Loading...
1987/10/20121 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20, 1987, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: EHRLE, HUNTER, KAYWOOD, BAY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBEXS: PICKLE~ PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Bob Simpson CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl CITY ENGINRRX: Gary Johnson TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer SENIOR PLANNER: Greg Hastings HOUSING OPERATIONS COORDINATOR: Debra Vagts A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 2:00 p.m. on October 16, 1987 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Bay called the meeting to order at 1:$0 p.m. and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Father John Lenihan, St. Boniface Catholic Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Fred Hunter led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Bay and authorized by the City Council: Pornography Awareness Week in Anaheim, October 25-November 1, 1987 Higher Education Week in Anaheim, October 24-31, 1987 United Nations Day in Anaheim, October 24, 1987 119: DECLARATION - IN SUPPORT OF DEUGBUSTERS: The City Council unanimously adopted a Declaration recognizing Drugbusters, a county-wide organization, as an effective drug awareness and prevention program for all the citizens of Anaheim. 119: PRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWAltDS: Mayor Bay and Council Members personally congratulated each of the following employees on their respective service anniversaries ranging from 25 to 30 years of dedicated service to the City of Anaheim: 30-Year City Service Awards William Griffith, Library Director William Franklin, Captain, Police Department Martin Mitchell, Captain, Police Department James Hund, Fleet Maintenance Francis Young, Lead Auto Mechanic, Fleet Maintenance 932 122 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. James Cook, Construction Inspector, Engineering Department Herman Stoeffel, Chief of Survey Parties, Engineering Department Joseph Bruce, Parks Department Ronald Cole, Parks Department Louis Masciel, Parks Department 25-Year City Service Awards Garry McRae, Human Resources Director, Human Resources Department Gordon Blair, Police Department Richard Christensen, Police Department Ronald Kasper, Sergeant, Police Department Willard Lowman, Police Department Delbert Wade, Lieutenant, Police Department Tom Barnes, Fire Department Marion Brouwer, Fire Department Boyd Van Wyckhouse, Fire Department Glen Bagley, Construction Inspector, Engineering Department Joe Rodriguez, Engineering Representative, Engineering Department Royce Inglis, Parks Department John Roche, Maintenance Director, Maintenance Services Administration Gilbert Waterworth, Street Maintenance Donald Henderson, Facility Maintenance Stephen Blake, Fleet Maintenance Eldon Bollom, Electric Field Lee Peterson, Electric Field Stephen Albright, Systems Operation Manager, Utilities Operations 119: SPECIAL RECOGNITION - BOB BERG: Mayor Bay and Council Members congratulated and commended Mr. Bob Berg, the City's Emergency Services Coordinator, upon receiving the State of California Outstanding Services Award in the field of Emergency Services. Fire Chief Jeff Bowman thanked the Council for recognizing one of his outstanding management employees this year and in years past. Hr. Berg thanked the Council for the presentation. He explained one of the reasons the City has been recognized as one of the leading cities in the State in the field of emergency services is because the Council has been so supportive in hosting conferences and workshops. MINUTES: Approval of the minutes was deferred to the next regular meeting. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,762,570.89, in accordance with the 1987-88 Budget, were approved. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Manager. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the Consent Calendar, after reading of the title thereof, and that consent to waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after 933 !19 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20, 1987, 1:30 P.M. reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CAT.KNDAR: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, 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 Bay offered Resolution Nos. 87R-422 through 87R-425, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Ferne Schlue for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 16, 1987. b. Claim submitted by Christopher Montoya for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 3, 1987. c. Claim submitted by Shannon Oudeans for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 25, 1987. d. Claim submitted by Robert Tonsing for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 4, 1987. e. Claim submitted by Dennis Hobbick for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 7, 1987. f. Claim submitted by Randolph Coleman for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 8, 1987. g. Claim submitted by John Gordon Matheson for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 4, 1987. Claim filed against the City - Recommended to be Accepted: h. Claim submitted by Bruce Bock for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 8, 1987. i. Claim submitted by Molena Jean Warholm for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 28, 1987. 2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file) a. 107: Building Division, Statistical Report ending September 30, 1987. b. 105: Public Utilities Board, Minutes of September 17, 1987. 934 120 City Hall~ A~aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. c. 105: Continued Joint Meeting of the Community Redevelopment Commission and Alpha Project Area Committee, Minutes of September 2, 1987. d. 105: Community Services Board, Minutes of September 10, 1987. e. 105: Senior Citizens Commission, Minutes of September 10, 1987. Councilwoman Kaywood noted from the Senior Citizen Commission minutes of September 10, 1987 that the Commission declared a vacancy due to the absence of Estelle Nichols because of health reasons. She thereupon asked that the seat be declared vacant and that the vacancy be posted so that it could be filled. f. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission, Minutes of September 9 and 23, 1987. 3. 108: Approving a Public Dance application submitted by Musa I. Madain, Green Eyes Promotions, at the Anaheim Convention Center, on October 30, 1987, from 8:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. 4. 123: Approving an agreement with California Lutheran Homes, to provide 31 affordable units of the proposed 123 rental units to be located at 891 So. Walnut Street. 5. 123: Approving a Third Agreement for Human Services with The Catholic Community Agencies of the Diocese of Orange, in the amount of $7,000, for the provision of human services through the Casa Guadalupe Mobile Outreach Unit, for the term July 1, 1987 through June 30, 1988. 6. 179: Granting a six-month extension of time to Variance No. 3504, to construct a 19-unit affordable apartment complex on RM-1200 zoned property located at the southest corner of Cypress Street and Olive Street, to expire on May 12, 1988. 7. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the two months ended August 31, 1987. 8. 140/106: Increasing revenue appropriations in account no. 01-3717 and in account no. 01-901-7115 by ~886,840 received from First Municipal Leasing Corporation for funding the purchase of an on line automated system for the Library Department. 9. 109/140: Authorizing the Library Director to make a Grant application in the amount of $18,215 through the Major Urban Resources (HURLS) Funding Program. 10. 155/105: Authorizing the modification of the Public Works - Engineering Department 1987-88 Resource Allocation Program to include the Arbor, Cherry and Glen Drive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) design project. 11. 123: Authorizing a Letter Agreement with Willdan Associates to provide for annual rental adjustment at a new rate of ~1.31 per square foot per month 935 117 Ctt~ H,11; A--h-~ California - COUNCIL 'MINUTES - October 20; 1987; 1:30 P.M. for Field Engineering lease of 1,690 square feet of office space in the Willdan Building, 290 South Anaheim Boulevard. 12. 155/106: Approving the modification of the Public Works - Engineering Department Fiscal Year 1987/88 Capital Improvement budget by addition of the La Palms Avenue Federal Aid Urban Project with $246,733 in Federal funds and $41,667 in City funds. 13. 156/106: Accepting $945 donated toward the participation of Officer Robert W. Lay and his German Shepherd in the International Dog Trials in Munich, Germany, by increasing revenue and expenditure appropriations, Account Nos. 01-3187 and 01-182-6501, respectively. 14. 153: Approving a change in the Schedule of Benefits of the self-funded Delta Dental Plan to increase the benefits payable for Basic Services from 60% of eligible charges to 80% of eligible charges. 15. 123: Authorizing an Office Space Lease with Mickey Thompson Entertainment Group, at a cost of $2,000 per month, for lease of office space at Anaheim Stadium, on a year to year basis. 16. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation in the amount of $26,203.20 for 6,000 each weatherproof, twist-lock type street light photoelectric controls, in accordance with Bid No. A-4486. 17. 160: Waiving Council Policy No. 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for rem used compact and intermediate size vehicles. 18. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-422: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, EASEMENTS AND/OR FACILITIES HERETOFORE IRREVOCABLY OFFERED FOR DEDICATION. (for alley improvements on the north side of Broadway between Harbor Boulevard and Citron Street - 84-85-35, A-B-C) 19. 156: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-423: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO CONDUCT AN AUCTION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY. (October 24, 1987, or in the event of inclement weather, on the next Saturday where weather conditions permit, and directing the City Clerk to publish a legal notice of said auction) 20. 000/102/123: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-424: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CERTAIN FEES TO BE CHARGED BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE PERTAINING TO ANIMAL CONTROL. 21. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 87R-425: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN. 936 City Hall~ Anmheim~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. 