1986/05/13239
City Hall~ A-Rhetm~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT
ABSENT:
PRESENT
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING: Norman J. Priest
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
CODE ENFORCEMENT & HOUSING SUPERVISOR: John Poole
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Reverend Raymond Wade, Grace Lutheran Church, gave the Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Irv Pickler led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Roth
and authorized by the City Council:
Day of the Teacher in Anaheim, May 14, 1986,
Buddy Poppy Week in Anaheim, May 11-17, 1986,
USO Armed Forces Day in Anaheim, May 16, 1986,
Poppy Days in Anaheim, May 16 and 17, 1986 - (American Legion Auxiliary)
National Public Works Week in Anaheim, May 18-24, 1986.
Judy Thomas of Teachers United and Marlaina Bosdet, Anaheim Elementary School
Council PTA President, accepted the Day of the Teacher proclamation; Les
McCauley accepted the Buddy Poppy Week proclamation; Virginia Galloway
accepted the Poppy Days in Anaheim proclamation and John Roche and Art Daw
accepted the National Public Works Week in Anaheim proclamation.
119: RESOLUTION OF WELCOME: A Resolution of Welcome was unanimously adopted
by the City Council and presented to Bill Bohlin, Chairman of the Anaheim
Affiliate Group, extending a most cordial welcome and warm wishes to the
Anaheim Affiliate of Literacy Volunteers of America in hosting the 2nd Annual
Sout[.west Conference to be held May 16 and 17, 1986 at the Conestoga Inn.
119: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT: A Resolution of Support was unanimously adopted
by the City Council to be presented to the Orange County Board of Supervisors
encouraging the Board to act favorably relative to the acquisition of the
Madame Helena Modjeska home and Gardens as a regional historic park.
340
24O
City ~11~ Anaheimf California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Eaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held April 29, 1986. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion.
Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances anu 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 Pickler seconded the
motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of 33,560,829.65, in
accordance with the 1985-86 Budget, were approved.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, 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. 86R-190 through 86R-199, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Councllwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance
No. 4717 for first reading.
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 Pacific Bell (File No. GF546-0735) for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
December 17, 1985.
b. Claim submitted by Charles J. Chavez for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 10, 1986.
c. Claim submitted by Elaine Hawkins for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 15, 1985.
d. Claim submitted by Ronald C. Yaw for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 5, 1986.
e. Claim submitted by Robert J. McNulty for personal injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 23, 1985.
f. Claim submitted by Merry Jo Rivera for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 11, 1986.
g. Claim submitted by Philip M. Condit for for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 20, 1986.
h. Claim submitted by Dona Mae Anderson for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 3, 1986.
341
237
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
i. Claim submitted by J. McKernan for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 26, 1986.
J. Claim submitted by Mike Gonzales for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 9, 1986.
Claims against the City - recommended to be accepted:
k. Claim submitted by Automobile Club of Southern California for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
January 16, 1986.
1. Claim submitted for Richard M. Perlongo, Property Manager for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 4,
1986.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 105: Golf Course Advisory Commission, Minutes of April 17, 1986.
3. 170: Authorizing the Mayor to sign the Ownership Certificate for Parcel
Map 83-249, property located along Santa Aha Canyon Road in the vicinity of
Weir Canyon Road, in order to facilitate recordation therefor, as requested by
Kaufman and Broad.
4. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Orange Unified School District to
allow City use and certain improvements of approximately 2.5 acres of Imperial
Elementary School property, 400 South Imperial Highway, for use as a public
park for a period of 25 years with option to renew for an additional 25 years,
with estimated annual operation and maintenance costs of $23,850 upon
completion.
5. 170/123: Approving a reimbursement agreement with Presley of Southern
California for special facilities to serve Tract No. 10971 in Anaheim Hills.
6. 170/123: Approving a reimbursement agreement with Presley of Southern
California for special facilities to serve Tract No. 10972 in Anaheim Hills.
7. ].23: Authorizing a supplemental letter agreement with ASL Consulting
Engineers, to provide for a maximum increase of $3,000 in fees for additional
consulting engineering services on the Anaheim Auto Center project.
8. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the nine
months ended March 31, 1986.
9. 128/123: Authorizing an agreement with Jones Hall Hill & White, Bond
Counsel regarding the sale of Certificates of Participation for refunding
portions of outstanding Community Center Authority Bonds, Series D; Anaheim
Stadium, Inc. Certificates of Participation; and Police Department
Certificates of Participation, to take advantage of current favorable tax
exempt interest rates.
342
2-38
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Authorizing an agreement with Seidler-Fitzgerald Public Finance as Financial
Advisor to the City regarding the sale of the 1986 financing issue.
10. 160: Accepting the low bid of Custom Floors, Inc., in the amount of
~16,832 for carpet and tile at 955 Melrose Street (Maintenance Administration)
in accordance with Bid No. 4332.
11. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-190: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Dale Avenue Storm
Drain Improvement, Stoneybrook Drive to Ball Road, Account No.
