Loading...
1986/12/161'29 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. ~S~T: P~S~T: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS OFFICER: William Sell ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Greg Hastings DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PlANNING: Norman J. Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay Chris Jarvi Priest Mayor Bay called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Father John Lenihan, St. Boniface Church, gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Fred Hunter led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held November 25 and December 2, 1986. Councilman Hunter seconded the motion. Councilman Bay abstained. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of 35,045,354.28, in accordance with the 1986-87 Budget, were approved. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Bay moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda, after reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilman Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 86R-547 through 86R-553, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: 1039 130 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M. a. Claim submitted by James Edwin Bockrath for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 1, 1986. b. Claim submitted by Beverly (Ernst) Holt for personal injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 20, 1986. c. Claim submitted by Ibrahim K. Sayed for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 10, 1986. d. Claim submitted by Cheri A. Smith for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 3, 1986. e. Claim submitted by Mrs. Russell William Gilbert for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 29, 1986. f. Claim submitted by Diane O. Thompson for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 14, 1986. g. Claim submitted by Harold A. Tucker for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 6, 1986. h. Claim submitted by Fullerton Savings & Loan Association for property damages sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 17, 1986. i. Claim submitted by Mr. & Mrs. James Brooks for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 24, 1986. J. Claim submitted by Virginia G. Moore for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 2, 1986. k. Claim submitted by Jody Ellen Remais for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 12, 1986. 1. Claim submitted by Maggie Touchstone for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 26, 1986. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim - recommended to be denied: m. Claim submitted by Margaretta C. Seaman for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 6, 1986. 2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file) a. 105: b. 105: c. 105: Project Area Committee - Alpha, Minutes of November 18, 1986. Public Utilities Board, Minutes of November 6, 1986. Park and Recreation Commission, Minutes of November 5, 1986. 1040 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. d. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission, Minutes of November 19, 1986. e. 107: Planning Department, Building Division Report, November 1986. 3. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Daniel Freeman Hospital/Orange County Paramedic Training Division to provide for student participation in a field internship for the City as a part of their educational development. 4. 123: Authorizing a sublease agreement with the North Orange County Regional Occupational Program (NOCROP) in the amount of $8,985.60 for rental of additional space at the Trident Community Center for the term October 15, 1986 through January 14, 1987. 5. 106/140: Increasing the allocation in Account No. 01-370-5115 by $1,660 and Account No. 01-370-5125 by $18,340 to allow increased purchases by Placentia Library District through the City and appropriating said amount into Revenue Account No. 01-3301. 6. 123: Authorizing the second agreement with the Neighborhood Improvement Program of Anaheim, Inc. (NIPA) to provide a neighborhood improvement program for apartments in the area of Manzanita Park, including a Program Administrator at a cost of $12.30 per hour not to exceed 163 hours per month, plus subcontracting fees in the amount of $5,000 for grant writing and fundraising services and $2,000 for bookkeeping and audit services, for the term October 1, 1986 to November 30, 1987. 7. 179: Granting an extension of time for Reclassification No. 83-84-35 and Variance No. 3409, for a change in zone from RS-7200 to C-R, to permit a 17-unit ~bed and breakfast~ motel on property located at the northeast corner of Ball Road and Flore Street, to expire August 21, 1987. (Councilwoman Kaywood voted no) 8. 151: Granting a 4-month extension of time for Special Events Permit No. 86-398, requested by Carl Karcher Enterprises, for a temporary drive-through food service including a 40 ft. kitchen trailer and a wooden patio cover on property located 1202 North Harbor Boulevard, to expire April 17, 1987. 9. 170/123: Approving the assignment of special water facilities reimburs~mant agreement with Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc., to Ed Edwin, relating to Tract Nos. 10996, 10997 and 10998 in the Anaheim Hills area. 10. 170/123: Approving the assignment of special water facilities reimbursement agreement with The Prado Corporation, to Norman and Eileen H. Benjamin, relating to Tract 12147 in the Anaheim Hills area. 11. 170/123: Approving the assignment of special water facilities reimbursement agreements with Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc., to Dr. Robert Barton, relating to Tract No. 9465 in the Anaheim Hills area. 12. 123: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Estoppel Certificate and Subordination Agreement relating to the Sage Park Development. 1041 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986~ 10:00 A.M. 13. 155/175: Withdrawing the Negative Declaration for a proposed combustion turbine to be used for peaking capacity by the Anaheim Public Utilities Department and providing for readvertisement at a later date. 14. