. The
property is on the fringe of redevelopment and the change timt
may take place. The house is beyond its economic life having
been built in i887. It is also beyond restoration and he
reiterated it is on the fringe of redevelopment and the
commercial area.
426
233
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 19~6, 1:30 P.M.
Vernelle Hayward, 3~8 North Beach Boulevard - Opposed.
He is speaking for the 310 North Philadelphia Street property.
He believes they have something to offer the City that would be
beneficial to those on a small scale who would like to move or
to develop or to exercise their basic property rights.
Mitchell Caldwell, 902 West Broadway - In Favor.
He is present as a representative of the Anaheim Neighborhood
Association (ANA). The Reclassification will encourage the area
to remain single-family and will discourage the demolition of
those homes and keep ti~ area going as it has been going where
families are moving back in. ANA conducted a survey through the
92~05 Zip Code and received a tremendous response saying they
are in favor of a Jeneral Plan Amendment and the
Reclassification. The information had previously been submitted
but he is again submitting the results of the survey for Council
review (survey sheets submitted).
Judy Olesen, 321 North Philadelphia Street, Secretary of the
CCNC - In Favor.
The General Plan Amendment will enhance and protect the subject
area while avoiding future problems. The proposed GPA and
Reclassification encourages owner-occupied housing while stiii
allowing new development. Where has been a dramatic change in
the area in owner-occupancy. It has gone from predominantly
rental to the current status of owner-occupied. The vast
majority of properties in the subject area were originally built
and have remained at iow density level. Only a small amount of
properties have been developed to RM-i200 densities or have been
allowed to deteriorate beyond ti~ point of practical repair.
RM-2400 addresses the concerns and needs of ali the property
owners and offers the most practical and desirable compromise to
meet those needs. The net result of the GPA and the
Reclassification will be an overall improvement of appearance,
value and quality of life in the subject area.
Allen Clendenon, 900 East Cypress - in Favor.
~hrough a random survey of the east Central Neighborhood Area,
the general consensus is that everyone is in favor of
down-zoning of t~at area in order to decrease the density.
Having done a comparison regarding prices of homes in Anaheim
and Orange in a similar type property, in a period of a year or
so if Anaheim property increases to the level of the homes in
Orange ($i60,000) property owners would realize a much better
return on their investment with no capital improvement rather
than under the RM-1ZO0 zone.
Bob McCorkle, 607 North Zeyn - in Favor.
There is no relationship or connection at all with what they are
trying to do in this area to the slow growth or anti-development
initiative. Yhe move to change the General Plan started two
years ago. Yhis represents a change in the fabrication of the
427
234
City Ms1 l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL M_hNUTES - April 19, 1986, 1:30 P.M.
demographics of the area. He is very much in favor of the area
being reclaimed by single-family owners.
Agnes Erickson, 30i East North Street - in Favor.
There are many bungalow type homes in the area or all small
homes. Many kave been repaired and remodeled. Apartments wouid
be detrimental to the area. She submitted a picture showi~xg a
new apartment building timt had been constructed along side the
small bungalow type homes.
Francis Nutto, 621 Jamboiaya - in Favor.
He lives outside the immediate area. He feels that limiting
growth in the subject area to something reasonable will aiso
limit the traffic. It would also help to forestall those who
might want to promote anti-growth initiatives which are
generally not good for a community. He hopes the Council wiii
not only adopt the General Plan Amendment but also follow up
with an area-wide single rezoning petition changing all the
zoning up or down to the appropriate zone which would be RM-2400.
Ellen Evans, Acacia Ranch Realty - Opposed.
Her firm represents the client at 3i0 North Philadelphia
Street. The developers proposed plans for the property will
cost approximately $~50,0u0 for the iand and building which will
be something of pride for the City of Anaheim. She urged a no
vote.
Dick Slater, 735 North Olive - In Favor.
He has upgraded i~s property three times the amount he paid for
it. There are a number of duplexes in the area with garages
behind them that are full of people. There are too many people
in that area who would not be there if the laws were enforced.
Vivian Engelbrecht, 2i~ So. Florette - Opposed.
