Loading...
1987/01/20City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: VACANCY: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler COUNCIL MEMBERS: One CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR: John Poole ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti Mayor Bay called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Captain Joseph Huttenlocker, Salvation Army, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Resolution of Congratulations was unanimously adopted by the City Council to be presented to Dr. Bryan Crow, founder of the Euclid Street Baptist Church and extending congratulations on the Church's 25th anniversary in the City of Anaheim. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held December 30, 1986 and January 6, 1987. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda, after reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,603,206.55, in accordance with the 1986-87 Budget, were approved. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 87R-10 through 87R-13, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4796 for first reading. 1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: 41 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987~ 10:00 A.M. Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Donna Fouste for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 19, 1986. b. Claim submitted by Dale Moore for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 6, 1986. c. Claim submitted by California Casualty (Lorenzo Reynoso, Insured) for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 11, 1986. d. Claim submitted by Robert W. Hardin for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 1, 1986. e. Claim submitted by Laura Patrick for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 25, 1986. f. Claim submitted by Jeanette Lucero for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 10, 1986. g. Claim submitted by Robert Brian Miller for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 8, 1986. h. Claim submitted by Patty Lynn Siu for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 7, 1986. Claims filed against the City - Recommended to be Accepted: i. Claim submitted by Barbara Milavsky for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 3, 1986. 2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file) a. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Application No. 86-04-007, Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E) for a certificate that the present and future public convenience and necessity requires or will require the construction and operation by applicant of a 220 kV transmission line between the Villa Park Substation and Barre Substation via the Lewis Substation in Orange County, CA. b. 173: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Application No. 86-12-043, Pinetree Service Corporation, Inc., for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to add two additional service points to augment their existing airport access service corridor between John Wayne Airport and Ontario International Airport and by the addition of three different service points in the Palm Springs area as well as the corporate limits of the City of Riverside as an additional service area to augment their existing Palm Springs service. c. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Application No. 86-12-047 (NOI No. 86-10-057), Southern California Edison Company (U 338 E) for authority to increase rates for electric service. 42 19 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. d. 105: Public Utilities Board, Minutes of November 20, 1986. e. 107: Planning Department, Building Division Monthly Report for December 1986 and Annual Report for 1986. 3. 123: Authorizing a contract amendment with Centel Facilities Communications, to provide for the City's purchase of telecommunications equipment for Anaheim Convention Center Exhibitors Telecommunication System. 4. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the five months ended November 30, 1986. 5. 123: Authorizing a revised affordable development agreement with Pacesetter Homes, Inc., to provide 21 senior citizen affordable housing units in a proposed 82-unit senior housing project to be located at 200 South Citron Street, to reflect the age restriction of 55 and over. 6. 175: Authorizing payment to the Water Advisory Committee of Orange County in the amount of $1,112 to help fund a public campaign to obtain maximum public awareness and support for a Southern California Water Policy Paper. 7. 153: Authorizing an increase in the City-owned automobile or automobile allowance to ~161.54 biweekly for the term January 23, 1987 to June 24, 1988, and $169.85 for the term June 24, 1988 to June 23, 1989. 8. 123: Authorizing the City Manager to renew membership in the Orange County Employment Relations Consortium and to execute an Agreement for Special Services with Liebert, Cassidy and Frierson, in the amount of ~1,290, effective January 1, 1987 for a term of one year. 9a. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-10: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 85R-429 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR UNREPRESENTED PART-TIME JOB CLASSIFICATIONS WITH FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS. (Amending Resolution No. 85R-429 which established rates of compensation for unrepresented part-time job classifications with full-time equivalents, increasing bilingual pay to twenty-five cents per hour, effective January 23, 1987) b. