1986/09/16City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT
ABSENT:
PRESENT
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Bay, Pickler and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Dr. John Porter, First Southern Baptist Church, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Ben Bay led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Roth and
authorized by the City Council:
Integrity Day in Anaheim, September 24, 1986,
P.O.W. - M.I.A. Recognition Day in Anaheim, September 19, 1986,
Human Resources Week in Anaheim, September 21-27, 1986,
Constitution Week in Anaheim, September 17-23, 1986,
Emergency Medical Services Week in Anaheim, September 21-27, 1986.
Marilyn Skinner accepted the Constitution Week proclamation and Martha Snook,
along with other representatives, accepted the Emergency Medical Services
proclamation.
MINUTES: Councilman Pickler moved to approve the minutes of the meetings held
August 19 and 26, 1986. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilwoman
Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF KEADING- ORDINANCES AND EESOLUTIONS: Councilman Pickler moved ~o
waive ~he reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of ~he 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 Overholt seconded the
motion. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,886,556.40, in
accordance with the 1986-87 Budget, were approved.
779
City Hall, Anaheim, Californ~e - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickler,
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; Councilman Pickler
offered Resolution Nos. 86R-410 through 86R-414, both inclusive, for
adoption. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4762 for first reading.
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 Kent Land Company for equitable indemnity and
comparative indemnity for a lawsuit, sustained purportedly due to actions of
the City on or about December 14, 1985.
b. Claim submitted by Continental Heller Corp. for equitable indemnity
for a lawsuit, sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
January 18, 1986.
c. Claim submitted by Deborah A. Costa for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 14, 1986.
d. Claim submitted by Goldman, Bruce, Rhodes, F.M. & Goldman & Rhodes
Development for total or partial indemnity for a lawsuit, sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 19, 1986.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 114: City of Cerritos Proclamation "A Week of Remembrance", to
commemorate the air disaster in Cerritos.
3. 175/123: Authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager, or his
designee, to approve the Southern California Edison Company request to execute
Modification No. 4 to the Department of Energy Utility Services Contract on
behalf of the City to provide for a 6 month deferral in the time allowed to
apply for additional future enrichment services.
4. 123: Authorizing an agreement with the City of Fullerton in an estimated
amount of $92,000 to be shared 50/50, for traffic signal improvements at the
Raymond (East Street) Orangethorpe intersection.
5. 160: Authorizing the Purchasin~ Agent to issue a purchase order to the
Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $30,665.80
for 50,000 feet of 15 KV U.R.D. Primary Wire, in accordance with Bid No. A4350.
6. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Spencer Marketing Services, Inc.,
(SMS) in an amount not to exceed $87,948 for refurbishment of the "Little A"
display units at Anaheim Convention Center, to be completed within 120 working
days after the issuance of the Notice to Proceed.
780
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
7. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-410: 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 Avenue
and & I-5; Ball Road, Euclid Street and I-5; and Katella Avenue, South City
Limits, Ninth Street and I-5, Account No. 17-792-6325-E2330, SOS No.
SOS-0S-0059(18) and opening of bids on October 16, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
8. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-411: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTIONAND COMPLETION 0F A PUBLIC WORK. (Lincoln Avenue
Street Improvement, 133 feet East of Dahlia Drive to Aladdin Drive, Account
No. 17-792-6325-E2390 and opening of bids on October 16, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
9. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-412: 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. (Lincoln Avenue
Street Improvement, 265 feet west of State College Boulevard to 440 feet west
of Cliffrose Street, Account Nos. 17-792-6325-E2360 and 51-484-6993-00710, and
opening of bids on October 16, 1986, 2:00 p.m.)
10. 101: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-413: 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. (Anaheim Stadium
Drinking Fountain and Water Line Improvement, Douglass Road Entrance, Account
No. 61-512-7115.PEQ16, and opening of bids on October 16, 1986)
11. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-414: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIKE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC WORK. (Lincoln Avenue
Street Improvement, Gilbert Street to Dale Avenue, Account Nos.