She is definitely opposed as far as ~r own personal property is
concerned. There was a prior redirection and the people who
were for down grading the Redevelopment Project Area by one-half
were the very first to leave the area. She owns property at
Mills Drive - a very short street one block ~outh of La Palma
from Anaheim Boulevard to Olive Street. She bas owned it for 20
years. Her intention, after paying for it, is to develop it in
income units for her retirement income. She already has had a
piece of property taken in downtown Anaheim which has been in
"limbo" for 8 years. Sim is still very much in favor of the
beautification of Anaheim. She would like to develop her
property for six units. She turned down Si10,000 for her
property two years ago. She reiterated it is the block-deep
area from Anaheim Boulevard to Olive Street. ~here are
attractive units in there now. There are also a number of
single-family residents in the area that have as many as 12
people in them. In spite of zoning inspections, there are a
number of garages being used as houses illegally. Yhe land 428
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - A~ril 1~, 198~, 1:30 P.M.
value for six units is $130,000. If downgraded to three units,
she would be losing $75,000.
William Parneii, 115 East North Street - In Favor.
He does not live far from the area Mrs. Engelbrecht was talking
about. The units that imve been built there look like sore
thumbs and tb~y take away from the privacy of the homes on both
sides of the units.
Marjory Booth - In Favor.
She is very much in favor of the c~mnge.
high-rise apartments next to her.
She does not want
Harry Gossett, owner of property at 2il and 2i3 East Mills -
Opposed.
He has seen good changes. ~he area has been upgraded with new
units. Old houses have been torn down and new units built.
Donna Berry, 511 East Broadway - In Favor.
She is a Redevelopment Commissioner but is not speaking in that
official capacity. Relative to the request for proposals for
Parcels 14 and 22 south of the subject area, she is trying to
encourage ownership units because pride of ownership is
beneficial to an area.
Keith Pepper.
He countered the concerns expressed by those in opposition.
KM-240U does not prevent development of any property or prevent
the property owner from requesting variances which may be in
order. Property owners were notified five different ways, nine
separate times. This is something overwhelmingly supported by
all of the people.
Mayor Bay.
in his opinion, t~m survey information is not conclusive since
the survey was not performed by staff; 34% of the notices were
returned in writing; 84% of that response was favorable to the
General Plan Amendment. however, 84% of 34% is only 2S.36% of
the property owners. Twenty Eight percent of the owners of the
property in almost a 100-acre area are saying that they favor
the General Plan Amendment. It is not even close to a
majority. Less than one-third are stating they are in favor of
down zoning from KM-i200 to R~i-2400. in his opinion, even if
they nad 51% which is required under City Code to set up, for
instance, a Street Lighting Assessment District it would be
questionable. In this case they are talking about large costs
to property owners, perhaps halving the value of their property
and attempting to do that on a 2~% response that bas not been
verified or shown to anyone.
Councilman ~unter.
He disagrees with the Mayor.
429
If the entire population had
232
C. ity Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- April 19, 198~, 1:30 P.M.
responded, 84% would have held throughout the entire area. He
feels it is necessary to down zone the area to RM-2400. The
effort has been going on for a couple of years. There are
people on Helena and Dickel Streets to the south that are
equally as concerned. The CCNC should be complemented for the
work they have done and the survey taken which was also in
Spanish every time it was sent out. The President of the
Anaheim Police Association and the President of the Anaheim Fire
~ighters Association equally endorse a down zoning of the area.
They cannot continue throughout the City to allow high density
units. Otherwise, it will have a major impact on the police
officers and firefighters in this City. The GPA to down zone
the entire area is for the benefit of everybody in t~ City. it
is a matter of quality of life.
Mr. Keith Olesen, answering Councilman Pickler, explained that
the documents he had submitted were copies of response cards
that were mailed out as an independent survey basically to asx
the question of whether or not the residents supported the
proposed GPA. it was mailed to the surrounding 9ZS05 Zip Code.
Councilman Pickler.
He is not ready to vote on ti~ matter today. He would like to
see staff send out a survey. He feels they are acting in haste
to take action today. He thereupon moved to continue tha matter
for one month. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
Before any action was taken, Councilman Hunter spoke in
opposition to the proposed continuance. The amendment was
recommended unanimously by tim Planning Commission, surveys were
done by the CCNC which in essence is a branch of government as
well as a separate survey done by the ANA. Persons in the area
had many opportunities to come forward and speak on the
subject. Out of the entire area, one house is in escrow and a
few other homeowners are in opposition. The great majority
favor down zoning to KM-2400. The Council should vote today
because enou§h information is available to make a decision. He
is adamantly opposed to any continuation.
Mayor Bay.