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-11: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 86R-103 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF GOMPENSATION FOR UNREPRESENTED PART-TIME JOB CLASSIFICATION. (Amending Resolution No. 86R-103 which established rates of compensation for unrepresented part-time job classifications, increasing bilingual pay to twenty-five cents per hour, effective January 23, 1987) 10. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-12: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, EASEMENTS AND/OR FACILITIES HERETOFORE IRREVOCABLY OFFERED FOR DEDICATION. (Accepting certain public streets, easements and/or facilities heretofore irrevocably offered for dedication - R/W 3458) 43 Cit Hall Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar20~ 10:00 A.M. 11. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-13: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ~F ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL pROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN. 12. 149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4796: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING NEW SUBSECTION .2320 TO SECTION f4.32.190 OF CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING AND STOPPING. (Adding new Subsection .2320 to Section 14.32.190 of the Code, relating to parking and stopping on Scout Trail, on both sides from Camino Pinzon to Nohl Ranch Road) 13. 175/123: Authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute a Firm Transmission Agreement with Southern California Edison Company. Roll Call Vote on 87R-10 through 87R-13: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler VACANCY: COUNCIL MEMBERS: One The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 87R-10 through 87R-13, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. End of Consent Calendar. One Vacancy. MOTION CAtLRIED. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session to discuss matters listed under Closed Session portion of the City Attorney's agenda. Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. (10:19 a.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Pickler. One Vacancy. (10:35 a.m.) 179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 828 - ANGELO'S RESTAURANT: Request for a rehearing submitted by Michelle A. Reinglass, Attorney for Angelo's Restaurant, for Conditional Use Permit No. 828, to permit the operation of a walk-up restaurant on CL zoned property located at 221 North Beach Boulevard. At its meeting of December 9, 1986, the City Council revoked Conditional Use Permit No. 828. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings is on file in the City Clerk's Office. Michelle Reinglass, Attorney for Angelo's Restaurant, was present relative to the request for rehearing. Mayor Bay first stated that the Council has read her request for a rehearing, the declaration of merit, petition and full statement of everything that was turned in with the request for rehearing. Every member of the Council has 44 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. read all of the particular paperwork he is talking about. He asked Ms. Reinglass if there was anything she would like to add to what was already presented. Ms. Reinglass stated on behalf of Angelo's she would like to point out that in administrative type hearings, the rules of evidence are substantially relaxed. She continued that there was was no prejudice at the time the evidence was sought to be introduced. They were dealing primarily with the files of the City. There is an analogous doctrine to the doctrine of judicial notice. The special notice could be taken by the Council of its own files including the Planning Department files. She is dealing not only with the file on Angelo's itself but also the file from Camelot and several files of other drive-in and drive-thrus for which other evidence was submitted. All of these are items for which the Council could properly have taken special notice and there would have been no prejudice. Also, the request for introduction of that evidence was submitted 18 days before the hearing, giving sufficient time for everyone to have reviewed it. For those reasons, she is requesting that the rehearing be granted to allow that evidence to be introduced. Mayor Bay asked the City Attorney if he had any comments. City Attorney White stated the grounds upon which the City Council can grant rehearings are set forth in the Municipal Code. This one has been requested on the grounds that there was relevant evidence which, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not have been produced by the petitioner which was improperly excluded by the City Council at the hearing. It is incumbent upon the Council based upon the statements made today as well as that in the petition for rehearing that was submitted whether that is the case and to act accordingly. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved that the request for rehearing be denied, that there was not relevant evidence which in the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have been produced by the petitioner or which was improperly excluded by the City Council at the hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. A Roll Call Vote was taken on the foregoing motion: Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler VACANCY: COUNCIL MEMBERS: One 108: APPLICATION FOR TAXI SERVICE: Request by Fred McCuistion, West Coast Cab Company (WCCC), for a permit to operate a taxi service in the City of Anaheim. Submitted was report dated January 7, 1987 from the Community Development and Planning Department, recommending that the request be denied. Mr. Fred Ray McCuistion, applicant, 26086 Via Pera, Mission Viejo. He first answered questions posed by the Mayor noting that the color scheme for West 45 ~California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Janua~10:00 A.M. Coast Cab Company is bright orange with bold black lettering. Rates are competitive; ten cars have been purchased exclusively for the Anaheim Area; proof of insurance has been submitted to the City Attorney's Office; the cabs are radio equipped for radio dispatch; the base station is in Santa And; they have nine repeaters going down to San Juan Capistrano where they are licensed and everything north up to Yorba Linda where they are also licensed. Mayor Bay noted the application stated Mr. McCuistion has ten taxis. He asked him if he had shown any financial backing for increasing that to more than ten or was that his intention. Mr. McCuistion stated he had come into the Orange County area about one year ago. Huntington Beach and Newport Beach asked for so many cars to do business. He is looking at 33-1/3 percent of all phone calls coming from the Anaheim and the Buena Park area. He did his own research and it does warrant him asking for an application from Anaheim. Answering Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. McCuistion, having seen the staff report stated he does have bilingual dispatchers which will be for the Santa And area where they hope to be licensed within the next week. There will and English speaking only. If possible at a later date, he will be Spanish Vietnamese. He uses Johnson radios, a high frequency of 800 MHz.have It is a sole ownership frequency and all vehicles are equipped with those radios. Councilwoman Kaywood stated the report indicates his cabs have been illegally picking up fares at several hotels in the Dlsneyland area; Mr. McCutstton stated he has no information that has been the case nor has he seen any police report. John Poole, Code Enforcement Supervisor. He explained that West Coast Cab Company has picked up Code Enforcement officers in the City who were working covertly. They were solicited for fares in West Coast Cab Company Taxi Cabs. Mr. McCuistion further explained upon questioning that the drivers working for him are independent contractors working on a 50 percent commission. He does have control over them because of the dispatching system. Pick ups and drop offs are logged. He clarified if th~ dr~vers do not tell him that they have been requested to appear in Court regarding a violation or if the drivers did not tell him they were stopped by a Code Enforcement Officer in the City he would not otherwise know of those occurrences. Mayor Bay asked if there was anything in the City's procedures that when a driver is served with a notice of violation that the company the driver is supposedly driving for also gets notified; Mr. Poole answered that there was no such procedure at this time. Mayor Bay suggested that staff consider instituting that procedure in the future so that the company will also be advised of a violation. Councilman Hunter was concerned that WCCC had not produced any evidence to demonstrate that there is an actual necessit for more ~.companies tp b~ operating in Anaheim as discussed in th~6sta~f report, , was an actua± City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. survey performed to ascertain the need for more cabs. Mr. McCuistion stated that he had. He could provide the log for all of the transfers that they make. He does not think Anaheim Yellow Cab Company can handle all of the business. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that in the staff report (Page 3, Item 7), "the applicant has not submitted any information or documentation to demonstrate that WCCC is adequately financed to provide the proposed taxi cab service." Mr. McCuistion stated he can submit a financial statement. Other cities have requested the same and he had been prepared to give them that information. Councilwoman Kaywood stated without proof of financial capability, there is no way the application can be approved; Mr. McCuistion answered if that is needed he is prepared to give it at this time. Upon further questioning by Mayor Bay, Mr. McCuistion reported that he had 36 cabs to cover the area from Dana Point North which covered Saddleback Valley, South Laguna, Laguna Niguel, Irvine, Tustin, Yorba Linda, Brea, Huntir~ton Beach, Newport Beach, Santa Aha, possibly within a week, Fullerton by possibly this afternoon, and Buena Park where he has submitted papers. The ten cabs in Anaheim would be separate and Santa Aha required eight cabs for exclusive use in that City. Anaheim is a very large area and it is important to take care of tourists and residents at the same time. Yellow Cab Company has been in business for many years and although they have done an excellent Job, there is room for another company to be competitive. Mr. Poole then explained for the Mayor that when the applicant comes to the City to discuss applying for a Taxi Permit, they are given a copy of the Code. The City Clerk's staff and/or his staff explains the procedures for applying for the permit so an applicant will not submit an application without being fully aware of the Code requirements. Mayor Bay noted there were some unanswered questions within the ordinance requirements regarding financial backing and Mr. McCuistion's