17-792-6325-E2370 and 51-484-6993-00710, and opening of bids on October 16,
1986)
12. 149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4762: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING SECTION 14.32.220 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
PROHIBITION OF PARKING ON PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 86R-410 through 86R-414:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERB:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Kaywood
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 86R-410 through 86R-414, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
123: AGREEMENT WITH COTY, IN, COLLINS~ KOLTS AND FRANSCELL TO PROVIDE LEGAL
REPRESENTATION: Councilman Bay moved to authorize the City Attorney to
execute an agreement with Cotkin, Collins, Kolts and Franscell to provide
certain legal representation at a rate of $100 per hour for attorneys and $60
781
Cit7 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
per hour for paralegal and/or law clerks, as recommended in memorandum dated
September 11, 1986 from the City Attorney. Councilman Pickler seconded the
motion. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
179: PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF A BASEMENT: Amending
Section 18.01.030 of the Code, amending the definition of basement.
Previously submitted was report dated September 2, 1986 from Annika
Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning. The matter was subsequently
continued from the meeting of September 9, 1986, to this date. Report dated
September 16, 1986 was also submitted, recommending changes to the proposed
ordinance as a result of the issues discussed and direction of the Council at
the September 9, 1986. (See minutes of September 9, 1986).
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning, explained that staff did not
have sufficient time to draft the final wording; however, on the top of Page 2
of the September 16, 1986 report, suggested wording was proposed specifically
stating that any below-grade parking garages located closer than 150 feet to
any single-family residential zoned property shall be considered a story. If
the Council did not disagree, the City Attorney will draft a specific text for
the ordinance. The developers who submitted letters to the Council relative
to the issue were aware of the staff report requested to be prepared but none
had received a copy.
Councilman Pickler suggested rather than a first reading of the proposed
ordinance today that a revised draft of the ordinance be submitted and
notification sent to those who had expressed interest and had written to the
Council.
Miss Santalahti stated she would be happy to send them a copy of the staff
report. She would not be present at the next Council meeting but the intent
of the amendment would be to state that the below-grade parking is problematic
only if the development is located closer than 150 feet to single-family. She
did not believe those individuals staff had been talking to fell into that
category.
City Attorney Jack White, clarified for Councilman Overholt that the proposed
ordinance with the new wording has been drafted and was typed that morning but
nO copies had been distributed to the Council.
Councilman Overholt stated then that the Council will be looking at the new
wording next week and it will give anybody who wants to speak to the issue two
more opportunities to be heard.
It was determined that consideration and discussion of the proposed ordinance
be continued one week to Tuesday, September 23, 1986.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4761: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4761 for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4761: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIMMUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
782
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
(Amending Title 18, Reclass. 85-86-29, CL, north of the northeast corner of
Lincoln Avenue and Gilbert Street)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
AB SENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Kaywood
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4761 duly passed and adopted.
114/153: REQUEST FOR SALARY/COMPENSATION DATA - DEPARTMENT HEADS: Councilman
Bay yielded his time since the City Manager had questions relative to his
request of last week (see minutes of September 9, 1986).
City Manager Talley then asked clarifying questions of Councilman Bay relative
to this subject (verbatim transcript of the proceedings on file in the City
Clerk's Office).
At the conclusion of discussion and questioning, Councilman Bay had clarified
the following: The group in which he was interested in receiving the
requested information was department heads, he is interested in the difference
in the dollar size of the management package, i. e., base salaries, plus the
management percentage package, plus other packages within individual
contracts, he is not interested in individuals, but in the positions, that the
request instead of going back to the 1980/81 Fiscal Year can be moved up to
the 1982/83 Fiscal Year and compared with the 1985/86 Fiscal Year, he does
want figures on auto allowance, travel and meeting expenses, and staff and
development seminars.
Mr. Talley then clarified for Councilman Bay how the costs were kept in each
account relative to travel and meeting expenses and staff and development
seminars and how those would be reported. He stated that all the information
requested would be provided next week.
114/153: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - ELECTION OF NEW PRESIDENT: Mayor Roth
announced and congratulated Councilman Pickler on his election as President of
the Orange County League of Cities at the Thursday, September 11, 1986 League
meeting.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Roth announced that a Closed Session would be
held to confer with the City Attorney regarding:
a. Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(a), to wit: Golden West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim,
Orange County Superior Court Case No 40-92-46.
b. To meet with the designated representative concerning labor
relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6.
Councilman Roth moved to Recess into Closed Session and a lunch break.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent.
MOTION CARRIED. (11:00 a.m.)
783
City Hall, An~heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16; 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilwoman Kaywood. (1:45 p.m.)