He feels the argument for a continuance is to give the
opportunity to check the accuracy of the data presented to the
Council and on the basis doing an inarguable, objective survey
on the owners of the property. He is very concerned about the
owners and their opinion because they are the ones that have the
most at stake. It is a continuation with the idea of doing a
proper survey and one that is not arguable.
Mary McCloskey.
If staff is to do a survey, a 2-month continuance would be a
more feasible time frame in which to accomplish that survey.
Otherwise, staff could submit a report in a couple of weeks on
how the survey that was done was conducted.
430
229
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 19, 198~, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Pickler.
Ne will ct~age his motion to 2 months if timt time is needed.
in the meantime, answering Counciiwoman Kaywood, if the Council
wants to place a moratorium on construction in the area, he has
no problem with that.
Councilman Ehrle.
He has done his own survey by driving the area, talking to
people in the area and at churches and schools. His personal
survey has revealed that people are tired of a lot of apartments
in downtown Anaheim. The issue is not apartments but density,
overcrowding and traffic and with greater density there is
greater crime. People in the inner-city want single-family
homes which are defined in many ways - townhomes, condominiums,
patio homes, homes where there is pride of ownership. He feels
they have to move in that direction. He is willing to make a
commitment to down zone the area which will still allow the
building of duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes. He is not going
to vote for a continuance and favors down zoning.
Council discussion then followed regarding specifics of the
survey, during which questions were posed to staff and Mr.
Pepper at the conclusion of which staff confirmed that witi~in
two weeks they could provide information on how the survey was
conducted, what was on the card sent, how many times, i.e., ail
the information on the existing survey.
Councilman Pickier thereupon withdrew his first motion for a
2-month continuance aud moved for a continuance to May 10, i96~
to give the staff the opportunity to provide information
regarding the survey conducted in the subject area.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood asked for
clarification if anyone in the meantime coming in with a
development under RM-1200 could do so by right if there were no
waivers.
Mary Mcgloskey.
If the development met Code, it could go through without
waivers. She would have to check to determine if any were in
Plan Check at the present time.
~ECES$: By general consent the Council recessed for ten minutes. (4:35 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (4:50 p.m.)
Joel Fick, Planning Director.
Staff has made a quick check and survey of the plans currently
in Plan Check for the subject area. ~hree projects are in
process representing ten dwelling units and these will have been
43I
23O
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MiNUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
processed by the end of the week. in addition, there was one
other project that has already gone through Plan Check. It is
his understanding of the four projects ail were submitted as
projects without variances. That being the case, it would only
require a ministerial act if they were in compliance with all
the Codes and just a matter of permit issuance.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion to continue the public hearing
to May 10, 1988 and carried by the following vote:
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
£hrle and ~iunter
None
104: PUBLIC H~AR~NG - REFORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NO. 1982-1 (TRACTS 1326 ~qO 1563):
REQUEST/LOCATION: Proposed Assessment District includes each parcel of
property abutting on Victor Avenue and Juiianna Avenue in Tract No. i326 and
Tract No. 1563. The District is for the maintenance and operation of ten (i0)
street lights for a period of five (5) years at an estimated cost of $6,300.
The assessment period begins July 1, 1988, as recommended by the
Superintendent of Streets.
Submitted was report dated April 5, 1988 from the Director of Public
Works/City Engineer, recommending that the Council adopt a resolution
declaring that there was no majority protest against the subject Assessment
District.
PUBLIC NOTICEREQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin April 7, 1988.
Mailing to all property owners completed by Engineering Department on April l,
198d.
}~yor Bay opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak; there
being no response, he closed the public hearing.
WAiV~/{ OF FO~ADING - F~ESOLUTION; The title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution No. 88R-i61)
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. MO~ION ~ED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. ~8R-161 for adoption, declaring no
majority protest on Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1982-1 (Tract
Nos. 1326 and 1563). Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-161: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING THAT THERE WAS NOT A MAJORITY PROTEST AGAINST STREET
LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1982-1, TRACT NOS. 1326 & 1563. 432
Ci. ty ~1, A~aheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL ME}~ERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickier and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-i61 duly passed and adopted.
104: PUBLIC HEARING - STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 1981-6 (TRACTS
NOS. 2228 ~qD 2705):
REQUEST/LOCATION: Proposed assessment district includes each parcel of
property abutting on Rome Avenue, Gaymont Street, Devoy Drive, Elmlawn Drive,
Calico Circle, Birchleaf Drive and Lynrose Drive in Tract Nos. 2228 and ~70~.