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306 and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation, in the amount of $12,637.57 for three Hewlett Packard computers and system components, to expand "Show-Times" for use by the Stadium. 15. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation in the amount of $62,043.92 for two loader/backhoes, in accordance with Bid No. A-4391. 16. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation in the amount of 5189,205.90 for eight 24,000 GVW conventional cab/chassis, in accordance with Bid No. A-4375. 17. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation in the amount of 539,250.51 for three cargo vans, in accordance with Bid No. A-4386. 18. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to the Anaheim Public Improvement Corporation, in the amount of 517,337.36 for one 1,000 K.V.A. three phase fused padmount transformer, in accordance with Bid No. A-4389. 19. 160: Accepting the low bid of Amtech Lighting Services, and authorizing an agreement for re-lamping and lighting maintenance at the City Civic Center in the amount of 531,286 for the term January 1, 1987 to December 31, 1989, in accordance with Bid No. 4398. 20. 160: Accepting the low bid of Neff Contracting Corp., in the amount of 545,406.20 for residential sidewalk replacement, in accordance with Bid No. 4399. 21, 123: Authorizin~ the Data Processing Director to execute a Purchase Agreement and other appurtenant documents with Nixdorf Computer Corporation in the amount of $1§,?§1.12 tO purchase Nixdorf data entry equipment. 22. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-547: A RXSOLUTION 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 493 feet east of Kingsley Street to 231 feet east of Rio Vista Street, Account Nos. 15-793-6325-E3090 and 51-484-6993-00710, and opening of bids on January 15, 1987, 2:00 p.m.) 23. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-548: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION OF A CERTAIN PUBLIC WORK. (CITRON STREET STORM DRAIN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 25-791-6325-E1520) (Accepting the completion of construction of Citron Street Storm Drain, Account No. 25-791-6325-E1520, Mike Bubalo, contractor, and authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion therefor) 1042 City Hall~ A, ahe{m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M. Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. The schedule that was suggested as part of the staff report was given to the Council for budgeting purposes only. The times and days were based on a statistical analysis by the Police Department of the times in which incidents occur in the parks across the City. It would be the intent as the program is funded and developed to actually allocate personnel on the basis of the problems experienced on the site. For budgeting purposes, they feel the schedule proposed is adequate and the five rangers City-wide will be able to meet the needs and help offset some of the problems. In some cases there may be three rangers in Pearson Park. It will be done on a demand basis relative to the problems experienced in the City similar to the way the Police Department allocates their personnel. He clarified that he had not seen the report submitted by the community organization. Mayor Bay wanted to know if there were certain parks in the City that were more of a problem than others. He wanted to know if there was anything set up that gives the Council visibility as to where there are the most problems in order to know where the priorities ought to be. He also wanted to know what the increase in funding would need to be to concentrate on the higher priority parks until they can initiate lasting corrective action and then have the rangers available to move out into the other lesser priorities. Mr. Jarvi answered that they have done an internal statistical report jointly with the Police Department and they do know the parks where there is a higher degree of problems than elsewhere. Mayor Bay asked if it was his opinion that the five rangers properly used City-wide are adequate; Mr. Jarvi answered yes. Mr. Jarvi also explained that the type of incidents they are talking about, while annoying, cannot utilize Police Department personnel on a constant basis and, therefore, park rangers are used. It does provide visibility and the more use, the less deviant behavior. The park rangers are also in direct contact with the Police. Councilman Roth stated he feels it is urgent that the program be implemented immediately using the Council Contingency Fund. The issue was a very important one to the citizens in that community and there was no better source than the people present today to evaluate ~t and then come back with ~oma input. If the problem was being solved then the desired results will have been achieved. If not, then the Council should look for other ways and means to solve it. Citizens deserved the right to feel safe in their parks. Councilman Hunter agreed. The problems at Pearson Park were not new. Even when he was working Pearson Park as a police officer in 1966, the same things were going on and it had not changed. Having park rangers at the park quite often and in contact with the police can stop the misconduct, not only the homosexual activity, but also the blatant drug dealing going on in Pearson and La Palma Parks. As the park rangers are ready to go, they should be put in the parks and it should be done immediately. 