179: PUBLIC hTAI{ING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2823:
APPLICANT:
Leo and Alice Waldman, (Taco Bell),
813 Royal Way
Anaheim, Ca. 92805
REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To permit an addition to an existing restaurant on
CL zoned property located at 3138 West Lincoln Avenue, with the following Code
waivers: (a) Minimum structural setback, (b) minimum number of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-198 denied Conditional Use
Permit No. 2823; approved EIR Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Appealed by Tim Lee, Agent for the applicant.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 4, 1986.
Posting of property September 5, 1986.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 5, 1986.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 21, 1986.
City Clerk Leonora Sohl announced that letter dated September 16, 1986 from
Charles H. Lawrence, Jr. had been received Just prior to the meeting
explaining that Mr. Waldman, the owner, recently had surgery and was unable to
attend today's meeting. He was requesting a continuance to either
September 30, 1986 or October 7, 1986.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone was present in the Chamber audience to speak to the
issue; no one was present.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to continue the public hearing on Conditional
Use Permit No. 2823 and Negative Declaration therefore to September 30, 1986
at 1:30 p.m. Councilman 0verholt seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood
was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
179: PUBLIC NRARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2833:
APPLICANT: Eric T. and Dolores Y. Erickson
P.O. Box 5130
Reno, Nevada 89513
REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To permit an automotive service facility on CL zoned
property located on the southwest corner of Orange Avenue and Western Avenue,
with Code waivers of minimum number of required parking spaces (denied) and
minimum landscaped setback.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-211 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 2833, in part; approved EAR- Negative Declaration.
784
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
HEARING SET ON:
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler at the meeting of August 26, 1986.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 4, 1986.
Posting of property September 5, 1986.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - September 5, 1986.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 4, 1986.
Mr. David Scott, 5122 Bolsa Avenue, Suite 101, Huntington Beach,
Ca. 92649, Agent was present to answer questions.
Councilman Pickler.
He had satisfied himself over the period of time since he asked
for the public hearing relative to the proposal. At this time,
he had no questions to ask of Mr. Scott.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
None.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT P. EPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, 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. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 86K-41~ for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 2833, subject to City Planning Commission
conditions. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 86R-415: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2833.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Bay, Pickler and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-415 duly passed and adopted.
785
City Hall, An-heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986} 10:00 A.M.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 86-87-4 AND VARIANCE NO. 3585:
APPLICANT:
Donald and Opal Heydendahl
205-211 North Western Avenue
Anaheim, Ca. 92805
REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: For a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200, to
construct a 50-unit apartment complex on property located at 205 and 211 No.
Western Avenue, with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum number of
parking spaces, (b) maximum structural height, (c) maximum site coverage, (d)
minimum distance between buildings.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-221 approved Reclassification
No. 86-87-4 and PC86-222 granted Variance No. 3585, in part; approved EIR -
Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Appealed by Hugo Vazquez, Agent for the applicant.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin September 4, 1986.
Posting of property September 5, 1986.
Mailiag to property owners within 300 feet - September 5,
1986.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 18, 1986.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Hugo Vazquez, 619 South Live Oak Drive, Anaheim.
He is proposing a 50-unit apartment complex at 205 and 211 North
Western Avenue. The property is approximately 1.4 acres and is
directly adjacent to the City of Buena Park. It will contain
2-bedroom 2 bath, and 1-bedroom-1 bath units with 126 parking
spaces. There will be interior courtyards which will exceed the
leisure space area required. Dense landscaping will be provided
on the entire northerly boundary of the property with mature
trees to be a minimum of 6 feet high planted 5 feet on center.
The pool area originally to be located within the 23-foot
setback was eliminated but after reconsideration is again being
requested. It will be completely covered with a roof structure
and have walls on three sides thus miti§atin$ any noise which
might be incurred from the pool during normal hours of use. It
is a lap pool only. He met with the neighbors and at one
meeting the Mayor of Buena Park and staff from that City were
present. Six-foot high walls are proposed all along the patio
area so that none of the tenants could look over into their
8-foot block wall along the north end. He has done everything
possible to ensure the privacy of both the tenants and single
family residents in Buena Park.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: None.
786
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN OPPOSITION:
Robert Papini, 8881 Buchanan Circle, Buena Park, Ca. 90620.