The District is for the maintenance and operation of forty-six (46) street
lights for a period of five (5) years at an estimated cost of $2~,9~0. The
assessment period begins July 1, 198~, as recommended by the Superintendent of
Streets.
Submitted was report from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer,
recommending that the Council adopt a resolution declaring that there was no
majority protest against the subject Assessment District.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIR~R~NTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin April 7, 1988.
Mailing to all property owners completed by ~ngineering Department on
April ii, i~8~.
Mayor Bay opened tile public hearing and asked if anyone wisimd to speak; there
-being no response, he closed the public hearing.
WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was
read by t~m City Clerk. (Resolution No. ~8R-162)
Councilman Pickler moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 88~-i~2 for adoption, declaring no
majority protest on Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1981-6 (Tract
Nos. 2228 and 2705). Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-162: A RESOL'dTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
~AHEIM DECLARING THAT THERE WAS NOT A MAJORITY PRO~EST AGAINST STREET
LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 198i-6, TRACT NOS. 2228 & 2705.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MF~BEKS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickier and Bay
None
None
~'The Mayor declared Resolution No. 88R-162 duly passed and adopted.
'433
CitY Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCILMINUTES - April 19, 198d, 1:30 P.M.
136: PUBLIC HEARING - WESTERN I~EDICAL CENYER - FINANCING CERTIFICATES OF
PARTICIPATION: To consider an installment sale financing with certificates of
participation in an amount not to exceed $28,000,000 for Western Medical
Center in accordance with the requirements of section 147(f) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code").
Submitted was report dated April 12, i988 from the Finance Director George
Ferrone, recommending certain actions in connection with the subject financing.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 24, 1988.
Councilman Pickier.
He asked what the City's liability might be, if any, with regard
to the financing.
City Attorney, Jack White.
Mr. Steve Maler, Partner in the Law Firm of Orrick, Harrington
and Sutcliffe who served as Bond Counsel for the City for the
issue is prepared to answer any questions.
Mayor Bay.
In the documentation it is mentioned that the City is fully
indemnified and held harmless from any financial exposure by a
letter. He would like verification that is true.
Steve Maier, Partner in the Law Firm of 0rrick, harrington and
Sutcliffe, acting as Bond Coun
He confirmed this is straight conduit financing and there is no
liability to the City. The City is fully indemnified and held
harmless in the transaction.
City Attorney, Jack White.
He also confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that this is the same
type of transaction the City has done before in connection with
Anaheim Memorial hospital and Martin Luther Hospital as well as
the California Lutheran Homes transactions.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
Francis Nutto, 621 3ambolaya.
He is wondering how well the City has assessed the value of tl~e
reassurances that the City will be held harmless.
Mayor Bay.
Those questions were just asked of the City Attorney and Bond
Gounsel.
City Attorney White.
To more fully explain, the letter referred to is a letter of
credit being put up to cover the full amount of the payments.
The agreement provides that the City's payment obligations are
payable only out of the'revenues that are in essence the conduit
434
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI~WUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
financing it receives from the purchaser. The City has no
liability by contract out of its general fund which differs
significantly from the other transaction referred to by Mr.
Nutto. If Mr. Maler disagrees, he would invite him to correct
him. It would provide absolutely no liability to the City in
this particular transaction.
Mayor Bay closed the public hearing.
WAIVER OF READhWG - RESOLUTION: i~ne title of the following resolution was
read by the City Clerk. (Resolution Nos. 88R-163 and 88R-164)
Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution.
Councilman Pickier seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Bay offered Resolution Nos. 88R-i63 and 88R-i64 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-163: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF Ai~HEIMAPPROViNG THE
EXECUTION~D DELIVERY OF AN INSTALlmeNT PURCHASE AGREEM_~T FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PROVIDING FiNANC~1G AND REFINANCING FOR CF2~TAIN HEALTH FACILITIES.
RESOLUTION NO. 88R-164: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIMAPPR0¥iNG
FiNANC~qG TRANSACTION FOR WESTERN MEDICAL CENTE~-ANAdEIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO APPROVEAND EXECUTE AGREEMENTS ~1D AUTHORIZING ~D DIRECTING CEKTA~1
ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 88R-163 and 88R-164:
- AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMF~ERS:
GOUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBE&S:
Ehrie, Hunter, Kaywood, Pickler and Bay
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 88R-163 and 88R-i64 duly passed and adopted.