1045 1'24 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern relative to the security lighting which she felt should also be done as soon as possible since lighting was a deterrent to the activities reported. Mr. Jarvi reported that they are asking for the funds for that lighting as part of the Community Development Block Grant process. They do have some contingency monies out of Block Grant to start the design process immediately. They expect those funds in the July time frame, will let the contract at that point, and install the lighting. The extra rangers were scheduled for the beginning of the next fiscal year (July, 1987) but if the funds were available, the program could start immediately. City Manager Talley suggested that if the Council wanted to move the program ahead agressively, that they approve Phase I and ask staff to bring back a plan to the Council at the meeting of December 30, 1986 that would put the program into effect at the maximum rate which would probably mean implementation and hiring sometime during the month of January. Council could then later be appraised as to how much of the 3242,000 from the Contingency Fund would be needed. MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to approve and implement Phase I of the program and that staff submit a plan to the Council at their meeting of December 30, 1986 in order to implement and expedite the balance of the program. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Talley stated regarding Phase II the additional information would provide the maximum rate that the program could be implemented which would assume that they would put it into effect in January when capital projects were being put into place or later but at the fastest possible time. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood asked whether the lighting could be expedited or if Block Grant Funds were going to be lost if they attempted to use other funds. Mr. Jarvi answered that Block Grant Funds that would have been used for the lighting would go into another project. They would have to find some other funding 8ource for the lighting if they were going to do it in January. City Manager Talley stated the recommendation from staff would be that the funding come from the Contingency Fund. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that part of the staff report was the recommendation that the Neighborhood Watch Program be expanded to include the park areas. She felt that was a very important part of the program and it should be started right away. Father John Lenihan (Pastor, St. Boniface Church) 120 North Janss, thanked Mr. Jarvi and the Parks and Recreation Department for working with the group. He also thanked the City Council for their very obvious and immediate response to the community's request. The Council has made at least 400 citizens who 1046 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M. 24. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-549: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION OF A CERTAIN PUBLIC WORK. (DALE STREET STORM DRAIN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 24-791-6325-E1510 AND 52-606-6329-05749) (Accepting the completion of construction of Dale Street Storm Drain, Account Nos. 24-791-6325-E1510 and 52-606-6329-05749, Fleming Engineering Inc., contractor, and authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion therefor) 25. 144: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-550: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FINANCING PROGRAM CERTAIN HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS (1987-1988). 26. 000/140: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-551: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING A FEE FOE REFERENCE ASSISTANCE AT THE ANAHEIM PUBLIC LIBRARY. (Establishing a transaction charge of ten dollars, plus costs of materials expended and actual employee time expended, for reference assistance for out of county patrons) 27. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-552: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF COMMITMENT AGREEMENT (MULTIFAMILY REHABILITATIONAND INFILL NEW CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM). (Authorizing an extension of Commitment Agreement with California Housing Finance Agency for participation in a Multi-Family Rehabilitation and Infill New Construction Bond Is~ue~ extending the agreement date until March 10, 1987) 30. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 86R-553: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OR INTERESTS THEREIN. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 86R-547 through 86R-553: AYES: NOES: ABSENt: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 86R-547 through 86R-553, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. End of Consent Calendar. Councilwoman Kaywood voted no on Item ~7. MOTION CARRIED. 150/106: SAFETY AND SECURITY ISSUES IN CITY PARKS: Authorizing use of Council Contingency Funds for Phase I of a park safety and security program and allocating the amounts of ~2,500 to Program 243, ~2,500 to Program 283 and ~2,000 to Program 270. Submitted was Joint report dated December 9, 1986 from the Police Department and the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department, recommending implementation and funding of the subject program. City Manager William Talley briefed the report which discussed the program in detail consisting of three phases noting that staff's recommendation is to take the phased approach as outlined. Representatives of both Departments were present today as well as a Mr. John Rodenbour who wishes to speak to the 1043 City Hall~ Anahe~m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. issue and possibly other people who were present in the Chamber audience particularly with regard to problems they are experiencing in the downtown and Pearson Park area. He is presenting the item to Council today with a recommendation that the staff motion, in their report dated December 9, 1986, be adopted and that Council designate funds from their contingency account. Also submitted under dated of December 15, 1986 is an additional staff report from Chris Jarvi, Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services, giving a correction regarding the hours staff proposes to place people in the Parks under Phase II. (Attached to the report is Attachment A revised - Implementation Phases for Safety and Security in City Parks). John Rodenbour, 604 Clementine Street, Anaheim. The people present today are a delegation representing the St. Boniface Church Community Organization. He then read their letter request to the Council dated December 16, 1986 (made a part of the