24-791-6325-E1510; and opening of bids on June 12, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
12. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-191: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (La Palma Park and
Pearson Park, Picnic Shelter Developments, Account Nos. 16-827-7107-27160,
25-827-7107-27060, 16-820-?107-2012c, 16-820-7107-20160 and 25-820-7107-20060;
and opening of bids on June 12, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
13. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-192: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Oak Canyon Nature
Center Restroom Project, Account Nos. 16-810-7105-10080 and 16-810-7105-10184;
and opening of bids on June 12, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
14. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-193: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Large Valve
Replacements on State College Boulevard, Account No. 52-606-6329-02842; and
opening of bids on June 5, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
15. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-194: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Valley Street
Storm Drain Improvement, Broadway to Orange Avenue, Account Nos.
24-791-6325-E1480, 11-790-6325-E0620 and 52-606-6329-05642; and openinE of
bids on June 12, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
16. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-195: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FIN~T.T.Y ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF Al.I.
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: LINCOLN AVENUE STREET AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENT IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM. (Account Nos. 17-791-6325-E1360, 51-484-6329-00732 and
52-606-6329-02260, Nick Didovic Construction Company, contractor, and
authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion therefor)
17. J.65: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-196: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
343
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: DOWNTOWN PROJECT ALPHA (PHASE I) PATTERN CONCRETE RECONSTRUCTION.
(Account No. 46-793-6325-E3920, Bruce Paving Company, Inc., contractor, and
authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion therefor)
18. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-197: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Lakeview Avenue
Street Improvement, Orangethorpe Avenue to La Palma Avenue, Account Nos.
46-792-6325-E2120 and 54-605-6329-04571; and opening of bids on June 12, 1986,
2:00 p.m.)
19. 153/123: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-198: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE ANAHEIM POLICE ASSOCIATION. (Approving the Letter of
Understanding dated February 18, 1986 with the Anaheim Police Association
amending the contract with the Public Employees Retirement System to implement'
lower tier pension benefits and the supplemental deferred compensation program)
20. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-199: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A CERTAIN DEED AND ORDERING ITS RECORDATION.
21. 170/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4712: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION .030 OF SECTION 17.08.110 OF CHAPTER 17.08
OF TITLE 17 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO EXTENSIONS OF
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPROVAL.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
None
Bay
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 86R-190 through 86R-199, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
123/106: CONSULTING SERVICES - COUNTY OF ORANGE NEAR-TERM JAIL FACILITY:
City Manager William Talley briefed staff report from the Community
Development/Planning Department dated May 12, 1986 noting that the County
Board of Supervisors had scheduled a meeting on May 22, 1986 to discuss the
Notice of Preparation (NOP) dated May 1, 1986 which is the first step in the
ELR process relative to the proposed subject facility thus necessitating
Council action today in providing professional consulting services in
conjunction with the NOP as recommended in the subject report.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to (1) authorize the City Manager to execute a
Letter Agreement with Phillips Brandt & Reddick to provide professional
consulting services in conjunction with the Notice of Preparation for the
Near-Term County Jail Facility Environmental Impact Report of compensation not
to exceed ~5,000 and (2) appropriating $5,000 from the Council Contingency
Fund to provide compensation to the consultant under such an Agreement.
344
236
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent.
CARRIED.
123: WESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW - WORK STUDY PROGRAM:
MOTION
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve an agreement with Western State
University College of Law to employ law students in the City Attorney's Office
through a work study program for the term July 1, 1986 through July 1, 1987,
as recommended in memorandum dated April 25, 1986 from the City Attorney.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION
CARRIED.
179: AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 86R-43 TO CORRECT A CLERICAL ERROR:
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 86R-200 for adoption, amending
Resolution No. 86R-43, nunc pro tunc, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2748
to correct a clerical error. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 86R-200: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 86R-43, NUNC PRO TUNG, GRANTING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2748.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
C0UNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Xaywood, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
None
Bay
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-200 duly passed and adopted.
179: ORDINANCE NOS. 4713 THROUGH 4715: Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance
Nos. 4713 through 4715, both inclusive, for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4713: 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(7), CO(SC), southwest corner of Santa
Aha Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road)
ORDINANCE NO. 4714: 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. 61-62-69(99)~ ML, 1353 North Miller Street)
ORDINANCE NO. 4715: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(Amendin~ Title 18, Reclass. 70-71-38(2), RM-1200, 831 North Zeyn Street)
114/179/112: SALE OF HOT MEALS AT CONVENIENCE MARKETS ALSO SELLING GASOLINE
AND t_LCOHOLIC BEVERAGES: Councilman Overholt stated that he had been
disturbed with an advertising program in progress specifically sponsored by
Arco regarding their AM/PM convenience markets. The advertising states that
for 99~ a customer can buy two fresh-cooked hamburgers. He recalled the
lengthy and exhaustive debates at many Council meetings on whether or not to
allow by ordinance the sale of alcoholic beverages at gasoline
stations/mini-markets. He voted in favor of allowing beer and wine at those
345
Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
facilities amidst all kinds of pledges by the petroleum industry that efforts
would be made to discourage the consumption of alcohol while driving. He felt
that those Council Members who voted in favor had now been "duped" by the
industry and Arco in particular. If hot food is now being sold in their
facilities, the likelihood of a customer picking up beer and drinking it with
a hamburger while driving out of the station was very probable. It "flies in
the face" of those who supported the ordinance. It was similar to encouraging
beer and wine sales on a take-out basis with any fast food operation.