22. 156/106: Authorizing the expenditure of funds in the amount of 319,500 for electronic conversion of the active Personnel and Master Name Index Fingerprint Files into the Police Record Management System. 23. 153: Authorizing the Human Resources Department to solicit proposals from firms interested in providing temporary help services to implement the ninth year of the outside agency temporary help program. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None Pickler The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 87R-422 through 87K-425, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. End of Consent Calendar. 153: CITY OF ANAWRIM MRALTH pi.AMS - 1988 HEALTH AND WELFARE PLAN RATES - 1988 MEDICAL PLAN EMPLOYRg CONTRIBUTIONS - AGReeMENT WITH MERCER-MEIDINGER-HANSEN, INC.; FOR GENERAL BENEFITS BROKERAGE AND CONSULTING SERVICES - ADDITION OF HUMANA HEALTH PLANT INC. TO TH~ CITY OF ANAN~IM HEALTH CARE PROVIDER LIST - AMENDMENTS TO THE SEI.~ FUNDED EMPLOYEE MEDICAL PLAN: Submitted were two reports dated October 12, 1987 and three reports dated October 13, 1987 from the Human Resources Director regarding the subject matters, each recommending approval of the foregoing issues relative to the City health plans. Mrs. Sharon Erickson, President, Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (AMEA) requested to speak. She has been trying to set up a meeting with PEKS (Public Employment Retirement System) to discuss their medical plans. The Association is very concerned about the City's medical retirees for the, "Class of '87". Everyone in the City is affected with the exception of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). When this issue was approved a few years ago, the Association was not aware that IBEWwas not going to be "stuck~ with the same thing. They are now at the eve of January 1, 1988 when everything changes. For the first time that she can ever think of and probably the last, she is not only speaking for A~, the Firemen, the Policemen but als0 speaking for Management. There are many management people going to be affected by the situation. Probably even more so than the people that are in her bargaining unit. At the present time there are 105 people scheduled to retire, only those telling the City ahead of time. Many are waiting until the last moment with (1) the hopes of being rescued and (2) they are disappointed that the City is going to, in their opinion, punish them for all their hard years of work. She has been on the Health Council for the past five years and there is no time she can remember they have ever discussed trying to find a way around this important issue. The reason she is present today is to propose that the City Council, City management, all the Unions, all mid-management thoroughly investigate the PERS Medical Health Insurance. She has taken the liberty to schedule a meeting with Diana Davis and Dan Shrappner from PEKS to give an extensive presentation including dollar figures on Thursday, October 29, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. She has 937 115 City Hall~ An-heim~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - October 20~ 1987, 1:30 P.M. prepared a hand-out for the City Council and City Manager to show some of the highlights in their research and some of the problems with the City handling the Health programs (see the two page document dated October 20, 1987 entitled PERS Health Care Insurance Program - made a part of the record) which pointed out the four issues of concern (see page two - nos. three and four were questions relating to the City's consultant and other related questions). She also proposed that the City delay signing any agreements until after their meeting with PERS or to make certain that they all have a 30-day escape clause. She understands there is a problem with open enrollment and she does not want that held up. If PERS should prove to be the right one, they could get out of their contracts without being sued. She definitely suggests that they do not enter an agreement with Mercer until they have looked at PERS. If PRES does show that it will cost the City a great deal of money, they will at least understand why. Her feeling is that perhaps Mercer may not be giving an unbiased opinion. Mayor Bay asked Mr. McRae to answer the questions posed - how has the consulting firm of Hercer, Meidinger and Hansen been paid during the past four years; have they been paid indirectly in soft dollars; why is a contract now required; what are the brokerage fees; is the stop loss insurance included in the total health care insurance costs to the City of Anaheim. Garry McRae, Human Resources Director. Mercer has been paid commissions during the last four years and since 1979. They have received no payment at all from the City. A contract is required and as soon as he found out that the City did not have a contract with them to be the broker of record, he immediately instituted a request with the City Attorney to prepare a contract which is before the Council today. Councilman Hunter asked if the City has gone without a contract for three or four years, why they cannot now wait another few months. Garry McRae. When he discovered that there was no contract, he felt he had an obligation to make that proposal to the Council. They are going to be the City's broker during this period under the same terms as in the past. He believes the best interest of the City will be served to have a contract to get the City through this period of time. Relative to the 30 day cancellation period suggested with all of the carriers, all of them do have a cancellation provisionwhich varies between 30 days and 90 days. If the Council chose at some later date to change the approach to health care for employees by accepting the PERS offer, at that moment in time, a certain amount of notice would be given. He does not see that as a handicap. The reason PEgS was not considered, he has taken the position because of the changes in the health benefit package the City has coming into effect on December 31 of this year, to move to the PERS contract would be a dr~,mtic change to that program. Therefore, he has suggested whenever asked that the PERS Health Care Package which is inclusive was not appropriate for Anaheim at this time. He would say that the principal thrust for the timing on PERS has to do with the provision of health care for retired members that is more beneficial for the retired members than that which is provided for in current labor agreements beginning January 1, 1988. It is not inappropriate and he is not offended by the approach. He also reported that the Health Council took no action on PRES. 938 Cit7 Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. He has told the Health Council that the magnitude of the health benefits is a matter of collective bargaining. He has taken the position with the Health Council in all honesty that says the level of benefits provided to retirees is a matter of collective bargaining. Relative to the stop loss insurance, the answer to that is yes. Each carrier to whatever degree they purchase stop loss is included in the rate and it is one item in the City medical plan. Relative to brokerage fees, he does not know what they are in the Mercer contract, but he does know that they are substantial. Extensive discussion, questioning and input followed between Council and staff. Mayor Bay expressed his concern about the timing for the open option starting November 1, 1987 particularly when the City is setting up for all health insurance for the coming year starting January 1. He is not unwilling to look at PERS but the timeliness of the request is what bothers him. They appear as a last minute attempt to divert the "Class of '87". The Council is very aware of the impact of the "Class of '87" and aware of the long-term savings in liabilities and with liabilities that cannot even be projected. There is nothing a great deal different in what the City has done in creating the "Class of '87" with regard to health insurance than has been done in the private sector. He is not against looking at other insurance plans including PERS in the coming year with the idea, if something can be worked out, that it be effective January 1, 1989 and not to try to do something by January 1, 1988. Garry' McRae. All of the items that AHEA suggested be taken off the Consent Agenda and discussed, except for the agreement with Mercer came to the Council on a unanimous, or near unanimous, recommendation from the Health Council which is made up of representatives of each of the employee organizations that have full time employees plus each of the various management groups that have been given positions on that Board. Councilwoman Kaywood. She agreed this is a critical time because of the open enrollment period being only ten or eleven days away. Garry HcRae. His recommendation will be that when the Council makes the decision next summer, that they make sure that the broker of record has a consulting capability so that they can utilize that service. He then answered questions posed by Councilman Hunter relative to brokerage fees. Garry McRae. There are no brokerage fees as such but there are commissions for placing business with insurance companies. Perhaps the Council can stipulate whether there will be some sharing of those commissions with the City in lieu of some other services that they might provide. As they solicit proposals, they can explore any of those kinds of activities. His only concern at this time is while they are in the process of placing the business and are on a January 1 time line, they do not have time to go through the process of selecting a broker and the process subsequent to that of placing the business. His personal Judgment is that they need to get through the first of the year and then set it late enough in the year so that they can do 939 113 Cit7 Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. a reasonable Job of reviewing proposals and take advantage of consulting services which they have paid for through the commissions that are going to be placed now. That is his whole purpose for making the recommendation for July 1, 1988. Sharon Erickson. The City has a broker of record for everything but health care. The whole issue came up because AMEA found out there was no contract. They have brought up meeting with PEgS and trying to find out the real dollar figure many times but it was "stonewalled" for whatever reason. She will do everything in her power