record and submitted to the Council) which explained the efforts they have undertaken since November 5, 1986 when they first met with Mr. Jarvi to express concerns and receive some promise of action regarding problems and security in Pearson Park. While the recommended program responds to some of the concerns of the community, they feel it is seriously deficient especially in what is recommended for Pearson Park. In the letter, they recommended additional hours for coverage of Pearson Park under the Park Ranger Program. They also expressed a need for daily patrol under the plan. Mr. Rodenbour, in answer to Mayor Bay, then expanded upon the problems they were experiencing at the park which prompted their request to the City in order to mitigate or eliminate those problems. Incidents involved a strong-arm robbery, harassment, solicitation of sexual favors, drug dealing, glue sniffing, etc. Isabel Lopez, 713 North Colleen Street. They are happy to see the City going in the right direction with regard to Pearson Park but feel they should have park rangers in the park 7 days a week. Senior citizens are not able to enjoy the park like they used to. Having interviewed seniors in the area, some reported that they locked themselves in their homes by 4:30 p.m. each day. A lot of people in the community do not go to the park any longer because of the activities going on there. The people present today have been long-time Anaheim residents and have never appealed to the City Council members before today and they are doing so because they feel a great necessity for the park rangers. They asked that the Mayor and Council seriously consider their petition for park rangers 7 days a week. City Manager Talley explained there are three problems relative to Pearson Park that were unique in the community. It is a known destination for homosexual activity, which is a police problem, there are an increasing number of people who could be described as homeless that are attracted to the downtown area and since that is the only park in the area tend to gravitate there, there are also more people in the downtown area and a certain amount who are free or Jobless during the day and also tend to congregate in the park. The park is significantly different for the neighborhood than it used to be. No matter how many park rangers there are will not materially change the visitation or number of people of those three groups that frequent the park. He does not know what to do about the situation and he has gone to the park to observe the situation first hand. 1044 121[ City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10=00 A.M. showed up on Wednesday night at the church hall to discuss their concerns and problems at Pearson Park very happy. 000/124: RATE INCREASE - ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER: Establishing new per square foot rental rates to be charged at the Anaheim Convention Center effective 1/1/87 - ~.12, 1/1/88 - ~.lS, 1/1/89 - ~.14 and 1/1/90 - ~.15. Submitted was report dated December 8, 1986 from the General Manager of the Gonvention Center Lynn Thompson. Councilman Pickler posed questions to Mr. Thompson relative to the proposed rate change noting that the increase was minimal, that the rates at present were under those being charged by competitive cities and that by 1990, the City would be lagging even further behind. Mr. Lynn Thompson, General Manager of the Convention Center, explained that they were recommending the phased approach in order to be sensitive to the needs of the tenants in the building. It gives exhibitors the opportunity, because shows are booked so far in advance, to increase the fees they charge for that space within the hall from their exhibitors. Further, the rental charge for this kind of activity, convention and trade shows, represents only 11 to 12 percent of the total revenue at the Convention Center. Councilman Roth stron~Ay recommended that the Council support the increases as proposed by staff with the caveat that if a year from now other facilities have increased their rates considerably that staff take another look and possibly increase the rates at that time, but it should not be done now; Councilwoman Kaywood agreed and felt it was the only intelligent way to go. The gradual increase is a wise one. Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 86R-554 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 86R-554: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING RATES TO BE CHARGED FOR RENTAL AT THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER. R011 Call Vote: AYES; COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBF/~S: Pickler ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-554 duly passed and adopted. 175/123: AUTHORIZING CERTAIN TRANSMISSION AGREEMENTS AND INTERIM OPERATING PROCEDURES WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON: Authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute the Deseret Firm Transmission Service Agreement with Southern California Edison Company to reduce power supply costs, to execute a Firm Transmission Agreement with Southern California Edison Company to reduce power supply costs, and to execute an Agreement for Interim Operating Procedures between the City and Southern California Edison Company. 1047 122 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. City Manager Talley stated staff was having some problems completing the negotiations and submitting the agreements due to requirements Southern California Edison Company is tentatively putting forward. At the meeting of December 30, 1986, if the City has not completed negotiations with Southern California Edison, he will elaborate on the situation at that time. It was determined that the subject agreements be continued to the meeting of December 30, 1986. 