Councilman 0verholt asked the City Attorney to advise the Council as to
whether the preparation of hot food at a convenience market also selling
gasoline is consistent with the City's ordinance, and secondly whether
preparation of hot food at a convenience market associated with dispensing of
gasoline is inconsistent with any CUP's the City has granted. If so, he
wanted to find out if those convenience stores at gas stations in Anaheim were
preparing hot meals (he considered hamburgers hot meals). If that was the
case, he for one, was going to start a campaign to reverse the decision
allowing the sale of beer and wine at a location where petroleum products were
sold since he felt it was an extremely dangerous thing to do.
Council Members Kaywood, Roth and Pickler concurred in the requested action.
The City Attorney was thereupon directed to submit the requested report for
subsequent Council consideration.
114: HOUSE NUMBERS TO FACILITATE IDENTIFICATION BY EMERGENCY VEHICLES: Mayor
Roth recalled that a subject which Councilwoman Kaywood had broached on
previous occasions had to do with the lack of house numbers on the front of
people's homes. He expressed concern if there was a fire or a call for the
paramedics, it would be very difficult for those emergency vehicles to know
which house the call came from, especially on requests for paramedic services,
because so many homes did not have identifying numbers either on the house
itself or painted on the curb. He thereupon encouraged all citizens to
evaluate by personal observation whether or not their homes could be easily
identifiable by number and, if not, take appropriate action in order to
facilitate identification by emergency vehicles should the need arise.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she had brought the issue forward many times over
the years. She questioned whether new developments were required to make
certain that houses were readily identifiable by numbers and, if not, that
steps should be taken to ensure that the street addresses showed clearly on
the house and preferably on the curb. There were a lot of accidents and near
misses because people had to slow down and try desperately to find a house
number. She also noted that most of the businesses along Harbor Boulevard.
where there were so many signs did not have a street number which she felt
should be incorporated into the sign along with the name.
REgUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Roth announced that a Closed Session would
be held to confer with the City's Attorney regarding the following:
To confer with its attorney regarding pending litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), to wit: Golden
West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim, 0.C. Superior Court Case
No. 40 92 46.
346
234'
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
be
To confer with its Attorney regarding pending litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1).
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch
break. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent.
MOTION CARRIED. (11:10 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilman Bay. (1:38 p.m.)
179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2747 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
APPLICANT:
McDonald's Corp., (McDonald's Restaurant),
8840 Complex Drive
San Diego, Ca. 92123
(Skip Sterling, owner)
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To permit expansion of an existing drive-through
restaurant on CL zoned property located at 3210 West Lincoln Avenue, with Code
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-8 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 2747. Approved EIR - negative declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Appealed by Mr. J. Kent Bewley and Mr. James W. Schmidt, Bewley Maintenance
(owners of the adjacent car wash). This matter was continued from the meeting
of February 25, 1986, March 25, 1986 and April 8, 1986, to this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 13, 1986.
Posting of property February 14, 1986.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 13, 198§.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 6, 1986.
City Clerk Leonora Sohl announced that an additional request for a one week
continuance of the public hearing had been received in letter dated May 8,
1986 from the law firm of Farano & Kieviet, attorneys for the applicant.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Frank Lowry, Attorney, Farano & Kteviet.
The reason for requesting a continuance is due to the illness of
the Chief of the Real Estate section of the McDonald's. He has
also contacted the opposition informing them of their intent to
request a continuance. He is now also asking for not a one week
continuance, but a continuance of the public hearing to May 27,
1986 in order to bring in a complete package to the Council.
Mr. Kent Bewley, appellant, 621 Hill Avenue, Whittier.
There has been only one meeting with Mr. Dunkleman by Mr. Lowry
since he (Lowry) asked for the last continuance five weeks ago.
347
2'31
City H~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
He would like to get the matter resolved but believes that Mr.
Dunkleman is playing a waiting game. He is not objecting to the
request for a continuance. Mr. Dunkleman, however, has not been
responsive and also had not repaired the wall as he was
requested to do. He did not know if the matter could be
resolved without Mr. Dunkleman being present.
Mayor Roth.
If the Council agreed to a continuance, he assured Mr. Bewley
that he would personally oppose any additional continuances if
requested.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
She also would not allow any further continuance. She asked
that Mr. Lowry relay a strong message to Mr. Dunkleman. She was
also not pleased at the apparent lack of effort on the part of
Mr. Dunkleman to try to resolve the issues.
Councilman Overholt.
He asked for Mr. Lowry's commitment to go forward with the
hearing on May 27, 1986.
Mr. Lowry.
He could commit within the limits of his ability to do so. From
a legal standpoint, he will be prepared to proceed with the
hearing. Mr. Dunkleman will receive the message that the
Council is going to proceed with the hearing on May 27, 1986
with no further delays.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to continue the public hearing on Conditional
Use Permit No. 2?4? and negative declaration therefor to Tuesday, May 27, 1986
at 1:30 p.m. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was
absent. MOTION CARRIED.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2760 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
APPLICANT:
HavadJia Holdings, Inc.,
4320 West 171 Street,
Lawndale, Ca. 90260
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 4150 East La
Palms Avenue, with the following Code waivers: (a) maximum number of small
car spaces (deleted), (b) minimum number of parking spaces, (c) minimum
distance of a drive-thru lane (deleted), to permit a drive-thru restaurant.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-60, granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 2760, in part. Approved EIRNegative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Review requested by Councilman Pickler.
meeting of April 29, 1986, to this date.