until December 31 to help every person stuck in this "Class of '87" because one group (IBEW) was not stuck with it. She added further relative to brokerage fees that she believes it is the employees who are paying those fees in their medical premiums and benefits. Garry McRae. For most of the health plans except for the City plan, the fees approximate the Kaiser rate and the City pays the full premium for those. Any plan higher than the Kaiser plan the employee participates in the proportionate payment of those brokerage fees. In general terms, the health plans are at about the Kaiser rate and the Kaiser rate is 100 percent paid by the City. Sharon Erickson. She is not trying to hold up the open enrollment. She invited the City Manager, the Personnel Director and his staff and the City Council, to the meeting with PERS on October 29, 1987. Hopefully they will be able to show a program like they have shown Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and 364 other places that appear to be saving money in the long run. Mayor Bay. The Council is interested in looking at any alternative that will save money and gives more benefits. Bob Simpson, City Manager. City management will be present and will work with Mrs. Erickson. He believes there may be a doubt in the Council's mind and those in the audience about what is being done with the Mercer contract. The first obligation is that there be a contract. They are not proposing that Mercer go past July 1, 1988 but that Mercer's contract be extended with a proviso that it can be cancelled. The second part of that recommendation is to instruct staff to prepare Requests for Proposals (RFPs) to secure a broker of record by July 1, 1988. He wants to be sure there are no misconceptions about that. Mayor Bay. He suggested in that RFP, if they want to know what the commissions are, that it be set up in the RFP. Bob Simpson. They will do that and if it is public information, they will find that out for the Council in the meantime. If he can do so prior to the next Council meeting, that information will be provided. Councilman Ehrle. He wants to be certain the City will have 30 to 90 day cancellation provisions in the proposed contracts. The Council also has an obligation to the employees and those who are leaving. He agrees with Mayor Bay that the matter has to be discussed on the negotiating table to see what can be done to help the people who are leaving. 940 114 City Mall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL'MINUTES - October 20~ 1987, 1:30 P.M. Garry McRae. His only concern at this time is if this discussion has indicated to employees who are part of the "Class of '87# that they ought to have second thoughts about that or raise their expectations and it does not come to pass, it could be tragic for them. Mayor Bay. There is no attempt to raise their expectations. Councilwoman Kaywood. The decision was made by the Council a long time ago and nothing has changed. To start sending mixed messages is turning people's lives upside down. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to approve the following recommended actions: (a) approve the 1988 Health and Welfare plan rate as recommended and authorize the Human Resources Director to sign all renewal documents; (b) waive the single party payroll deduction for all participants in the Inland Health Plan and establish non-represented employee contributions to the self-funded Employee Medical Plan at the 1988 rate established for employees represented by the Anaheim Police Association, Anaheim Fire Association, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; (c) authorize an agreement with William M. Mercer-Meidinger-Hansen, Inc., for professional insurance brokerage and consulting services and directing staff to solicit proposals for a broker of record to be effective July 1, 1988; (d) authorize the addition of Humana Health Plan, Inc., to the list of authorized health care providers for City employees, and direct the Human Resources Director to prepare a formal agreement for Council approval; (e) authorize the addition of Community Care Network (CCN) as a Preferred Provider Organization (PPO)for the self-funded Employee Medical Plan and direct the Human Resources Director to prepare an agreement for Council approval; (f) authorize the addition of the August Fund as a Pre-admission Review/Utilization Review provider for the self-funded Employee Medical Plan; instruct the Human Resources Director to notify Cost Care of the City's intent not to renew the existing agreement; and direct the Human Resources Director to prepare a new agreement for Council approval; (g) approve in concept amendments to the self-funded Employee Medical Plan to provide for 90 percent co-insurance levels to participants who utilize the CCN-PPO network, and instruct the Human Resources Director to prepare the necessary detailed amendments to implement the recommended plan changes for Council approval; (h) waive the pre-existing condition exclusion for the self-funded Employee Medical Plan for the 1988 open enrollment o~Lly. GouncllwomanKaywood seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Hunter stated he wanted to be sure that if there were any provisions relating to the length of contracts that they follow the standard procedure, and that if 30 days, in some instances, up to 90 days in others, is the usual cancellation provision that that be the case with these contracts as well. He does not want to come back and find out that the contract was signed and it was for a year or more. Garry McRae. Staff investigated the matter some time ago. The Kaiser contract is 90 days and HFP is 30 days. Those are the two cases checked on thus far. There are five or six others and they anticipate all have a termination agreement in them. They do not have a contract provision with 941 111 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL'MINUTES - October 20, 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Humana as yet but if the Council agrees to the proposals he has made relative to Humana which is an add-on agenda item, he will pursue it on that basis. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion which included all of the items as listed. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 153: HUMANA HEALTH PLAN APPLICATION: Submitted was report dated October 19, 1987 from the Human Resources Director Garry McRae recommending approval of the subject application. Mr. McRae explained that the matter did not come to his attention that it would require formal action until after the agenda was published last Friday. On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the Anaheim City Council determined that the need to act on the following item arose after the posting of the agenda for this meeting, on Friday, October 16, 1987, at 2:00 p.m.; and consequently waived the Brown Act requirement relative to posting the item on the printed agenda. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to authorize the Human Resources Director to sign a group application for participation with Humana Insurance Company to provide health benefits for City employees, effective January 1, 1988, and authorizing an advance payment to Humana Insurance Company in an amount not to exceed $15,000 as recommended in memorandum dated October 17, 1987. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for ten minutes (3:05 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Pickler (3:17 p.m.) 177/137: PUBLIC ~rP. ARING -MULTI FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS - CHEVY CHASE ANAHEIM PARTNERS: To consider approval of the issuance of revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $26,000,000 for the purpose of assisting in the financing of a proposed project consisting of the rehabilitation of approximately 384 units and construction of eight new units located on approximately 19 acres bounded on the north by California State Route 91, on the south by Romneya Drive, on the east by Manzanita Park, and on the west by Patrick Henry School, Chevy Chase Anaheim Partners, dba Park Vista Apartments, developer, and assigning private activity bond allocation to the Anaheim Housing Authority. Submitted was report dated October 20, 1987 from the Community Developmeut Department recommending that the City Council, subsequent to a public hearing, adopt a resolution approving issuance of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds for a project to be developed by Chevy Chase Anaheim Partners, and assign private activity bond allocation to the Anaheim Housing Authority. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin October 8, 1987. 942 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Bay asked if anyone wished to speak; there was no response. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. City Clerk Sohl read the title of the Resolution. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTION: The title of the following resolution was read by the City Clerk. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-426 for adoption. Refer to the Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-426: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANADD~IMAPPROVING ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS FOR PROJECT TO BE DEVELOPED BY CHEVY CHASE ANAHEIM PARTNERS AND ASSIGNING PRIVATE ACTIVITY BONDS ALLOCATION. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Bay NOES: COUNCIL DIEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-426 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC MRARTNG - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-10; VARIANCE NO. 3691 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: APPLICANT: Ronald Thomas Boswell 2033 Parkridge Norco, California 91763 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to ILM-1200 to construct a 34-unit "affordable" apartment complex on property located at 2011 and 2017 West Ball Road, with the following Code waivers: (a) minimum building site area per dwelling unit, (b) maximum structural height, (c) maximum site coverage. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-185 approved Reclassification No. 87-88-10. Resolution No. PC87-186 granted Variance No. 3691; approved CEQA Finding - Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood and public hearing scheduled for this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin, October 8, 1987 943 109 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet, October 9, 1987 Posting of property, October 9, 1987 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated September 14, 1987. COUNCIL CONCERNS: Councilwoman Kaywood. She set the matter for a public hearing. She asked the applicant to give a brief review of the project so that those present on the matter could be informed of the proposal since there were changes made to it. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Rafat Saman, 1244 North Van Buren, Suite 11, Anaheim, 92807. The project is now only 32 units and not 34 as originally proposed. This includes six affordable units and 28 regular ones. The Planning Commission recommended the change on the site plan to comply with City policies and some of the requests of the single family residents to the east. These included providing a 20-foot wide strip, fully landscaped, and set back from the east side. They also recommended the elimination of two units that were too close to the property line, the elimination of four open parking spaces close to the property line, the relocation of trash containers away from the single family homes all of which they have done. They also relocated the entire building which is now 61 feet away from the property line of the single family homes. The Planning Commission also requested that they provide an elevation to the building to show that there were no openings or balconies from the east or the north side. The site plan has been reviewed and submitted to the Planning Department for their review and recommendations. On September 14, 1987, the Planning Commission adopted the Resolution on a 6-0 vote. He knows most of the neighbors are complaining about the number of units. Two factors have to be considered - the composite of the type of apartments in the complex. Within the 32 units there are eight bachelor units which means the average number of people renting the bachelor apartments is 1.5 or a total of 12 people. If those eight units are replaced w~th ~our two-bedroom units with two batha, the average number will be 3.5 even though there will be four less units. Also any developer will gain by getting a City bonus which will be in the future. The City will gain immediately by providing affordable units at 60 to 80 percent of the current market rent for low and moderate income people. He signed an affordable agreement for 30 years. When they filed the Letter of Understanding it was for six units when 34 units were proposed. Now there are 32 units. STAFF INPUT: Debra Vagts, Housing Operations Coordinator, interjected and explained that Mr. Saman filed a Letter of Understanding for three units and 20 years. He had an option to either provide 944 110 City Hall, Anaheim~ California -COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. six units under the 25 percent low income rents or ten percent which would be three units at 50 percent of the median. Therefore, there are three affordable units. In calculating the density bonus, the percentage is figured based on what they could have gotten under normal zoning regulations. Reducing the proposal from 34 to 32 units did not impact his total number of affordable units. Discussion followed on the issue of the number of affordable units between Council and staff wherein City Attorney White outlined the provisions of the State law relative to calculating density bonuses. If iow income units, the developer is entitled to ten percent over the maximum Code or if iow-moderate he would be entitled to 25 percent. In this case it is low income. Figuring ten percent of the 28 it is 2.8 or 3. He is required to provide three units at affordable prices. The other part is when a developer provides the ten percent or three units, he is entitled by right under State law to a 25 percent increase in density even though it is only ten percent at Iow income. The law used to be 25 percent affordable had to be provided to get a 25 percent density bonus. That was changed. If truly iow income units a developer only needs to provide ten percent for a 25 percent density bonus. He is actually getting a 14 percent increase from 28 to 32 but only three legally are required to be affordable. He is within the law. Relative to the other variances involved, Mr. White explained the only variance that is regarded as a density bonus that the State law would mandate would be waiver a., minimum building site area which is being decreased from 1200 per unit to 1,064. The other two variances, structural height and maximum site coverage, are totally within the Council's discretion and should be regarded as any other variances and approved or denied in accordance with normal Code criteria. Councilwoman Kaywood. She asked for a show of hands of those present in opposition to the project. There were approximately eight people. The reason she set the matter for public hearing was that there were 16 people opposed at the Planning Gommission meeting plus 81 had signed a petition in opposition. She is also concerned with overcrowding and a "box like" structure three stories high. Mr. Saman. It is not a "box like" structure. It is three separate buildings connected with an outside corridor. Relative to the other two waivers, the project is two stories above the partially subterranean garage. It is not three stories. The garage is five feet underground and five feet above ground. The actual "footprint" is less than 40 percent but because the City considers anything above the grade level to be a part of the "footprint" that is why it is considered three stories. The actual "footprint" area is almost 37.2 percent. 945 107 Ci__~y_~all~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P'M'. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION: Don Haiker, 939 South Agate. At the September 14, 1987 Planning Commission meeting they all left disgusted because none of the issues voiced at that meeting were addressed by the Planning Commission. The residents felt betrayed by the Commission. He then outlined the findings of the Planning Commission reading from the Resolution wherein it indicated that special circumstances exist. He wanted to know what are those special circumstances and why is this property different from any other. Ball Road does not have a multi-number of apartments abutting single family homes. The extraordinary circumstances were never explained or addressed. This is a 34 unit (now 32) complex with the potential of a possible 114 occupants next to single family homes. That is a great number of people which will generate a great deal of noise and trash. He was the only person who met with the developer. There were no mitigation measures offered nor offers to negotiate. Instead he was told what was going to be done. As the project is proposed, the view they would have of it would be a box especially for his neighbors on the corner. The project will devalue their properties and the properties in the neighborhood. They would not have purchased their homes if there was an enormous structure in their back yards. Susie Casumino, 947 South Agate. She lives on the east side of the proposed project. She and her neighbors are opposed to the project for the following reasons: the value of their property will go down; their privacy will be invaded; different types of people will be living in the apartments and it will be a nuisance to them; the swimming pool they are planning to build will be behind their house; 34 units are too much; there will be congestion and traffic; there is a question since so many people will be living in the complex if they will have problems with community water. Tang Tran, 955 South Agate. The zoning permitted under the Anaheim Municipal Code is more than sufficient for the property, anything exceeding the two story limit deprives them of the amount of sunlight they now need and enjoy, any setback less than 150 feet denies their right to privacy and peace. They live right behind the proposed property and request that the trash storage area be located away from the single family site. Mabel Hall, 926 Agate. The project will cause congestion. Key Elementary School had to reopen this year. There are also four churches in the area as well as four schools. Traffic on Ball Road is a concern. When it rains, only one lane is able to be used. Where would excess water from the project go. Apartments do not belong with single family homes. 946 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Bee Borenstein, 944 Agate. She objects on the same basis as the others who spoke. they have not seen the plans. Olga Ward, 922 South Agate. The residents in the area are getting older having lived in the neighborhood for a very long time. There is no opportunity for them to move away. Property values will go down. Many of the residents walk to church. There will be a big impact from the apartments. Modjeska Park is across Ball Road behind the school. There are a lot of drugs in the area. To have more people living in the area will only add to the existing problems. Louise San Miguel, 927 Emerald Street. They plan to retire in their present home. They do not want to see the value go down. They do not want a congested area. The developer should find someplace else to build apartments. Single family residents do not want to live close to apartments. There are good people and bad people. She does not want to be in a place where she would feel unsafe at night. Gerry Paproski, 938 Emerald. There are a number of churches, schools, pre-schools and day care centers in the area. He has two children and has to cross Ball Road to get to church. They are not in favor of this project. Fay Fayvinepham, 918 South Agate. The area is already too crowded. They do not want to move out. The project will cause congestion and it will be unsafe. She opposes the project. SUMMATION BY APPLICANT: Mr. Semen. He refuted most of the concerns expressed by the residents. The trash containers have been placed away from the single family homes, the building is not "box like", it is a two story building on top of subterranean parkinl, they are 61 feet away from the property line facing the single family homes, there are no openings or balconies from both the east and the north side, the traffic generated will be approximately 200 trips per day compared to 25,000 or more vehicles now traveling on Ball Road, the underground parking will be provided with proper drainage, the project will not contribute to crime. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. STAFF INPUT: Paul Singer. The ADT on Ball Road is 28,300. The apartment complex would generate seven trip ends per unit or 94? 105 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. 