130/142: APPROVAL OF THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE ANAHEIM CABLE TV FRANCHISE: Approving the assignment of the Anaheim Cable Television Franchise from Storer Cable TV, Inc., to MLMedia Partners, L.P. City Manager Talley referred to and synopsized the Joint report dated December 10, 1986 from Intergovernmental Relations and the Assistant City Manager recommending that the Council adopt an ordinance approving assignment of the subject franchise to MLMedia Partners L.P. Staff's recommendation with the proposed new operators is that the Council not only introduce the ordinance and the resolution, but also a motion which would allow them to assign or transfer their rights to Public Utilities facilities. The three major staff representatives, Ron Bates - Assistant City Manager, William Sell - Intergovernmental Relations Manager and Cindy King - Assistant to the City Manager who had worked so extensively on the matter were present to answer any questions. Also a number of gentlemen were present today who represent both Storer and the proposed purchaser who can answer Council questions. Another issue today is that the purchasers believe it would be necessary to have a second reading of the ordinance and then 7 days of operation prior to expiration of this calendar year in order to conform to the requirements of their tax advisors which would mean that the Council would have to meet either on the 23rd or 24th of December, 1986 to give a second reading to the ordinance to conform to the advice they are getting. It is staff's view that the clarification received and the Letter of Credit they proposed to provide would place the request in the public interest in his opinion. He recommended that the Council carefully consider that. The agreement being proposed and the work that is proposed to be completed by them under the Letter of Credit does represent a substantial public interest that would override possible interfering with whatever advice they are getting from their tax people. Councilwoman Kaywood questioned if it was the intention to have the coverage extend to Net 4, the Fire Training Center. Bill Sell, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, answered the franchise allows for any public facility within 500 feet of a drop to be installed free. If it exceeds 500 feet they would have to pay the extra charge for doing so. The Fire Department has requested that all the fire stations be included but have not asked that of the Net 4 Facility. He then confirmed for Councilman Roth that mobilehome parks were considered as multiple dwelling units and will be included in the groups to be provided with Cable TV. Mr. Richard Clark, Senior Vice President for Storer, first thanked City Manager Talley and staff for their assistance during the long negotiations. He would only underscore Mr. Talley's comments about the timing for approval 1048 119. Cit7 ~ll~ Amgheim~ Ca31fornta - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. they were requesting. He asked that the Council indulge them and give a second reading to the ordinance on December 23 or 24, 1986 whichwould enable them to avoid some serious tax implications. He then introduced Mr. Elton H. Rule after giving Mr. Rule's extensive background mostly in the Broadcasting Industry. Mr. Elton H. Rule stated he is one of the General Partners of ML Media Partners L.P. and delighted to have the opportunity of participating in the growth of cable in this part of the world. They will do everything in their power to continue the service that Storer has provided and in every way upgrade it when that is possible. Mayor Bay then posed a number of questions. He asked Mr. Rule if he was familiar with the franchise and all the supplemental information regarding the transfer including the Consumer Protection Standards entitled, "Service Standards", "Peg Access Channels", "Multiple Dwelling Units" provided by his staff and if he could explain his approach to meeting the Consumer Protection Standards. Mr. Rule answered the first question that he was generally familiar with the franchise and the documents as stated but relative to the latter would ask his consultant to be more explicit. He then introduced Mr. Chris Connelly, the consultant to the General Partnership. Mr. Chris Counelly, Consultant to ML Media, explained he had worked closely with City staff on drafting the Consumer Standards which were now a part of the franchise agreement and he feels comfortable withML Media being able to do a good job in complying with those standards. Mr. Allen Hon of his staff was present today, both he and Mr. Hon worked in the New York City Cable TV systems where they had severe consumer response problems when they took over. They mastered those problems in a short period of time. They were both looking forward to coming to California within the next few weeks and improving the operations here. Mayor Bay stated that the City wanted to be sure they (ML Media Partners L.P.) understood that failure to comply with the standards could impose a refund of up to 25 percent of Cable income to the citizens of Anaheim. Also the City would like to know if he feels the franchise is commercially practicable for his company, and also if he would discuss plans for oparating the Anaheim franchise, particularly in the areas of management organization, if it will be centralized or decentralized. What will be the communication lines for complaints and how quickly those were going to get back to corporate if necessary. Mr. Connelly answered in terms of the enforcement standards in the franchise, they are well aware of those. They analyzed the franchise prior to making a recommendation to ML Media to acquire the property and felt at that point that the franchise terms were terms under whichMLMedia could operate a reasonably profitable business. It is a franchise in which they can operate a business and do not anticipate the City or the subscribers receiving any refunds or penalties as a result of nonperformance. There is a reasonable phase-in 1049 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. period which gives enough time to put the type of management structure and systems that they deem appropriate in place. Mr. Rule stated the partnership consists of Merrill Lynch, himself and his partner who is based in New York. He (Rule) is based in Los Angeles. They have no plans to centralize control. They feel that the system is very