This matter was continued from the
348
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin April 17, 1986.
Posting of property April 18, 1986.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 18, 1986.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 17, 1986.
STAFF INPUT:
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
He has met with the applicant twice and recommended, since
Councilman Bay was favorable to the development subject to the
installation of a traffic signal, that the applicant participate
by paying one-quarter of the cost of the signal. It could then
be moved up on the priority list. The configuration of the
property is such that the drive-thru can be accommodated only
within the property. No waiver for parking would be required
for the small car spaces but overall a waiver is needed.
However, the parking study indicated parking will be adequate.
The planned signal at present is No. 4 on the priority list. It
would still remain No. 4 but it could be built sooner with the
one-quarter participation from the applicant. The cost of the
signal is estimated to be between $90,000 and $100,000. He did
not receive a formal commitment of participation from the
applicant.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT AND ANSWERS TO COUNCIL QUESTIONS: Mike HavadJia, applicant.
The project is only 2,000 square feet and he does not feel it
fair to pay $25,000 for the traffic signal. The Cabot, Cabot &
Forbes (CC&F Development) across the street is 190,000 square
feet with 675 parking spaces and they did not have to pay for a
traffic light but only the regular traffic signal assessment
fees. He is also willing to pay his fair share of the fee. A
drive-thru will cut down the number of cars coming to the
restaurant since many times an order is placed for many people
and only one person utilizes the drive-thru to pick up that
order. Relative to the trucking operations on Richfield, if
there are too many trucks which make it difficult for traffic at
the intersection~ those companies should be required to cut down
their operations to leave room for him. Otherwise~ he should
also be able to develop his property. He has already agreed to
demolishing the existing house on the property located in front
of the setback line which will make for a better intersection.
It has already cost him $40,000 to build his restaurant and he
has dedicated over 4,000 square feet of land to the City worth
another ~60,000. If he is allowed to build on the property, he
will also remove all the bushes and trees which will provide
greater visibility. His parcel is very small and anybody who
decides to develop it will have to keep to a small concept. A
restaurant, liquor store or convenient store will draw more
traffic than his proposal. Denial of his request will diminish
the value of his property. Relative to a waiver of the parking
349
229
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
PUBLIC INPUT-
IN FAVOR:
requirements, he cited several CUP's in the area that had been
granted such waivers. The findings in the parking study
determined that his project will not place an undue burden on
the traffic at the intersection.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
He reported for Councilman Pickler that the traffic signal
priority list was evaluated each year. The subject signal would
not be installed before 1987/88 and possibly 1988/89.
Mike Havadjia.
The restaurant will probably not be built for another year. If
his operation is found to be causing a problem, he will close
down the drive-thru portion for 6 or 8 months until the City
installs the traffic light.
Mayor Roth.
The applicant is attempting to crowd to much on the property.
Drive-thru restaurants are popular and if the use was going to
be adding an additional amount of traffic to the subject
intersection without the benefit of a traffic signal, it would
increase the hazard at that intersection.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
Traffic will increase and he did see a potential hazard at the
intersection if it was not signalized in a timely manner.
Harry HavadJia, part owner of the project.
He understands there is a minor problem with traffic. Richfield
is a dead-end street with only trucks going in and out. They
stop after 10:00 a.m. At the time the restaurant will be
operating, there will be no trucks. The project will also be
better for the City since it will improve the intersection and
make it safer.
Councilman Pickler.
The use is going to cause more circulation problems than any of
the other uses in the vicinity. If the traffic light is needed
before it is scheduled to be installed, he wanted to be assured
that the applicant would share the cost in the amount of $25,000.
Councilman 0verholt.
He believes that the proposed project will create an impossible
situation at the subject corner and he is going to vote against
it.
Eleni Philippou.
She is in favor of the project. She met the HavadJia brothers
through a mutual friend and was offered the position of being
manager at the proposed Anaheim restaurant. She has been
working and training with them at their Perris operation for the
last 2 to 3 months. That business is a walk-through as well as
350
230
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986, 10:00 A.M.
drive-thru and it is very efficiently operated. A the last
Council meeting which she attended, it was stated that the
traffic light was going to be installed in the next year and not
1988. Also, the person who spoke against the project did not
cite traffic as the problem but expressed concern about people
using their parking lot. She did not see how that could be a
problem.
Councilman Pickler.
He was questioning the possibility of working something out
since he felt it would be safer with the facility built on the
corner than what was existing on the property at the present
time.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
The visibility would be improved by the removal of the bushes
and structure presently on the property but another concern he
had, brought out in the discussion was pedestrians crossing at
that location to get to the restaurant. He also confirmed that
relative to prioritizing the signals, they would be kept in
their present order but accelerated.
Councilman Overholt.
It disturbed him that Councilman Bay's previous comment about
advancing the signal at the subject intersection was so
important in the Traffic Engineer's mind. No one had a quarrel
with the quality of the project presented but whether it should
be allowed at this time without traffic control. He asked for
the Traffic Engineer's evaluation on that basis.
Paul Singer.
He recommends that the signal be installed before the project is
completed. To allow the project now without such control would
make a bad situation worse.
Councilman Overholt.
He could not see approving the project under the present
circumstances. If the applicant wanted more time he would
entertain a continuance.
Councilman Roth.