224 total trips. There would be no specific problem related to this project entering or exiting Ball Road from the site. Greg Hastings, Senor Planner. The pool and spa have been relocated further to the west away from the single family homes but are still approximately 40 feet away. There will be a six foot high wall separating the properties which is a requirement. Discussion followed between Council and staff relative to the land uses in the area wherein Mayor Bay pointed out the many areas of RM-1200 zone in the immediate vicinity. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the City Council approved the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 87R-427 and 87R-428 for adoption denying Reclassification No. 87-88-10 and Variance No. 3691, reversing the findings of the City Planning Commission. Refer to the Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-427: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-10. RESOLUTION NO. 87E-428: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 3691. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Ehrle stated he feels this particular parcel should be reconsidered to be developed more in harmony with single family residences. There are no apartments in that immediate area. There are churches and schools. He does not believe it is an appropriate project for the site. Councilman Hunter. If the project were approved, he sees at least three lots that abut the project and they too would eventually become apartments. A vote was then taken on the foregoing Resolutions of denial: Roll Call Vote: 948 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 87R-427 and 87R-428 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3696: APPLICANT: Automobile Club of Southern California 2601 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To construct a monument sign on CL(SC) zoned property located at 5500 East Santa Ama Canyon Road, with the following Code waivers: (a) type of sign, (b) maximum sign area and display surfaces. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-179 granted Variance No. 3696; project is Categorically Exempt form the requirements to prepare an EIR. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman Hunter and public hearing scheduled this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin October 8, 1987. Posting of property October 9, 1987. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 9, 1987. Mr. Sid Muuger of the Automobile Club was present to answer questions. COUNCIL CONCERNS: Councilman Hunter. His understanding is the sign is going to be set back approximately 50 feet from Santa Aha Canyon Road and 20 feet from the property line. The sign will be two sided, five feet high and lighted and that other tenants will not be advertised on the sign. He also received a letter from Robert Zemel, Chairperson, Anaheim Hills Citizens Coalition, expressing their concerns with sigmage within the scenic corridor. (See letter dated October 20, 1987 from Mr. Zemel submitted prior to the public hearing.) APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Sid Munger. He first clarified that the sign is going to be approximately 45 feet from Santa Ana Canyon Road. The sign will be lighted and the lighting will be on the same schedule as the parking lot lighting. It will go off at 9:30 p.m. It is au identification sign which will say "Auto Club Plaza" with the address. They are the owner of the building and the land. The other tenants will not be advertising on the sign. He has pictures of other signs in the immediate area which are similar to what the Auto Club is requesting. He also has composite pictures of the 949 103 City Hall~ Amaheim~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - October 20; 1987~ 1:30 P.M. building which he submitted to give an idea of where the sign will be located. When they built the building three years ago, they complied with the City's request to place the building farther back from the road. They also constructed a bridle path at the City's request and kept a beautiful big rubber tree on the property. Unfortunately those three things have made visibility of the building a problem. The monument sign is in keeping with the area and will help clients looking.for the building. They have people calling every day asking where they are located. Councilwoman Kaywood. The sign is really a service in providing identification and infomation for the motoring public. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN FAVOR: None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN OPPOSITION; None. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood. She would like to be assured that the sign is only going to say "Auto Club Plaza" with no names of other tenants listed. Mr. Munger. There are no plans to include tenants names. City Attorney White. He recommended if the Variance is approved that the Council may wish to add an additional condition that provides that the sign shall identify the name of the Automobile Club of Southern California only and not identify any other tenants on the property. There is an existing condition providing that the sign cannot be lighted between the hours of midnight and 6:30 a.m. The stipulation today was that the sign would be off by 9:30 p.m. That can be changed accordingly if Council wishes. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Hunter, the City Council approved the negative declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - AND RESOLUTIONS: was read by the City Clerk. The title of the following resolution 95O 104 City Ball, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20, 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolution. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Hunter was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Bay offered Resolution 87R-429 for adoption granting Variance No. 3696, subject to City Planning Commission conditions with two additional conditions as stipulated that (1) the sign will not be lit between 9:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. and (2) the sign will be for the Automobile Club only with no other tenants listed. Refer to the Resolution book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-429: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3696. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler The Mayor declared Resolution No. 87R-429 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - RETA~SIFICATION NO. 87-88-09, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2943 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: APPLICANT: Smart and Final Iris Realty 5933 West Century Boulevard, Suite 900 Los Angeles, California 90045 (sold to Anaheim Hotel Complex, 2932 East Nutwood, Fullerton 92631) REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: For a change in zone from CL to CE, to permit a 12-story, 105-foot high, 200-room hotel complex on approximately 1.68 acres on the northwest corner of Orangewood Avenue and Harbor Boulevard, with Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC87-169 approved Reclassification No. 87-88-09 and Resolution No. PC87-170 granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2943; approved CEQA Finding Negative Declaration. HEA~G SET ON: Appealed by J. ~hah. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin, October 8, 1987 Posting of property, October 9, 1987 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - October 9, 1987 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 31, 1987 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT: Mr. J. Shah, Captain Quarter's Inn, 620 West Orangewood Avenue, Anaheim, 92802. People were present to speak who could not wait and have left. He submitted additional signatures collected in 951 101 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. opposition (made a part of the record) and also photographs showing the site and surrounding land uses to which he directed the Council in giving his presentation. (Mr. Shah had also previously submitted detailed letters outlining the basis for his opposition to the subject project as well as petitions which further clarified the points of opposition, also made a part of the record.) There were concerns not only on his part but also other people. The main points of Mr. Shah's opposition were as follows (also see his letter of August 26, 1987): the three parcels involved should be developed as one to accommodate a large hotel such as the Princess Alicante (Hyatt) to the south; the setback is not sufficient and should be kept at 100 feet instead of 50 feet; an Environmental Impact Report should be provided addressing such issues as traffic, noise, congestion, exhaust fumes, additional vehicles generated, crime, etc. A parking structure will be aesthetically detrimental to the area not only in appearance but because of noise intrusion into the surrounding areas and parking should be ground level parking; the proposed project is too high in relation to the lot size, 12 stories on 1.65 acres is too much and it is not in harmony with the area; the project will be detrimental to his business. His business will now lose visibility from Harbor Boulevard. It is unfair to grant all these things to this developer. There is no hardship involved. In concluding, Mr. Shah requested a continuance of the public hearing and that it be set for an evening hearing so that more people can attend to give their input. He also asked that the City Council direct that the matter be returned to the Planning Commission for reappraisal so that the project will be more compatible with the lot size. His attorney wasn't able to attend the hearing today but did call to request a continuance of 30 days. He and his attorney both ask that the matter be continued for 30 days and set for a night hearing. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE PROJECT: Eleanor Smylak, resident, 1844 South Haster. She is present to express her opinion of the high rise. She feels it would be detrimental because it is too high for the neighborhood and the community. It will also hav~ a four gtory garage for parking. There will be too much traffic, noise, crime and drugs - all the bad things that go with overcrowding. There needs to be more time given to plan it better, a smaller and better building. Cliff Rediger, 2131 South Hallul. He manages 40 units on that street and represents three owners. He signed the petition in opposition not so much because he is in opposition, but as a process of self-education relative to the process. It seemed they are less receptive at the Planning Commission level. Two reasons he is present are relative to issues discussed at the Planning Commission public hearing. The 952 102 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987, 1:30 P.M. primary issue is with regard to noise in the parking structure. One of the Commissioners was sympathetic to that and addressed the developer suggesting that some sort of design change be made to limit the noise of a multi level parking structure. A specific suggestion was relative to an exterior louvered facing of some kind. The developer's Public Relations man contacted him and focused on the possibility of squealing tires which he (Rediger) considers to be only one issue. The developer proposes to change the surface of the floor to prevent the squealing but that would be inadequate and it also indicated to him a lack of sensitivity. The second issue was that it takes a great deal of time and effort to come and express opinions at the various hearings. Since the property is being subdivided, they do not have amy idea what the other parcels are going to be used for. The Public Relations man said that he could not divulge what was going to be built because the City would not allow him to discuss that. They want the property developed but because it is being subdivided and since they do not know what will be developed they are concerned. He suggested that there be a master plan for the entire parcel, that the noise problem from the parking structure be addressed in full, that the two open faces of the parking structure be modified so that noises in the evening from the structure will be inhibited by some exterior facing. Shirly Adams, 12272 Orangewood, Garden Grove. He lives on the other side of the street from the proposed project and represents the homeowners living there. His concerns are the same as those in Anaheim - noise and traffic. The street is already being used as a parking convenience to the Convention Center and 18 wheelers park there as well. Consideration should be given to protecting those living on the other side of the street as well as Anaheim residents. Delight Nease, 701 Lamark Drive. She lives in the residential area to the west of the subject property. She is not specifically in opposition but came for more information. The people in her tract met with the developer ia the s,,mmer and at that time they discussed developing the one portion of the property but did not have any information about parcel two and parcel three. Their homes are directly to the west of parcel three. They have concerns relative to what development will take place on those remaining parcels. If the subject parcel is developed now, will parcels two and three be landscaped, will they be maintained or will they have the same eyesore that is presently on the property. They are most anxious to know what will happen to the balance of the property. Also, what will happen directly to the east of the property lines of the homeowners, the westerly portion of parcel three which will not be developed at this time. There will be a heavy visual impact to the people who have back yards along there even though the 12 story structure will not be 953 99 City Hally Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: directly behind the fences. She would like a condition if possible that the area be heavily screened with trees. Ficus trees are heavy and planted close together give good screening. The residents would prefer that there be some development that would cover the whole property at one time but that may not be possible. They are tired of the eyesore they have had for the past three years but do not want to substitute another eyesore for the present one. Frances Bellaire, 2156 South Harbor. On September 1 she was assaulted on Harbor and 0rangewood and was not able to get a police officer for two hours. The proposed complex will require additional police officers for the area and will make things more difficult. There are prostitutes in the area and the addition of another hotel will add another place for prostitutes. There have been several accidents at the corner, there is a problem puttiu~ the building so close to the street, it will cause additional traffic problems. Greg Miller, Director of Marketing, NCD, National Capital Development, 2932 East Nutwood, Fullerton. The proposed building will consist of 200 units, all suites deluxe first class for the property on the corner of Orangewood and Harbor Boulevard. It will provide customers and clients with luxury accommodations with about twice the room that is afforded in normal hotel space size. It is a concept ideal for families and business travelers and it is very popular. Occupancy rates are much higher than in regular hotels. He then described the many amenities that will be offered in the suites. The market will attract the upper end of the business client and traveler as well as tourists visiting Anaheim. Among the many other amenities they will provide shuttle service to Disneyland, the Convention Center, LAX and Long Beach airports. On August 20, 1987, they held a meeting with the community at the Jolly Roger Inn where the issues previously broached by the speakers were discussed. Thirty eight people attended and a question and answer session was held. In the last two weeks they have also visited many of the peoplewho reside in the border area to the property. Three concerns seem to be at the crux of the problem - (1) construction noise - the developer will use the existing Thriftimart building to house their equipment. Construction will take place only during normal business hours. (2) noise from the parking lot - there will be a 20 foot buffer on the westerly side - the floor of the structure will be a "broom sweep" to eliminate the irritable squealing sound associated with parking structures. (3) the present Thriftimart building is housing local "riff raff" whichwill be eliminated because the developer will be using the building. The transient problem will be eliminated. 954 100 City Hall~ Anahe!~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. COUNCIL CONCERNS: Council Members questioned Mr. Miller relative to the 20 foot buffer and the types of trees or buffering material that would be used, if the west side of the parking structure could be closed, and if there will be security in the hotel. Dan Van Dorpe, 863 Jasper Circle (office 295 Rampart). He has been involved with a number of other projects in the Disneyland area and considers this the finest project he has been associated with. The entire site has been master planned but because of economic and other constraints, it is not possible for the developer to develop the site all at one time, They have divided it into three parcels at the suggestion of the Planning Director and addressed all of their concerns with regard to the major corner parcel~ It is conceived that there would be a mirror-image hotel of the one proposed on the parcel to the north and a compatible hotel on the parcel to the west. If this is developed as proposed, it is almost assured whether the Patels continue to own the property or not that similar and compatible structures will be built on the adjoining parcels. Mayor Bay. He has no problem with what is being developed to the north but will have big problems regarding parcel three and what will be put between the proposed hotel and the RS-7200 to the west. He wants to see some buffering. Dan Van Dorpe. As required by the Planning Commission at the present time a 20 foot landscaped buffer will be provided. The adjoining structure will be a parking structure with the hotel structure over 1_50 feet away. When they develop parcel three, at that time they will address the concerns of the development of that parcel. To the west would be a compatible development not only to the hotels on Harbor, but also compatible to the adjoining residential properties. Additional questions were posed to Hr. Van Dorpe by Council Members re§arding the project as well as specific questions posed by the public. Mr. Van Dorpe explained they authorized a parking study which was submitted to staff (see Anaheim Hotel Complex Parking Demand Study August, 1987 and also a Traffic Study of the same date prepared for NCD by KHR Associates of Irvine - previously made a part of the record) and the consultant is present to answer questions. Relative to the parking structure, they have to meet the minimum requirement for safety purposes but the structure will be mostly closed on the sides facing the east and west. Landscape plans have not been developed as yet. It is also proposed that the structure architecturally tied in with the hotel. 955 97 City Hall~ Ap~heim~ California - COUNCIL N_I_NUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. STAFF ~PUT: Mayor Bay interjected. The only waiver he sees on the development is the waiver for parking. He is not concerned relative to setback or height limitations and reiterated the only technical waiver in the operation is the parking. The Council is concerned about the impact of this development plus the other two parcels on the single family dwellings and the residents immediately west in Anaheim and the residents to the south in Garden Grove or in Anaheim. Their concern is for the protection of those residential areas to the best that it can be done. There is no opposition to the development per se because the Council considers it to be a high quality project and the type of development they want in Anaheim. Dan Van Dorpe. Relative to the impact to the west, the current development is 235 feet away. When the development to the west comes in then there will be greater difficulty in meeting those concerns; Mayor Bay suggested that whoever buys that property not close escrow until they get approval on their development. Dan Van Dorpe. They have agreed to the 20 foot buffer and the use of trees as a buffering agent. The real concern from people they talk to is the existing ThriftyMart building. After construction, the building will be demolished which will help to mitigate their concerns. Relative to Ficus trees as requested by Mrs. Nease, he felt those would be acceptable. However a specific landscape plan will be submitted to the City for approval. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer. He requests a change to ConditiomNo. 