MOTION: Councilmmmn Bay moved to approve the form of agreement and authorize
t~e Mayor to sign an agreement with Jones Hail Hill & White to provide legal
services as special counsel to the City of Anaheim in connection with such
financing. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
1~5: PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED FACILITY PLANS FOR THE SA~NTAANA CANYONAREAS
OF BENEFIT AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: To consider approval of the following
facility plans for the Santa Aha Canyon Areas of Benefit:
Police Protection Facilities Plan
Fire Protection Facilities Plan
Public Library Facilities Plan
Street Maintenance Facilities Plan
The purpose of the hearing is to determine: (1) the boundaries of the
particular areas of benefit; (2) the facilities planned for the area of
benefit; and (3) the method of fee apportionment.
435
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCILMINUTES -April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
This matter was continued from the meeting of March 8, 1988, to this date. It
is also recommended by the Planning Director that the item be withdrawn from
the agenda at this time.
PUBLIC NOTICE R~QUIREM~21TS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin January 29 and February 26, i988.
PI2~NNiNG STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated April 12, 1988 from Joel
Fick, Planning Director, recommending tkat the subject facilities be withdrawn
at t~s time.
Joel Fica, Planning Director.
He confirmed that staff is asking for an indefinite continuance
at this time. Even though they are recommending that it be
taken off the calendar, staff is still working on the plans and
will be bringing them back to the Council in tim future. Since
they do not know of a date certain, they feel it would be
smoother to readvertise the matter than to continue it to a
certain date when they do not know when they will be able to
fully complete each of the plans. Completion of the development
agreement process for the large ranches has resolved a number of
the issues and has taken the pressure off and the immediacy for
some of the issues as well.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
No one was present to speak either in favor or in opposition.
City Attorney, Jack White.
He recommends that the Council terminate the proceedings and
withdraw the item from the agenda with the understanding that at
a later date it would be renoticed and reinstituted and brought
back for additional l~aring.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to terminate the subject proceedings and to
withdraw the item from the agenda at this time. ~e item will be renoticed
and reinstituted and subsequently brought back to the Council for hearing at a
latez' date. Councilwoman ilaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CAi~~.~).
10~/114: REQUEST FOR JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL: Request by the
Planning Commission for a joint meeting with the City Council regarding
multi-family developments.
City Clerk, Leonora Sohl. ~he Council had previously determined they would
discuss condominiums vs. multi-family dweilings (apartments) at the Council
meeting of April 26, 1988. She asked if the Council would like to invite
Planning Commission to attend that meeting.
Mayor Bay. He noted that Councilman Pickler would not be attending the
meetings of April 26 and May 3, 1988. i~e next date there would be a full
Council will be May 10, 1968. He suggested that there be a workshop meeting
with the Planning Commission on the issue and that it start at i0:00 a.m. in
436
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL }~NUTES - April 19, 1988, 1:30 P.M.
order to avoid being pressed for time since ti~re were many issues to be
discussed.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved that a Council/Planning Commission Workshop be
set for Wuesday, May 10, 1988 at 10:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber.
Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: ORANGE COUNTY SYEEL SALVAGE: CounciLman Pickler stated that Code
Enforcement should be notified that as he understands it, Orange County Steel
Salvage can no longer shred cars at their facility. Yhe process they have
been using has been declared by the State as not proper and they must cease
and desist. He wants to be certain they do not continue shredding.
City Attorney, Jack White. Whey are operating under a court decree. Yhe Code
Enforcement Manager is out at the site constantly to make sure Orange County
Steel Salvage is complying and ti~ State sends out representatives as well.
He will bring the matter to Mr. Pooie's attention. Ti~s comment is the first
i~ has been advised of the matter.
127: PROPOSED PETITION INITIATIVE - ADMISSIONS TAX: Mayor Bay. He noted the
action of th~ H6~E group earlier in the meeting announcing that they had filed
their Notice of Intent to circulate their petition relative to an Admissions
Tax. A lot of detailed information was submitted and he has not yet had an
opportunity to study it. He wi]f[ be very much interested in the City
Attorney's review and subsequent writing of an objective description of what
the petition says. He feels the Council should stay close to the matter.
ADJOU~M~T: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn to Yuesday, April 26, 1988 at
i0:00 a.m. for the purposes of a Closed Session. Councilwoman Kaywood
'seconded the motion. MOTION ~ED. (5:44 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CIYY CLERK
437