He felt the project could be approved but only on the basis that
the applicant share the cost of installing the signal so that it
could be installed before the project was completed. Otherwise,
there was the alternative of waiting until the signal was
installed in accordance with the priority list in 1988/89. No
matter who develops on that corner, they would be subject to the
same requirements.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
351
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13, 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Additional Council discussion and questioning of the applicant followed
revolving around the possibility of his submitting revised plans eliminating
the drive-thru.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to continue the public hearing on
Conditional Use Permit No. 2760 and negative declaration to Tuesday, May 27,
1986 at 1:30 p.m. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was
absent. MOTION CARRIED.
134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 212:
APPLICANT:
City of Anaheim,
200 So. Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim, Ca. 92805
REQUEST: To consider amendment to the circulation element text and map for
redesignation of Hidden Canyon Road from a hillside commuter arterial highway
designation to a local street.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-78 recommended adoption of
General Plan Amendment No. 212 circulation element and General Plan Text -
Exhibit A.
HEARING SET ON:
Required.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin May 1, 1986.
Posting of property May 2, 1986.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 5, 1986.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 31, 1986.
PUBLIC INPUT-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC INPUT-
IN 0PPOSITION:
None.
STAFF INPUT: Staff had nothing further to add relative to the proposed
amendment.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, seconded by Councilman Roth, 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 Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
352
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986.~ .10:00 A.M.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 86R-201 for adoption, approving the
amendment to the circulation element text and map General Plan Amendment No.
212 Exhibit A for redesignation of Hidden Canyon Road from a hillside commuter
arterial highway designation to a local street. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 86R-201: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 212, EXHIBIT A.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Kaywood, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
None
Bay
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-201 duly passed and adopted.
105: RESIGNATION FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD: Councilwoman Kaywood
moved to accept with regret the resignation of Steven Staveley from the
Community Services Board as tendered in his letter of May 6, 1986. Councilman
Roth seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked that a Letter of Thanks be sent to Staveley for his
service on the Community Services Board; City Clerk Sohl noted that it would
be necessary to post the unscheduled vacancy for 10 days before the Council
made a reappointment.
RECESS: Councilman Roth moved to recess to 7:00 p.m. Councilman Pickler
seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (2:37 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilman Bay. (7:08 p.m.)
108/142: HEARING - REQUEST TO AMEND STREET VENDING ORDINANCE: To consider a
request for amendments to Ordinance No. 4615, which regulates street vending.
This matter was discussed at and continued from the meetings of March 18 and
April 15, 1986 (see minutes those dates where input was received).
Mayor Roth asked to hear from any members of the public who wished to speak to
the issue, either in favor of amending the present ordinance regulating street
vending which would allow vending in apartment areas o~ the City, or against
amendment to the present ordinance.
Mr. Jose Luis Bucio, President of the Association of Street
Vendors of Southern California speaking through an interpreter,
Mr. Robert Nava, Staff Specialist, Orange County Human Relations
Commission.
The Association is present to show the support the City of
Anaheim and the latino community has for the vendors, which
support has been consistent, the people present support and need
their services. The goods the vendors sell are 60 percent
cheaper than what they are sold for at markets. It is not true
that the vendors harm the community. The services they provide
Ctt7 Hall; Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986, 10:00 A.M.
benefit the community. They can no longer endure delays on the
issue and hope that the meeting will settle the issue once and
for all. There are some people who have embedded themselves in
certain organizations who do not live in the community and do
not know what the community needs and experiences who are trying
to agitate. It is not Just for the City to move against the
vendors based on the allegations of two or three people who are
not successful in business and who have tried in the past and
failed.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked to see a show of hands of those
present in support of the requested Code amendment;
approximately 100 people raised their hands.
Mrs. Delia Carrasco, 12641 Nelson Street, Garden Grove.
She works through the University of California and the
Department of Agriculture Cooperative Extension located on
Harbor Boulevard in Anahetm. Her Job is to teach low income
families how to eat better and for less. The vendors provide a
great service to low income homemakers by selling fresh
vegetables and fruits. She urged the Council to change the
ordinance so that the vendors can sell to the community.
Ed Dart, 446 South Anaheim Hills Road, Anaheim.
He respresents the "Hot Dogger" a vending type operation.
Cities tend to over regulate vending businesses which are
already regulated by the State and County health Department.
Vendors believe in ordinances and guidelines but feel that those
establishing the guidelines do not know what a vendor does and
offers. The City should look at vending as a service and a
business. It is a business that is being regulated out of
existence,
Pedro Vasquez, speaking through the interpretor, Robert Nava,
627 South Shelton, Santa Aha.
They are small business people who have all their capital
invested in the vending business. They have worked with certain
groups but have not been able to reach either a positive or
negative accord with them because those groups have not lent
their attention in order to achieve a solution. Relative to
trash, it is a problem caused by owners of the apartments. Some
have one bin for 16 apartments. Relative to traffic, it is a
reality that has always existed. The vendors are not the cause
of traffic. They are also not involved in dirty business or in
drugs, the latter being a problem whichhas affected them the
most but they have nothing to do with it.
Rick Kramer, 1234 South Feather.
He frequently drives by the apartment complex next to the
Disneyland Hotel (Lynn/Jeffrey area) and has observed a van
which parks next to the curb with people milling around it
buying vegetables. There are many mothers with little
children. While he feels vending serves a need for the people
354
226
City Hallt Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
in the area, his concern is relative to safety and with the
possibility of an accident. Perhaps the City could set aside
areas to keep the activity off the street.