potential to expand which is germane to whether or not WCCC can serve the entire City or not. Also to be considered is whether ten cabs can serve the entire City. did not want to bring those points to bear on a decision from the Council before Mr. McCuistion understood that there are numerous things he did not answer formally within his application that are still required. He After additional questions posed to Mr. McCuistion by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mayor Bay asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding the subject application. Mr. Floyd Farano, Attorney representing the Yellow Cab Company of North Orange County. He is in opposition to the application presently before the Council. Anaheim City ordinances set forth 11 required findings the Council must make in order to grant a Taxi Cab Permit which is really a certificate of public convenience and necessity. No need has been shown by the community. The Council must hear something beside the words of the applicant himself. The purpose of the hearing is to give the applicant the opportunity to offer his 47 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20~ 1987, 10:00 A.M. proof of the propriety of his application in that he will not only respond to the needs and necessity of the public but also that he is financially capable of doing so and can do so in conformance with the Codes. It is not appropriate, insufficient and incompetent for the applicant to neglect to submit the information that is required under the ordinances and to the public at large so that anyone may examine the information proposed by the applicant in order to test it. Since the application requirements of the City have not been met by Mr. McCuistion (WCCC), if for no other reason, the application should be denied. The Yellow Cab Company of North Orange County has been an operator in the City of Anaheim for many years. They have consistently been before the City, the citizens of the City and their books have been and are available for scrutiny and examination at any time. They have satisfied all the requirements and have an exemplary record before the City. (He elaborated on the services given by Yellow Cab Company). The statement that there is a need for additional cab service should be examined carefully. It is also his recollection that independent contractors are not proper to use as cab operators. In the case of his client, all drivers of Yellow Cab Company are employees of the Company and are required to report any and all violations. He is also not aware of any other city where the applicant has been given the permission to operate with the exception of Huntington Beach, that permission having been granted within the last 45 days. Yellow Cab Company would like to have a list of specific cities where the applicant has been authorized and permitted to operate pursuant to the findings of public convenience and necessity so that it can be verified. Mr. McCuistion, in summation, stated that relative to their radio system, he has a car with him today that can be inspected. He will be giving a Financial Statement to the City. At this time he feels the best thing to do is ask that the application be held over for two weeks so that he can turn the matter over to his attorney. If it has to be submitted again, he would like to do so in the correct way. He is asking for a continuance for another two weeks so that he can submit the information and also submit information to the Yellow Cab Company to show them what they have for books as to the calls they receive. Mayor Bay. He is only interested in seeing that Mr. McCuistion fulfills the requirements of the City's ordinances and suggested that he (McCuistion) get back with staff. It was not up to the staff to interpret all the ordinances but up to the applicant to understand the requirements under the ordinances and to fulfill those requirements. He has no problem with a continuance but wants to hear from his colleagues. Councilman Hunter. The Anaheim Municipal Code requires the finding, "that the public convenience or necessity require the operation of such taxi cab(s) or chauffeured limousine(s) within the City of Anaheim." However, Mr. McCuistion has not done anything in that regard and it is incumbent upon him or any other company who may wish to apply to demonstrate that the public convenience or necessity requires the operation of an additional taxi cab company in the City. Even if the matter was continued for two weeks, he does not believe Mr. McCuistion could come back in that period having done those surveys and studies pursuant to the Code requirements; Mr. McCuistion stated he had given the Council that information where he stated that he did five months of research showing that the City does want another taxi company. The statement 48 ~Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar~_~, 1987, 10:00 A.M. he gave before that when a cab is called and the response is not immediate, to him that is public necessity and the need has not been met. Councilman Hunter stated that such information should have been attached to his application. It was not up to the City Clerk's Office or staff to ask for it but up to Mr. McCuistion to read the Code and act accordingly. Councilwoman Kaywood. She is concerned if the Council continues the application for two weeks it would not give staff enough time to check out a Financial Statement and survey· Further, one person submitting a survey does not make it objective. Mayor Bay surmised that the