The citizens of the "President's" tract selected a committee to
spearhead their objection to the proposed project. Young Lion
Development was invited to several of the meetings and did
participate. Some points of agreement were reached, others were
not. Further discussions are necessary to find some
compromise. He submitted letter dated September 8, 1986 from
Steven C. Worrell prepared to be submitted as an appeal of the
Planning Commission's decision; however, an appeal had been
filed in the meantime by Mr. Vazquez. He submitted the letter
which outlined the items of concern with regard to
Reclassification No. 86-87-4 and Variance No. 3585 along with
two photographs showing the caliber of the homes on Buchanan
Circle. The 1.4 acre parcel is not rectangular in shape. There
is a long narrow portion only 76 feet wide proposed to contain
25 to 30 of units and with a 23-foot setback will also include a
10 x 30 lap pool and subterranean parking. It will also be 5 to
10 feet from school classrooms on the south side of the
property. The property does not lend itself to the density
proposed. A S-bin trash area is proposed on the east facing
buildings on Western Avenue adjacent to a single-family home.
This home will be constantly subjected to noise from people
dumping their trash. The proposed pool will service 50 units
and is only 10 feet from the residents in Buena Park which will
be subject to the noise that will be generated. Problems that
have arisen as a result of subterranean parking due to
excavations so close to homes have gone unresolved. He has not
seen anything that will ensure the residents of Buena Park will
not experience problems with soil, drainage, slippage, plumbing
problems, etc. On the south side, apartments are going to be
within 5-feet of public school classrooms (the school is not
open at this time). He has heard there is a strong possibility
that a density bonus will be requested on the project. The
single-family residents adjacent to the area would be offended
by the City of Anaheim allowing such a project adjacent to a
substantial single-family residential area. At the Planning
Commission hearing (see minutes of that hearing dated August 18,
1986) the Commission indicated that the 150-foot setback
required in the City of Anaheim between 2-story multiple-family
and single-family was ridiculous and that it has never been
enforced. The project will have a negative impact on the value
of the surrounding single-family homes. The inner-courtyards
will be common areas which will encourage tenants to use them as
recreational areas. The residents will not only have a pool but
people picnicing and enjoying themselves within 5 to 10 feet of
their homes.
Helen Bohan, 821 Garfield Circle, Buena Park opposed the project
and also submitted newspaper articles opposing the project. She
displayed a large photograph showing the location of the subject
787
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, C~liforn_~a - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M.
property in relation to the single-family homes. She outlined
the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission (see minutes
of the Planning Commissionhearing dated August 18, 1986). Many
questions were left unanswered, yet the plans were approved.
Schools in the Centralia School District are full or almost
full. As long as the Centralia School is being leased their
children will have to be transported to other schools in the
district to handle the overflow. There is possibly an excellent
chance that the Centralia School will be reopened, thus
resulting in concern relative to safety of their children
because there will be a 6-foot wall surrounding the area making
it accessable for children to climb and reach the pool area.
There is concern over the safety of children in the neighborhood
with an apartment complex in the area. There will be an
increase in the crime rate. There are no positive reasons for
building the complex. She urged the Council to vote no.
Kathy Williams, 6613 Via Gancho Circle, Buena Park.
Apartments previously built behind their homes resulted in the
homeowners losing their right to privacy. The value of their
homes will be reduced. She explained problems now being
experienced relative to lack of privacy as a result of other
apartment developments in the area. She is not speaking for the
homeowners but on her own behalf. She asked that their pleas be
heard.
Steve Worrell, 8881 Garfield Circle, Buena Park.
He submitted photographs of the property as seen from his
property and a drawing of the cross section of the 76-foot
portion of the property. The project is not appropriate for the
parcel (see Mr. Worrell's letter of September 8, 1986 listing
the items of concern). With subterranean parking, the complex
will be two and one-half stories high. It is technically
3-stories if a half-story is considered another story. The
Planning Commission, at their meeting yesterday, stated they
were against any further underground parking. He is aware that
the 150-foot setback is not always enforced and he understands
the reason for that. The Commission does try to provide
protection for single-family homes. The Commission stated there
was to be a 20 to 25-foot dense heavily landscaped area. The
reality is that there is no room and Mr. Vazquez is proposing to
use the 20 to 25-foot area as a common area for his tenants and
for parking. They were unable to compromise on that issue. The
project is not feasible for the parcel of land involved. Too
much is proposed with too many on too small a piece of
property. With two and one-half-stories, the residents' privacy
cannot be protected. There is no way to prevent intrusion with
windows from a second-story. No formal Environmental Impact
study was made. With deep excavation at the property lines,
this might disturb adjoining foundations. The excavations,
density and traffic factors indicate the need for an EIR and he
is demanding such a report. They are located at an already
788
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
crowded intersection and traffic is a real consideration. The
school issue should also be addressed in an EIR. The project is
within 5 feet of the boundary of the classrooms. A property
value analysis should be instituted by an objective party. The
plans do not match the rendering of the project. RM-2400 which
would allow up to 25 units is a much more reasonable and
acceptable designation for this property. The residents have
met with Mr. Vazquez three times to work out a compromise. The
developer needs to redesign his project on a much smaller
scale. They would like to see the RM-2400 designation enforced
with a maximum of 25 units, single-story in the 76-foot wide
area and a 35-foot dense greenbelt setback with mature trees and
to be used only as a buffer zone and not a common area along the
whole northern boundary of the property with no windows, patios
or entrances facing the northern boundary, and a 10-foot wall.