Amin Daivd, 419 South Colt, Anaheim.
He referred to the City's present ordinance which has existed
for 60 years. The Code has been interpreted to change some
ground rules relative to what is considered a business section.
Apartment zones are considered businesses and he is at a loss to
know why. Code Enforcement Officers are saying that street
vendors cannot vend in apartment areas because those are
business areas of the City while it is still permissible to vend
in single-family residential areas. Relative to the argument
that street vending is unfair competition, the vendors should be
applauded if they can afford to bring foodstuffs to the people
who need it for less than the markets. Relative to drugs, drug
traffic can be found on the premises of large hotels and bars.
In their decision, the Council should look upon the matter as an
entrepreneurial endeavor. It would not serve the best interest
to restrict the vending activity causing it to flounder and go
away.
Ruth Kozusyn, 2117 West Minerva, Anaheim.
Permitting the street vendors to resume their operations will be
a step backwards. Most Americans are not familiar with push
carts. Very often, vendors are not even clean. She also
expressed her concerns relative to the problem of illegal
immigration into the United States. She then referred to an
article from the Los Angeles Times relative to a rare and fatal
infection affecting mostly immigrants from Latin American
countries, especially Mexico, which disease is related to food
handling (see Miss Kozusyn's letter of May 9, 1986 attached to
which was a copy of the article). She is opposed to relaxing
health standards in this country and accommodating people who
want to change American society forcing conformance to their
standards. She urged the Council to vote no to the resumption
of street vending.
Dennis 0rphar, Attorney representing Prince ~arket, 1200 West
Cerrltos.
His clients have invested considerable time, money and energy in
their store. They are in danger of being put out of business by
the street vendors. The vendors have no overhead. They are
going to cause considerable problems if they are left to sell
whatever they want to on the street. They now sell everything
in their trucks. It would appear not knowing what is sold in a
truck would cause severe licensing problems. There are also
traffic hazards associated with street vending. Eventually
there will only be trucks in the City and no stores.
Frank Morales, 28302 Paseo Establo, San Juan Capistrano,
consultant for the Neighborhood Improvement Program of Anaheim
(NIPA), the Program Administrator. The program was established
355
223
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
(originally the Apartment Improvement Program) because of the
need to reverse the deterioration of apartment buildings in the
Chevy-Chase area. After 3 or 4 years of effort there appeared
to be continued deterioration. He Joined the program in
November and found a number of problems such as disposal service
and trash pick up. They worked with the disposal people and the
situation has improved. He would be surprised to see 16 or 18
units with only one bin. There were many problems with drugs,
actually curb service. He personally witnessed it having walked
the streets morning, noon and night. There were also some
prostitution problems. Some apartment owners do not care.
There are also some tenants who do not understand their tenant
responsibilities. He personally has been working withmany of
the tenants, apartment owners and business people. NIPA has
addressed itself to many of the problems, one being the street
vendors. They have nothing personal against the vendors being
in business. Some of the innuendos made tonight are far fetchedl
Mr. Joe Caux, Chairperson of NIPA was unable to be present and
asked him to read a document. Mr. Morales then read the
recommendation of NIPA regarding the street vendor issue in the
apartments around the Chevy-Chase area, the last paragraph of
which stated, "Therefore, it is the recommendation, by majority
vote, that the current Code (Option No. 1) be enforced and that
strict enforcement of all street vendors in the apartment area
be continued." (See document dated May 13, 1986 from NIPA).
Brenda Garcia, 1036 North "C" West Brewster, a resident of the
Chevy-Chase area. At times she and her neighbors do not have
the money to buy things. No markets give credit, but the
vendors do. Preventing children from congregating around the
trucks is a mother's responsibility; drivers must be responsible
as well. The vendor's services are very much needed. Most of
the residents do not have cars.
Margaret Morrissey, 1232 Laster, Anaheim, homeowner in the
Lynn/Jeffrey area.
It has been very quiet in the area in the past few months since
enforcement of the ordinance. Before this time, the noise from
the trucks was continuous occurring at least once an hour
everyday including Saturdays and Sundays.
Oisa Luna, Apartment 10, 507 South Street, Anaheim, speaking
through the interpreter, Mr. Nays.
She and her neighbors need the services provided by the
vendors. It has been very difficult for them since vendor
activity was stopped. The fruits and vegetables sold are always
fresh. The people involved are humble individuals and need the
support. Many are latinos or low income people. She urged
favorable consideration by the Council.
356
22.
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Petilla Rameriz (speaking through the interpreter, Mr. Nava) 630
West Ninth Street, Anaheim.
The street vendors provide a valuable service. They sell good
products and are sensitive in caring about how the trash is
handled. The market close by (Prince Market) has hurt the
consumers because their prices are too high. The street vendors
do not persecute their customers in any way.
Jack More, 617 Sabina, Anaheim.
He is very much against the vendors. The disturbed the
residents at night with loud music. The City should not bend
the ordinance in their favor. Since the vendors have not been
allowed in the area, the street have been much cleaner.
Larry Mishler, 1738 North Cedar Glenn, Anaheim.