Council was suggesting that the application be denied on the basis of the incomplete application even though the Council is advising the applicant he does have to meet all the requirements and can reapply at a later time if he wishes to do so. City Clerk Sohl confirmed that on December 3, 1986, she wrote a letter to Mr. McCuistton that contained a copy of the Code and indicated that the requirements set forth in the applicable section of the Code must be submitted in writing which included all eleven of the items required· MOTION: Councilman Hunter moved to deny ~ab Company to operate a taxi service in the permit submitted by West Coast Kaywood seconded the motion, the City of Anaheim. Councilwoman Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White stated that he assumed the motion of denial was on the grounds that the application failed to meet the required findings in the Code. Councilman Hunter amended his motion to include that the application failed to meet the required findings in the Code. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion as amended denying the application. Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney White then explained for Mr. M¢Cuistion that there was no time limit on when he could reapply for the permit. 2:ORDINANC~ un fon ~ of-~~ ~,C~GE O~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING TIME: Amending ..... ua z.mz. ulu of Unapter 1.12 of the Code relating to meetings of the City Council, setting the time to begin at 12:00 noon. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4795 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. pRDINANCE NO. 4795: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION · 010 OF SECTION 1.12.010 OF CHAPTER 1.12 OF TITLE 1 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Before a vote was taken, it was confirmed that the new time schedule would commence with the Council meeting of February 3, 1987. 49 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. City Clerk Sohl noted that the ordinance would not be effective on February 3, 1987 but the Council can adjourn its 10:00 a.m. meeting to 12:00 noon. It could not be done for the meeting of January 27, 1987 because Legal Notices have already been mailed announcing that public hearings will begin at 1:30 p.m. A vote was then taken on the foregoing Ordinance: Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: VACANCY: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None Pickler One The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4795 duly passed and adopted. 179: ORDINANCE NOS. 4797 AND 4798: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance Nos. 4797 and 4798 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4797: 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, Reclass. 77-78-64(8), RM-1200(SC), 8600 Santa Aha Canyon Road) ORDINANCE NO. 4798: 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, Reclass. 86-87-05, RM-1200, 213 South Walnut Street) 114/144: JAIL SITE MEETING: Councilman Hunter reported that he had attended the Tuesday, January 13, 1987 meeting held at Canyon High School concerning a proposed jail site in either the Gypsum or Coal Canyon area. The meeting was attended by approximately 700 residents of Anaheim Hills who do not want a jail at either Gypsum or Coal Canyon. Later in the meeting, Councilwoman Kaywood and Mayor Bay commented on the issue. Councilwoman Kaywood first noted that the invitation to the meeting was not received until Monday, January 12, 1987 and that the Council had been previously invited to the opening of the Freedman Forum four months ago. Therefore, it was not possible to be at the meeting and the grand opening of the Theatre which was a very important event. The jail issue was and has unanimously been a tremendously important issue over the years and the Council has been active and involved in opposing a jail site and also a dump site in the Gypsum or Coal Canyon area. She emphasized it is not a City determination relative to the proposed sites but a County Board of Supervisors determination. It was unfortunate that it was not possible to attend the meeting but that in no way reflects lack of interest. She reiterated the Council has been involved in the situation for years and will continue to be involved until an alternate remote site is chosen by the County. 5O City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. She emphasized it was important for the citizens in the Canyon Area as well as the rest of the City to realize that Anaheim Hills is not a separate City and there is no postal name, Anaheim Hills. The Council is totally unified in its opposition to the jail in Anaheim. It was also an issue that all candidates in the last campaign agreed on and no one wanted the Jail. There was no question as to the Council's position with regard to the Jail site. Mayor Bay then reported that on Friday, January 16, 1987, the Jail Action Committee meeting was held at the Chamber of Commerce where an update was given on where that committee stands. The Jail Action Committee, in this case, is involved with the proposed Katella Avenue site in the City of Anaheim chosen by the Board of Supervisors. Some weeks ago when the El/{ for the Jail site was up before the Board of Supervisors, he spoke for the City and pleaded with the Board not to take that action but to get a master plan moving with the cooperation of the cities all over the County for a remote site for not only the 1500 Jail cells, but also for the larger Jails being projected across four or five different sites in the eastern part of the County. Some of those sites include Gypsum and Coal Canyon. His position on the Gypsum Canyon area as a "remote" site was stated some months ago to a large group of people in the hill and canyon area. He has been opposed to any Jail within the City limits of Anaheim or in the Gypsum Canyon area which is within the City's sphere of influence. His position on jails has not changed. There was no division he knows of on the Council in its opposition to the techniques, motives and actions of the Board of Supervisors who were now trying to solve a problem they should have been working on more seriously eight years ago. There will be many ways the City is going to have to work to try to help the County solve the regional problem. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Bay announced that a Closed Session would be held to confer with the City Attorney regarding: (a) 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. (b) To discuss labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6. (c) To confer with its Attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 5495§.9(c). Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch break. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. (11:44 a.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Pickler. One Vacancy (1:45 p.m) ' One 179: PUBLIC HEARING - TERMINATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1703 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 25257 The hearing on both Conditional Use Permits was initiated by the Anaheim City Council to (1) consider termination or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 1703 to permit 51 ' City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20~ 1987, 10:00 A.M. resource recovery and recyling operations on approximately 6.4 acres located at the southeast corner of Frontera Street and Newkirk Road, with the following Code waivers: (a) minimum front setback, (b) required block wall; and (2) consider termination or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 2525, to permit resource recovery and recycling operations including an automobile dismantling business with wholesale and retail sales of auto parts on property located at 3200 East Frontera Street, both relating to Orange County Steel Salvage. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin January 8, 1987. Posting of property January 9, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - January 9, 1987. STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report from the Community Development and Planning Department dated January 13, 1987, recommending that the Council terminate Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1703 and 2525, pursuant to provisions of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.03.092. Mayor Bay announced that he has read the detail of the meeting where the subject hearings were set to consider termination or modification of the subject CUP's and most of the motions and initiation of action was by Councilman Pickler who is not present today. He feels both of the hearings require that at least the four present Council Members be in attendance. Councilman Bay, thereupon, moved to continue the public hearing on Termination or Modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 1703 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2525 (Orange County Steel Salvage) to Tuesday, February 17, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3621 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: APPLICANT: Kennedy and Hause 2850 "A" Gretta Lane Anaheim, Ca. 92806 REQUE§T/ZONINC/LOCATION: To retain a mannger'~ unit in an existing 15-unit apartment complex on RM-1200 zoned property located at 210 West Vermont Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum site area per dwelling unit, (b) minimum number of parking spaces. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-290 denied Variance No. 3621; approved EIR - Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: Appealed by Scott C. Vos, Kennedy & Hause. meeting of January 13, 1987, to this date. the January 13, 1987 meeting. This matter was continued from the The appellant was not present at PUBLIC NOTICEREQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin January 1, 1987. 52 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 20, 1987, 10:00 A.M. Posting of property January 2, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 31, 1986. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 1986. City Clerk Sohl announced that since the last meeting, letter dated January 15, 1987 has been received from Scott Vos, Kennedy and Hause, indicating he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Mayor Bay acknowledged that the Council had received the January 15, 1987 letter withdrawing the appeal and, therefore, there was no reason to continue with the public hearing. City Attorney White confirmed that it was not necessary to hold the public hearing. The appellant has withdrawn his appeal and the original action was a denial of the Variance by the Planning Commission. In other cases where the facts are different, a public hearing would be necessary but not in this instance. Mayor Bay announced that the Planning Commission action of denial stands. He also asked if anyone wished to speak; there was no response. ADJOURNMENT: the motion. (1:48 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded Councilman Pickler was absent. One Vacancy. MOTION CARRIED. 53