Pool or spa areas should not be located on the northern boundary
at all. He clarified for Councilman Bay that single-story in
their interpretation did not include the half-story of
underground parking but starting at grade level. The density
factor is the main thing that needed to be addressed.
Rick Warsinski, Senior Planner, City of Buena Park.
The basic difficulty stems from the fact that the density for
the property is too high to support the type of development Mr.
Vazquez is trying to realize. (Also see Mr. Warsinski's letter
of August 19, 1986, previously made a part of the record). Many
of the items proposed in the project are not an acceptable
alternative to providing the residents with the privacy and the
interest that they deserve as single-family homeowners within
the jurisdiction of Buena Park. Relative to the "dense#
landscaping proposed along the northerly property line, Italian
Cypress are proposed. If 6-foot high, 5 feet on center, it
would take a number of years to provide an adequate buffer with
Italian Cypress. Specific findings are necessary for granting
variances. There are no hardships on a vacant piece of land.
The applicant is trying to get too much on the property. A
better course of action would be to look at the RM-2400 and make
the project site more compatible and consistent with the desires
of the adjacent single-family homeowners.
'Discussion then followed relative to the differences between the setback
standards for multiple-family from single-family in both the Cities of Anaheim
and Buena Park.
Steve Bowman, 1324 Brookdale, Corona, Director of Fiscal
Services for the Centralia School District.
The District owns Centralia School which borders the south and
west side of the property. It has been leased out until 1988.
After that, the District will evaluate School District
enrollment and then decide what should be done with the school.
It could be a K-6 school again. Any proposal made and built on
that property should take that into consideration. He is not
speaking either in favor or against the proposed project.
789
Cit7 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
Martha McCormick, 7161 Monroe, Buena Park.
She agrees with all the concerns expressed. She has a concern
relative to traffic because her street runs parallel to Lincoln
Avenue. There is already traffic coming down the street because
of people trying to avoid the traffic on Lincoln. The residents
already have difficulty backing out their driveways. If
apartments are allowed to be built, that many more people will
use the street and it will create a tremendous traffic problem
on Lincoln and Western Avenue.
SUMMATION BY APPLICANT: Hugo Vazquez.
He first read letter dated September 15, 1986 which was drafted
by the homeowners subgroup and presented to him on Monday
morning, September 16, 1986 (made a part of the record). The
letter listed 10 points of compromise reached at the last
meeting on Sunday, September 14, 1986. He worked on the
compromise issues with three architects and thought that both he
and the residents were very close. Working from the posted
plan, Mr. Vazquez then explained some of the changes that had
been made such as; relocation of the trash bin; enclosing the
pool on the north, east and west side; the fact that the project
was set back 50 feet from the 2-story units with a 6-foot high
wall; with the single story units there are also 6'foot high
walls, etc. He is not opposed to planting any type of tree that
the City of Buena Park would recommend in lieu of Italian
Cypress or to planting trees in the three cul de sacs on the
Buena Park side. He was also not opposed to planting Italian
Cypress 2 feet on center instead of 5 feet. He then addressed
and/or rebutted the concerns expressed by those who spoke in
opposition. In concluding, he submitted a General Plan map of
the City of Buena Park showing the existing apartments in the
area. It was an issue regarding the City Codes of Anaheim as
opposed to the City Codes of Buena Park. It was difficult to
satisfy both.
Mr. Vazquez then answered questions posed by Council Members;
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning, also clarified
certain aspects of the proposed project as a result of Council
questions. Mr. Vazquez is not requesting a density bonus, only
two variances are being requested at this time, maximum
structural height and maximum site coverage, there would be a
3-story portion to the buildings.