He has been selling ice cream in Anaheim for 25 years. He does
not operate in the areas of concern. The problems are a
combination of the vendors and residents in the City. He lived
in the Chevy-Chase apartments 16 years ago and trash was a
problem even then. If a vendor is stopped and servicing a
customer, no music should be playing. He has observed that even
when the vendors stopped, the music is still blasting.
Mr. Laverne Wilton.
He has been an Anaheim resident since 1944. The 60-year old
ordinance should not be changed for other people coming into the
country. The music from the trucks keeps him awake. If the
ordinance was going to be changed, it should be put to a vote of
the people.
Francis Gonzales, 608 North Olive, (since 1936).
She has tried every thing to clean up the City. When she moved
toAnaheim it was very different than now. She did not blame it
on the vendors, but on the City and the Health Department. The
vendors have a right to make a living but there are too many of
them. She is going to be selling her house and moving out of
Anaheim. She questioned why the vendors were restricted from
selling in certain areas. The music and noise were not the main
problem. She was concerned for the children. She was not
against the vendors. Since the vendors have not been selling,
the situation has improved but the vendors need the work.
Councilman Overholt.
He clarified the issue is to decide after 60 years, should the
vendors be able to sell in apartment house areas. They have
always been about to sell in single-family residential areas.
Mel Aguilar, 511 North Anaheim Boulevard.
His family has lived inAnaheim for over 60 years. The issue is
not whether those involved are hispanics or anglos but the
concept of being able to use the free enterprise system so that
the vendors can support their families. As Chairman of the
357
Ctt7 Hall,} Anaheim{ California - COUNCIL I~J~JTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Central City Neighborhood Council, the members wanted the
Council to do what they consider is fair. He clarified the
Neighborhood Council did not make a recommendation one way or
the other but they wanted to let the Council know that they are
concerned and wanted something to be done. Relative to his own
personal opinion, he noted that Carl Karcher initially pushed a
cart and became a tremendous asset to the Anaheim community. He
wanted to see people be able to "make it" as well as fair
representation by the Council. He also felt that vendors should
be able sell in apartment areas but with proper restrictions
such as those outlined by staff in the previous hearing on the
issue.
Artha Wilber, 1208 East Palm, Orange.
The problem was county-wide whatever decisions were made in
Anaheim would influence other cities and areas. She did not
want a pushcart society to develop in the United States. She
considered one of the most pressing domestic problems in the
country is illegal imm~gration. All governing bodies on all
levels should make decisions to deter illegal immigration and
not support it.
Alfonso Gomez, 1634 East Broadway, Anaheim.
He is one of the vendors and has made suggestions about the
problems. Trash is being blamed on the vendors but 80 percent
of the trash is beer bottles and the vendors to do not sell
beer. It is also more dangerous for kids to cross streets
following the truck to buy ice cream. Relative to the music,
the vendors suggested playing music only when the trucks are
rolling and not while waiting on customers. He asked that the
City take into consideration all the things the vendors
suggested and all that they are planning to in favor of the City
and themselves. He asked that they amend the ordinance.
John Poole, Code Enforcement Supervisor, then clarified a
concern expressed by Mr. Gomez regarding citations received
involving permits. Vendors receive only a receipt until cleared
by the Police Department. It is only a receipt and not
permission to sell. Therefore, they are violating the Code
until they receive a permit. The clearance procedure usually
takes about a month.
MarJorie Conway, 1310 Atika Place, Anaheim, member of NIPA.
Some of the tenants they talked to that came to their meeting
regarding the vendor issue were present tonight. There have
been subtle threats about them because of their alleged feelings
against the vendors. The tenants told NIPA they have witnessed
some drug sales. It is now cleaner in the area, quieter and the
tenants they talked to are very pleased with the way things are
now since enforcement. Vendors came to their meeting and stated
they had formed a union and indicated they would stay out of the
area. She and Sheri Pignone have monitored the area and the
union members have not stayed out.
358
222'
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Kris Tenpas, 1213 North Citron, Anaheim, Chairman of the Patrick
Henry Neighborhood Council. She thanked Mr. Poole and his staff
for the ongoing efforts regarding the street vendor problem in
their neighborhood. When the vendors are allowed into their
neighborhood, they are subjected to the following conditions:
Numerous vendors sometimes 8 or more within a block of each
other all competing for business at the same time, constant horn
honking or music playing to attract customers, illegal parking
by many of the vendors creating traffic hazards and congestion,
children running into the street to greet vendors or shopping
from the street-side portion of the truck, unrefrigerated,
uncovered food, open to the elements, attracting flies and other
pests, unsanitary conditions on the trucks themselves, food
lying unwrapped and uncovered on the floor of the truck,
spoiled, damaged food thrown on the street and lawn areas left
for the street sweeper, catering or hot food trucks attracting
30 or more customers at one time. Vendors are often in the area
until midnight making it difficult for people to sleep. The
large quantities of trash left behind is then the responsibility
of area residents, or property management to clean up. There
are also complaints of drugs being sold by some vendors.
She had heard that some of the vendors formed a union and were
making an all out effort to cooperate with City officials and
area residents. One of the terms used was "self policing." On
Thursday, May 20, 1986 Union President Jose Bucios and some of
his members attended a NIPA meeting and announced that the union
members would not vend in the neighborhood until the Council
made a decision on the issue. She then relayed specific
incidences showing they did not keep their word. She submitted
pictures to substantiate her claims. It was also not uncommon
to see vendors in the rear yard area so that they could not be
detected from the street. She also expressed concern over the
quality of produce being sold and elaborated upon that issue.