well managed and well supervised. The extent of their participation would be to supervise the supervisors. They have no intentions of reducing the staff or the facilities. The only thing they would do would be to make such changes as would be in the best interest of the operation which, in turn, would be in the best interest of the community. They are pleased and feel comfortable with the way the system has been managed to date. They have no large staff nor do they intend to have a large staff. They feel local control is most important in the success of a venture such as this. Mayor Bay stated Council is very interested in a great deal of improvement in the corrective action as requested by the City in the franchise. He has always felt there were great opportunities for the cable franchise in this City that have not been exploited. They have reams of complaints regarding the time frames for responses on problem calls. Their interest is to shorten the lines of communications and to make the necessary changes to improve the response to that service plus going ahead and exploiting the other opportunities the City sees open. Mr. Rule stated they concur with that observation. The corporate partnership would be in no position to satisfy any response, complaints or otherwise from the local citizenry or the subscribers. They used the same practice with ABC (American Broadcasting Corporation). On their stations throughout the country, the local management was always given a great deal of autonomy. Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4788 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4788: AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ANAHEIM CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM STOP. ER CABLE TV, INC. TO ML MEDIA PARTNERS, L.P. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she would like to get a commitment that Net 4 become a part of the cable system. Mr. Rule answered he was not certain they were in a position to make that commitment. Chris Connelly stated the commitment they can make is part of their initial assumption of management responsibilities, they will look into providing that service. He can personally commit the resources of Allen Hon, a very qualified Engineer, to do that in the very early part of his work in the City of Anaheim. Mr. Rule commented it continues to be in their best interest to increase their subscriber base and the facilities. They will do so as quickly as humanly possible. 1050 i. fT. City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. Mr. Talley then changed his recommendation to make the final reading either December 22 or December 23, 1986 and adjourn to that date today. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to approve the assignment of the License Agreement dated July 1, 1980 between the City of Anaheim and Storer Cable TV incorporated to Media Partners L.P. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Bay offered Resolution 86R-555 for adoption, consenting to the assignment of Cable TV Franchise from Storer to MLMedia Partners L.P. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 86R-555: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM STORER CABLE TV, INC. TO ML MEDIA PARTNERS, L.P. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-555 duly passed and adopted. RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for five minutes. (11:23 a.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (11:36 a.m.) 123: ATTORNEY SERVICES AGREEMENT - BEAM AND BROBECK: Councilman Pickler moved to authorize the City Attorney to execute an Attorney Services Agreement with Beam and Brobeck, to provide legal services in connection with any employees or previous employees arising out of their official capacity with the City, as recommended in memorandum dated December 11, 1986 from the City Attorney's Office. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 123: ATTORNEY SERVICES AGREEMENT - RICHARDS, WATSON AND GERSHON: Councilman Pickler moved to au~h0rlze ~he City A~orney to execute an Attorney Services Agreement with Klchards, Watson and Gershon to provide legal services in connection with any employees or previous employees arising out of their official capacity with the City, as recommended in memorandum dated December 11, 1986 from the City Attorney's Office. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 108: APPLICATION FOR DINNER DANCE PERMIT - LA CHIQUITA MEXICAN RESTAURANT: Councilman Roth moved to approve an application for a Dinner Dance Permit submitted by Cam J. Badgwell for La Chiquita Mexican Restaurant, 1750 West La Palma Avenue, to have dancing Tuesday through Sunday, 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CAR/LIED. 1051 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meeting held November 24, 1986, pertaining to the following applications were submitted for City Council information. 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2855: Submitted by Richard G. and Barbara L. Saylor, to permit a bed and breakfast inn on RM-2400 zoned property located at 804 West Broadway, with Code waiver of maximum area of freestanding signs. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-287, granted in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 2855, and granted a negative declaration status. 2. VARIANCE NO.' 3620: Submitted by David Wendell and Donny Sue Ross, to establish an eight lot "ML" zoned subdivision on ML(SC) zoned property located on the east side of Hancock Street, north of Bryson Street, with Code waiver of required lot frontage. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-289, granted Variance No. 3620, and granted a negative declaration status. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2862: Submitted by James W. Stryker, E1 Torito Restaurants, Inc. (Casa Maria), to permit on-sale alcohol in an outdoor patio area in conjunction with an existing restaurant on ML zoned property located at 1801 East Katella Avenue, with the following Code waivers: (a) Maximum fence height, (b) minimum structural setback, (c) permitted encroachments in setback areas, (d) minimum number of parking spaces (in part). The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-291, granted in part, Conditional Use Permit No. 2862, and granted a negative declaration status. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2647--EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by William E. Snow, Contract Engineering Corporation, requesting an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2647, to permit an office use in a residential structure on property located at 140 West Ball Road. The City Planning Commission granted an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2647, to expire January 7, 1987. 5. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 81-82-4 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2249--TERMINATIONS: Submitted by A. W. Garrison, Synod of Southern California and Hawaii, requesting termination of Reclassification No. 81-82-4 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2249, proposed change in zone from RS-A-43,000(SC0 to CL(SC) to permit a church, preschool and office complex with certain Code waivers on property located on the south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of Fairmont Boulevard. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-293, terminated Reclassification No. 81-82-4 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2249. 6. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 221 (READV.) AND RECLASSIFICATION NO. 86-87-10 (READV.): Submitted by Fairmont Limited, to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan, redesignating from hillside estate 1052 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL I~NUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10~00 A.M. residential, hillside low-medium density residential or hillside low density residential designation, and a change in zone from RS-HS-22,000(SC) to RM-3000(SC) on approximately 6.2 acres on the east side of Fairmont Boulevard, south of Santa Aha Canyon Road. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-294 and 295, denied General Plan Amendment No. 221 (Ready.) and Reclassification No. 86-87-10 (Ready.) and granted a negative declaration status. 7. VARIANCE NO. 3596 (RENOTIFIED): Submitted by R. Burbin, et al, to construct a 17-unit affordable apartment complex on RM-1200 zoned property located at 818, 822 and 828 North Lemon, with Code waiver of minimum site area per dwelling unit. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-297, denied Variance No. 3596 (Renotified), and granted a negative declaration status. 8. GENERAL PLAN AMF2/DMENT NO. 216: Submitted by Planning Commission, to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan proposing a redesignation from medium density residential to designations including but not limited to iow-medium density residential, Iow-density residential and/or general commercial for an area of approximately 21 acres bounded by La Palma Avenue, Lemon Street, Wilhelmina Street and the public alley westerly of Anaheim Boulevard. The City Planning Comm~ssion, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-296, recommended approval of Exhibit A of General Plan Amendment No. 216, and granted a negative declaration status. A public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 216 is scheduled for this date. See public hearing section. 9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2856: Submitted by George Chris Heed, (Pleasure House Boutique), to permit retail sales of applicant's product line in conjunction with applicant's primary permitted uses on ML zoned property located at 1830 South Anaheim Boulevard, with the following Code waivers: (a) Dedication of right-of-way, (b) minimum dimensions of vehicle accessways, (c) minimum number of parking spaces, (d) permitted accessory uses, (e) minimum structural setback and yard requirements, (f) required improvement of parking areas. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-286, denied Conditional Use Permit No. 2856, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date. 10. VARIANCE NO. 3618: Submitted by Inch Investments, (Greyhound Bus Lines), to permit a liquor store in an existing bus terminal on CL zoned property located at 2080 South Harbor Boulevard, with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum landscaped setback, (b) minimum number of required parking spaces. 1053 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNClL MINUTES - December 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-288, granted Variance No. 3618, and granted a negative declaration status. A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood and, therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date. 11. VARIANCE NO. 3621: Submitted by Kennedy and Hause, to retain a manager's unit in an existing 15-unit apartment complex on RM-1200 zoned property located at 210 West Vermont Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum site area per dwelling unit, (b) minimum number of parking spaces. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-290, denied Variance No. 3521, and granted a negative declaration status. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant and, therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date. 12. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2863: Submitted by Joseph and Julie Casale, to construct a granny unit on RS-7200 zoned property located at 630 North Clementine Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) Minimum rear yard setback, (b) maximum rear yard coverage. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC86-292, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2863, and granted a negative declaration status. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern that with regard to requests for granny units, that the purpose was to have such units for parents or strictly family members but not to be used as a rental. Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning, reported that the Planning Commission resolution and approval of the request did not include a condition prohibiting rental. A review of the Planning Commission's decision was thereupon requested by Councilwoman Kaywood and, therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date. End of Planning Commission Informational Items. 