Councilman Pickler.
There are areas of concern on both sides. He does not know if
50 units is an ideal density but believes there is a happy
medium. Mr. Vazquez and the residents should meet again to
discuss the number of units as well as the 10 items listed in
the September 15, 1986 letter. Staff Just received the new
plans and should have an opportunity to review them. He
recommends that Mr. Vazquez request a continuance with the idea
790
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16, 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
that he will discuss the matter further with the residents.
got the impression from Mr. Worrell that they are willing to
compromise.
He
COUNCIL CONCERNS=
Councilman Bay.
The issue is putting in one of the highest residential zones in
the Citywhich allows 36 units to the acre right next to a
single-family development that exists on the borderline in Buena
Park. He does not like 36 units per acre and two and
one-half-stories bordering single-family dwellings and it is not
fair to the single-family homeowners whether in Buena Park or
Anaheim. The only true reason for zoning is to protect homes.
He cannot approve the development.
Councilman Roth.
He agrees with Mr. Bay. He respects the letter received from
Lester Reese, Mayor of Buena Park (letter dated August 27, 1986
-made a part of the record) expressing concern relative to the
proposed project. He (Roth), a concern relative to the living
environment of the citizens. The proposal is too much on too
small a piece of property. It is the responsibility of the
Council to protect the integrity of that single-family
residential area. Realizing that there is a need for housing,
he will support denial of the project.
Councilman Overholt, was supportive of Mayor Pro Tem Pickler's
suggestion that a continuance be requested. The residents and
developer were close and more time might permit the two groups
to come to an agreement which might be a better solution. The
two alternatives are to grant or not grant, the project. He does
not share Councilmen Bay's and Roth's attitude that the project
is not good for the neighboring community. Further, the three
concerns expressed in Mayor Reese's letter relative to line of
sight, increase in traffic along Western Avenue and lack of
consolidated usable open space have been mitigated as a result
of the developer and homeowners working together. He supports a
motion of continuance.
Hugo Vazquez.
He would like Mr. Worrell to step forward and make a statement
for the group. He had shown them a plan with 1-story units,
literally one and one-half-stories, on 65 to 75 percent of the
northern boundary line. If Mr. Worrell would be in agreement
with that concept, he (Vazquez) would be more than in agreement
to meet on that point.
Steve Worrell.
He is not opposed to some type of compromise. The compromise
not addressed in the September 15, 1986 letter, since he did not
have a cbmnce to meet with all the people and one of the things
they wanted to address, was the density. If Mr. Vazquez is
791
City Hall, A~ahe!~, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M.
willing to talk about a compromise relative to density, which he
has not been willing to do on all three occasions, he will be
happy to meet with him. He would call the neighborhood together
to be certain they agree which could be accomplished in a couple
of weeks. Twenty-five units is the residents number and 50 is
what Mr. Vazquez wants. He was certain that somewhere in
between they could find a happy medium.
Councilman Overholt.
He would be willing to set a night meeting if necessary for the
continued public hearing. He asked if it would be imperative to
have the people come back at night.
Steve Worrell.
An afternoon meeting would be fine with him. He will have met
with everybody in the neighborhood and feels that everything
could be facilitated by him being the only speaker in the
afternoon.
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning.
Staff would need at least three or four weeks. Revised drawings
would need to be submitted to the Planning Department by
October 1, 1986.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to continue the public hearing on
Reclassification No. 86-87-4 and Variance No. 3585 to Tuesday, October 14,
1986 at 1:30 p.m. to be scheduled as the first public hearing that date.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent.
MOTION CARRIED.
114: COUNCIL MEETING - NOVEMBER 12~ 1986: City Clerk Leonora Sohl asked for
clarification that the Council would meet on Wednesday, November 12, 1986
since Tuesday, November 11, 1986, the regularly scheduled day for Council
meetings was a City Holiday (Veteran's Day) and offices would be closed; City
Attorney Jack White Clarified that Wednesday November 12, 1986 would be the
regular Council meeting day since the Code provides that when a City Council
meeting day falls on a City Holiday, the next succeeding day that is not a
holiday is the Council meeting day.
After brie~ Council discussion, it was determined that the Council will meet
for its regular meeting on Wednesday, November 12, 1986.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilman Pickler seconded
the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (3:55 p.m.)
LEONORAN. SOHL, CITY CLERK
792