She ended by questioning if there would be any liability on the
part of the City.
Leonard Spivak, 16596 Redwood Circle, Fountain Valley, owner of
an 8-plex apartment in the Lynn/Jeffrey apartment area. He
elaborated on the trash problem he has encountered. His trash
bin is used on numerous occasion to discard crates used for
bananas and tomatoes and not trash which can be attributed to
his tenants. The police have told him not to confront the
vendors. His property is only one block from the mini-market
and 7/10 of a mile from Albertson's Market on Euclid and
Katella. He has a responsibility to keep his property clean and
well maintained or he is subject to Code Enforcement as well.
The City Council has the responsibility to keep the streets
clean, safe and free of noise.
Mr. Bucios/Nava, interpreter.
He refuted allegations made by members of NIPA. He also pointed
out that trucks that have been in the apartment areas in
359
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
violation of the Code are not trucks that belong to his
association. He also submitted photographs which were printed
in the spanish newspaper La Opinion where their reporter
interviewed an individual from Santa Ana who had blatantly
violated the ordinance but has never received the attention his
association has received. Relative to Mr. Spivak's testimony,
at the corner of the apartments he owns, there is excessive drug
dealing that occurs in that area. One of the reasons Mr. Spivak
has not evicted the tenants is because those individuals who
deal with drugs pay their rent quickly and on time. The people
who were present tonight to testify are in favor and need the
services of the vendors. The other people have another agenda
which is not for the benefit of the entire community.
Frank Morales.
He explained that he and Mr. Caux did attempt to find a solution
in providing a place for the vendors to sell their goods but
found that because of the liability insurance requirement, it
was not possible. They are not against the vendors or anyone,
but the problem. The cleanliness and quietness in the area as
attested to tonight is due to Code Enforcement doing their Job.
COUNCIL INPUT:
Councilman Pickler.
He has heard some racial inferences made tonight as being the
cause of the situation but the majority of the people did not
even raise that issue. It is not such an issue. There are
areas in the City inundated with vendors and those are also the
problem areas. The City has been trying to clean up those
areas, but they are getting worse instead of better. There are
additional traffic problems creating a hazard, parking problems,
trash, noise and health problems. Another major concern in his
view is the liability with which the City could be faced.
Allowing street vending in the apartment areas is going to be a
step backwards in any progress that might be made. The City's
ordinance relative to vending has been in effect for 60 years.
It allows vending in other areas of the City and it is working.
If the ordinance is amended as requested, it will result in
making a bad situation worse. It is necessary to maintain the
present ordinance.
Councilman Overholt.
The one issue was whether or not to change an ordinance that
prohibits vendors in the City's apartment house areas. In
reviewing the 60-year old ordinance, he considered those
Councils over the years who have had an opportunity to look at
the wisdom of that ordinance. He has great respect for a law
enacted 60 years ago which to this date has not been changed.
It has served a very worthwhile purpose and it continues to do
so, that being to prevent, in high density apartment areas,
activities which interfere with the normal activities of coming
and going, ingress and egress. He has not heard anything
tonight to convince him that the vendors should sell their wares
360
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
in these high density apartment areas. There was no reason why
the vendors could not sell in single-family areas. In his
opinion, there was no reason to change the present ordinance.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
There were obviously many people present in support. She
personally received many calls from people who were opposed.
Some would not openly speak out. Noise is one of the main
complaints, the music, the horns, the blaring along with traffic
congestion with trucks cluttering up the street. Residents
wanted to have quiet in their neighborhoods. The danger posed
to children by the activity was also another fear. It was a
difficult situation. She had feelings for both sides; however,
when there were so many vendors, it creates an intolerable
situation in the neighborhoods.
Mayor Roth.
The case could be argued on both sides relative to the merits
and demerits. It was undoubtedly a very difficult decision to
have to make. He felt there was overwhelming evidence that,
given the areas and due to the density, the limited amount of
space available, limited parking, health and safety problems, it
was almost an impossible situation. He then asked the City
Attorney if the Council's action was to uphold and reaffirm the
present ordinance, did he plan to recommend any modifications to
that ordinance.
City Attorney, Jack White.
He recommends if the Council reaffirms the existing ordinance
that currently prohibits street vending in business districts,
which districts include multiple family apartments, the City
Council as part of its motion should direct the City Attorney to
draft and submit to the Council an ordinance which would do two
things - (1) Incorporate into the ordinance a specific
definition of a business district consistent with that in the
State Law that the City has been using for the last 60 years
which would make it very clear to anyone who picked up the
ordinance and did not have access to the State Vehicle Code as
to where street vending was permitted and was not. (2) That the
ordinance be drafted to include regulations which related to
regulating street vendors in those areas other than the business
districts to include those items basically listed in the
Community Development and Plannin& Department report dated
April 2, 1986, Option 2, and subsequently submit the proposed
ordinance to the Council for consideration at a later date.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved that the present ordinance regulating street
vending not be amended thus reaffirming the existing ordinance including the
foregoing recommendations as articulated by the City Attorney. Councilwoman
Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
361
2!7
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 13~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilman Pickler seconded
the motion. Councilman Bay was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (9:05 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
362