5 relative to the parking structure adding to it, "...and further that access, circulation and parking layout be approved by the Traffic Engineer". Dan Van Dorpe. They have no problem with that change. They have incorporated reciprocal easements into their parcel map to address some of the concerns regardin~ access and circulation. Mr. Gordon Bricken, 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K, Santa Ama. They did an analysis for NCD. Relative to the parking structure they found no possibility that the structure could exceed either the Planning standards or exceed the City's noise Ordinance. Acknowledging that there are certain annoyances from parking structures, they proposed using the "broom finish" to eliminate the squealing and to install speed bumps within the structure to force people to slow down. It is their judgment there will not be substantive noise emissions from the structure as it is currently designed. From the point of view of the criteria developers are asked to live by in the community, they find no possibility that this criteria is going to be exceeded. 956 City Hall, Anahetm~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - October 20t 1987y 1:30 P.M. Relative to shielding being installed, it is always possible to add something but how architecturally compatible it will be is another issue. They should forewarn the architect of the possibility. There is a Noise Ordinance in effect and if the operations in the structure exceed that, corrective legal action can be taken. SUMMATION BY PETITIONER: Mr. J. Shah. He reiterated his main concerns relative to setback, that the property should be developed as one, that the scope of the project is too large for 1.65 acres, it is high density and it will not be an asset to the City. It is a five-acre lot and should be developed as five acres not subdivided into three parcels. His attorney could not come today and other people in the area could not come because of the timing. He asked that they reconsider the request for a continuance and that it be set in the evening. He also requested a copy of the tape record of the meeting for his records. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. Councilman Ehrle. He does not feel they need a night meeting on this public hearing or that it should be rescheduled. He is prepared to vote on the project today. It is a quality project and will fit in on Harbor Boulevard where they are seeing the emergence of a hotel strip from the Princess Alicante Hotel in the south north to Ball Road. Anaheim is a convention and tourist City and it is the type of quality project the City would like to see built. He is also anxious to see what will be developed on parcels two and three. Parcel three is going to be a problem unless it is well thought out and master planned. Greg Hastings, Senior Planner. The Engineering Division has asked him to relate a condition which was inadvertently left out of the variance requiring the standard street improvements prior to occupancy of the building on both Harbor Boulevard and 0rangewood. The City has the dedication requirement but, along with that, would be the street improvements. Engineering has Just told the developer of the condition. Dan Van Dorpe. It is their understanding that the streets are improved (Harbor and Orangewood). They agreed to installing a bus bay on Orangewood but as far as widening Harbor and Orangewood, they are now currently developed in that area as wide as elsewhere. It was also their understanding there would be an irrevocable offer to dedicate an additional 12 feet in the event that the critical intersection was invoked at some future date. At that 957 95 City H,11~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL HINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. point if the City desired to widen Harbor Boulevard for its entire length, they would be willing to dedicate without any cost to the City and irrevocably make that offer to dedicate promptly to the City for any future widening of Harbor. He reiterated they did not understand that there would be any widening or any street improvements at this point other than the bus bay. Gary Johnson, City Engineer. At the staff meeting this morning the issue came up and it was Mr. Titus' and Mr. Singer's recollection at the Planning Commission the critical intersection dedication and construction were clear requirements in that without the critical intersection improvements there would have to be an on-site fire road circulation of some sort. Dan Van Dorpe. He understood that Orangewood was not a critical intersection but Mr. Singer wanted the irrevocable offer of dedication. As far as the bus bay, that would give an additional ten feet of widening which would give closer access to the building for the Fire Department. In initial meetings with staff they asked about fire access to the building on at least two sides. Mayor Bay expressed concern that at this point in the hearing, having already gone through the Planning Commission, there is some debate on critical intersection still open in the agreement between the developer and the City. City Attorney Jack White. If the project generates a need and dedication is reasonably necessary as a result, then it legally can be imposed notwithstanding the fact that it has not come up until today. There are occasions when conditions are attached by the Council when they have not been raised before. Discussion followed between Council, the developer and staff relative to the additional condition. Hayor Bay interjected and suggested a short recess ~herein the City Engineer and developer could discuss the issue in order to come to an amicable resolution before the Council's final action. RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for ten minutes (6:10 p.m.). AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Pickler (6:23 p.m.). City Engineer Gary Johnson. The conditions as presently written will be satisfactory for this particular project - parcel one which is the irrevocable offer of dedication of 12 feet on Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. E~VIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Hunter, seconded by Councilman Bay, the City Council approved the negative 958 96 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - RESOLUTIONS: The titles of the following resolutions were read by the City Clerk. Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of the resolutions. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. CARRIED. MOTION Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 87R-430 for adoption, approving Reclassification No. 87-88-09 and Resolution No. 87R-431 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2943 subject toall City Planning Commission Conditions and with the change to Condition No. 5 as stated by the Traffic Engineer. Refer to the Resolution Book. EESOLUTION NO. 87R-430: A F~ESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-09. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-431: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2943. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 87R-430 and Resolution No. 87R-431 duly passed and adopted. 175/123: ENGINEF/iING AGREEMENT - DANIEL~ MANN~ JOHNSON AND MENDENHAr3. (DMJE): Councilman Bay moved to waive Council Policy No. 401 and authorize an Engineering Agreement with Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall (DMJM) in an amount not to exceed ~174,605 for engineering services for the Walnut Canyon Reservoir South Inlet Structure and Storm Water Run Off Disposal System as recommended in memorandum dated October 5, 1987 from the Public Utilities Board. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARALIED. 152/112/118: COMPROMISE OF CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS: Authorizing the City Attorney to compromise claims and lawsuits prosecuted on behalf of the City. The title of the resolution was read by the City Attorney. Councilman Bay moved to waive reading of the Resolution in full. Councilwoman ~Caywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 959 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. Counctlwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 87R-432 for adoption authorizing the City Attorney to compromise claims and lawsuits prosecuted on behalf of the City as recommended in memorandum dated October 15, 1987 from the City Attorney. Refer to the Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 87R-432: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHOF. IZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COMPROMISE AND SETTLE CERTAIN CLAIMS, DEMANDS AND LAWSUITS PROSECUTED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY FOR THE RECOVERY OF SUMS OF MONEY IN THE AMOUNTS AND PURSUANT TO THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED HEREIN. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Ehrle, Hunter, Kaywood, Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler The Fmyor declared Resolution No. 87R-432 duly passed and adopted. 148: REAPPOIN~_ENT - SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to reappoint Betty L. Sanford as an alternate member of the Senior Citizens Advisory Council representing Anaheim in the Fourth District of the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-02 AND CONDITIONAL USE PFAMIT NO. 2907: James P. Barons, Morinello, Barone, Holden and Nardulli, representing Mr. and Mrs. Jeral Stanley, requesting a rehearing for Reclassification No. 87-88-02 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2907, a proposed change in zone to permit office use of residential structure on property located at 236 South Ash Street, with Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. City Clerk Sohl reported that Mr. Barone was present earlier today but was unable to stay. He has requested if Council does not wish to consider the rehearing today that they continue it for one week. Mayor Bay. In reading their request for a rehearing, the only change he could see was the addition of two more parking spaces; Councilman Hunter. He visited the site and feels that the Council should continue the matter for one week when Mr. Barone will be present. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to continue the request for a rehearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2907 for one week. Councilman Ehrle seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meeting held September 28, 1987, pertaining to the following applications were submitted for City Council information. 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2922: Submitted by Santa Fe Land Improvement Co., to permit industrially-related office uses on )iL(SC) zoned property located at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Manassero Street, to permit industrially-related office uses. 960 94 City ~11~ An-heim~ California - COUNC!LHINUTES - October 20~ 1987, 1:30 P.M. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-198 granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2922, and granted a negative declaration status. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2944 (READV.): Submitted by Larry R. Smith, to permit on-sale beer in a billiard center located on CL zoned property located at 919-959 Knott Street, with Code waiver of minimumnumber of parking spaces. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-199 denied Conditional Use Permit No. 2944 (Ready.), and granted a negative declaration status. 3. RECI.AgSIFICATION NO. 87-88-15 AND VARIANCE NO. 3700: Submitted by James H. and Grace E. Elliott, a proposed change in zone from CG to RM-1200, to construct a 3-story, 8-unit apartment building on property located at 415 So. Lemon Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) maximum structural height, (b) maximum site coverage. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-200 and 201 granted Reclassification No. 87-88-15 and Variance No. 3700, and granted a negative declaration status. 4. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-17: Submitted by Jose A. Flores, for a change in zone from RM-2400 to RM-1200~ to construct a 2-story, 6-unit apartment building on property located at 742 No. Philadelphia Street. The City Plann/ng Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-204 granted Reclassification No. 87-88-17, and granted a negative declaration status. 5. CONDITIONAL USE P~RMIT NO. 2928--EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by La Quits Zynda, E. Z. Pikin's R. V. Storage, for an extension oi time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2928, to retain a 54-space recreational vehicle storage yard on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 3603 Savanna Street. The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2928, to expire January 18, 1988. 6. CONDITIONAL USE pFmMIT NO. 2113--AMEND RESOLUTION NO. PC87-77: Submitted by Planning staff, requesting to amend Resolution No. PC87-77, nuuc pro tunc, pertaining to the termination date of said Resolution, granting a 3 year extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2113, to retain a concrete and asphalt recycling operation in RS-A-43,000(SC0 zoned property located on the east side of Richfield Road, south of La Palma Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-207, amended Resolution No. PC87-77 in Conditional Use Permit No. 2113, to terminate September 22, 1989. 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2935--AMENDRESOLUTION NO. PC87-153: Submitted by Planning staff, requesting to amend Resolution No. PC87-153, nunc pro tunc, for Conditional Use Permit No. 2935, to increase the number of recreational vehicle spaces within an existing R.V./Mobilehome park for a total of 198 spaces with certain Code waivers, on property located at 1009 South Harbor Boulevard (Anaheim harbor RV Park), clarifying stipulations of the owner. 961 9] City Hall~. Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-208, amended Resolution No. PC87-153 in Conditional Use Permit No. 2935. 8. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 87-88-16 AND VARIANCE NO. 3701: Submitted by Helen Cameron, a change in zone from RS-7200 to RM-1200, to construct a 2-story, ll-unit apartment building, on property located at 917 E. North Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) maximum structural height, (b) maximum site coverage. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-202 and 203, denied Reclassification 87-88-16 Variance No. 3701, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date. End of Planning Commission Consent Calendar. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2897 - SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Submitted by Gaye Spencer Bannister, et al, (George's Best Restaurant), to retain a drive-through lane and outdoor patio area for an existing restaurant on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 1475 South Anaheim Boulevard, with the following Code waivers: a) minimum drive-through lane dimension; b) permitted encroachment into required front, side and rear yard areas. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-205, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2897, with recommendation that the City Council set this item for Public Hearing to review conditions of approval. MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to set the date and time for public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2987 as Tuesday, November 10, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 134: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMF~NT NO. 231 - SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: City of Anaheim, to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to consider alternate uses of land from medium density residential to low-medium density residential, on approximately 3.9 acres located on the north side of Pearl Street between West Street and 170 feet east of Dwyer Place, and on the south side of Pearl Street between Carleton Avenue and 170 feet east of Dwyer Place. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC87-206, adopted General PlanA mendment No. 231, Exhibit A, Land Use Element, with recommendation that the City Council set this item for Public Hearing to review conditions of approval, and granted a negative declaration status. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to set the date and time for a public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 231 as Tuesday, November 17, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 179: P~VIEW OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISIONS - OCTOBER 8, 1987: 962 92 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - C0UNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. 1. VARIANCE NO. 3704: Submitted by Shirish HansJi Patel and Pushpa Shirish Patel, et al, (Waikiki Motel), to construct a 4-story, 100-unit hotel, on property located at 631 West Katella Avenue, with Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, pursuant to Resolution No. ZA87-26, approved Variance No. 3704, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision date was October 8, 1987. 2. VARIANCE NO. 3705: Submitted by Gary G. Laughman, to construct a semi-enclosed patio on property located at 6466 Via Corral, with the following Code waivers: (a) minimum front yard setback, (b) minimum side yard setback. Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator, pursuant to Resolution No. ZA87-27, approved Variance No. 3705 and ratified the Planning Director's categorical exemption determination, (Class V). The decision date was October 8, 1987. 170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13129: Submitted by Philip W. Ganong, et al, to establish a 25-1ot, 22-unit RS-5,000(O) zoned subdivision on property located at 1770 North Lakeview Avenue. The City Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 13129, and granted a negative declaration status. 106: RECOMMENDATION F0K BALANCING THE FISCAL YEA~ 1987-88 RESOURCE ATJ,OCATION PLAN: Mayor Bay stated he promised the Council they would get to the budget this week. He suggested that they trail the item through the rest of the agenda, have a dinner break and return on the budget. Councilwoman Kaywood suggested that the matter be continued one week for full Council action since Councilman Pickler was not present today. She moved a one week continuance on discussing Recommendations for Balancing the Fiscal Year 1987-88 Resource Allocation Plan. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council discussion followed on when the matter would be discussed. Councilwoman Kaywood suggested that the Council meeting start at 11:00 a.m. in one week and that the budget be discussed at that time. City Manager Bob Simpson reported that relative to the Police 2000 Project, the deadline for a decision on that Project was not today but it was drawing very close. Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved that they proceed with the Police 2000 Project and that it be discussed further next week. The motion died for lack of a second. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion for a one week continuance. Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 114/144: TAXPAYERS FOR A CENTRALIZED JAIL - OPPOSING THE GYPSUM CANYON JAIL SITE: Councilman Hunter requested that a resolution be placed on next week's 963 89 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 20~ 1987~ 1:30 P.M. agenda in support of Taxpayers for a Centralized Jail. The Council concurred in the request. 114/179: POSSIBLE ZONING REGULATION IN THE COMMERCIAL-[LECREATION AREA: Councilman Ehrle referred to the Council discussion last week on the strip center being constructed at the corner of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue in the CR area. Since then he has received several calls on the matter. Perhaps the Council can do something in the future in order to have more say relative to what is developed in the CR area. There are three property owners who are upset about what is going in on those important corners. He wanted to know if there was something that could be done so that when projects are proposed in the CR area, rather than being passed through, the Council might have a say regarding development. City Attorney Jack White. About the only thing that can be done is to change the zone - adopt an overlay zone or change the underlying zone which would require that some sort of discretionary approval be required by the City prior to putting in those developments. Currently, as long as the development complies with the underlying zone, the developer can obtain a building permit and start construction. If the Council wanted to direct staff or refer the matter to the Planning Commission to prepare a report they could do so. It was determined that the subject will be an agenda item for the Council meeting of October 27, 1987. 114/111: HAIJ.OWEEN - 1987: Mayor Bay recommended that there be a press release that Trick or Treat night in Anaheim is Friday, October 30, 1987 from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. with the traditional Halloween Parade being held on Saturday night, October 31, 1987. ADJOURNMENT: 11:00 a.m. to discuss the FY 1987-88 Resource Allocation Plan. Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler was absent. (6:55 p.m.) LEONORAN. SOHL, CITY CLERK Councilman Bay moved to adjourn to Tuesday, October 27, 1987 at Councilwoman MOTION CARRIED. 964