170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12884: Submitted by Steven W. and Pamela S. Hall, et al, to establish a 7-lot RS-5000 zoned subdivision on property located at 2215 Loara Street. The City Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract No. 12884 and granted a negative declaration status. There was no action taken by Council. MOTION CARRIED. 153/179/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4785 - CREATING THE OFFICE OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Adding Chapter 18.12 to the Code, creating the Office of Zoning Administrator and defining the powers of the office. 1054 City Hall~ Anmheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. City Clerk Sohl announced that a request had been received from Frank Lowry, Attorney, Farano & Kieviet, to speak to the item but he was not present in the Council Chamber. Norm Priest, Director of Community Development and Planning, explained for Councilman Roth that he had spoken at length with Mr. Lowry to discuss the terms of the proposal. At the conclusion of their conversation, Mr. Lowry stated it was his expectation, based upon their discussion, he did not expect to appear today and he would assume that Farano & Kieviet no longer have a problem with the proposed ordinance. Mayor Bay reported that in his discussion with Mr. Farano the main concern was staff not becoming a protagonist in the subsequent appeal hearings when there were appeals against the Zoning Administrator's decision. The key concern and one of the things in Mr. Farano's opinion that offers a problem with this type of action is that when an item is appealed and it goes straight to the City Council, it is dealing with the Zoning Administrator defending his or her decision and that is what he wants to avoid. Mr. Priest stated that was one of the items he had discussed at length with Mr. Lowry yesterday. They are proposing a somewhat different approach than as followed in the case of some Zoning Administrators in which when they render a decision and should it be appealed to the City Council they bring in their decision and defend it before the Council. Staff feels that is unrealistic and puts the Zoning Administrator in an untenable position. They propose when Planning staff presents a case to the Zoning Administrator, that staff person would bring it to them Just as they would to the Planning Commission. If appealed, staff, and not the Zoning Administrator, will bring the case to the Council. It would not put the Zoning Administrator in a position to come before the Council to defend a position. Mr. Farano entered the Council Chamber; Mr. Priest, after speaking with Mr. Farano regarding the proposed ordinance, reported that he (Farano) had no further comment. Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4785 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. ORDINANCE NO. ~785: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANA~EIMADDING CHAPTER 18.12 TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE CREATING THE OFFICE OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND DEFINING THE POWERS OF THE OFFICE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4785 duly passed and adopted. 161/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4786: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4786 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. 1055 114 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986~ 10:00 A.M. OILDINANCE NO. 4786: AN 0KDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING CF~TAIN LIMITATIONS FOR THE KEDEVKLOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA, AS REQUIRED BY CALIFOKNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33333.4. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBEKS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4786 duly passed and adopted. 142/114: ORDINANCE NO. 4787: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4787 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4786: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING NEW SECTION 1.12.015 TO CHAPTER 1.12 OF TITLE 1 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC MEETING PROCEDURES. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4787 duly passed and adopted. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 4789: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. first reading. 4789 for ORDINANCE NO. 4789: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4722, NUMC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO ZONING. 114: SUGGESTED PROCEDURE - SELECTION OF 5TH COUNCIL MEMBER: Councilman Pickler stated the expense of the Special Election would be unnecessary if the Council has the courage to place differences aside and find the best available person to replace Councilman Don Roth when he resigns from the Council. He is convinced that the Council can find an individualwho has the quality, the independence, the integrity and experience and will look after the best interests of all the people of Anaheim without being aligned to any special interest group or individual. He would like to suggest a process or make a motion, if necessary, where each eligible Council Member submit two or three names for consideration to replace Councilman (Supervisor-Elect) Roth. By this method, he feels the Council could come up with a majority vote for one individual to serve on the Council. Councilman Roth has said if the Council Members (excluding himself) could come up with an acceptable replacement, he would resign immediately. Councilman Roth confirmed that he would resign early if the four Council Members select a replacement. 1056 City Hall, An-helm, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. Mayor Bay reiterated the fact that he and Councilman Hunter made their position very clear that there is precedent for choosing the runner-up in the Election to serve on the Council and that person is Bill Ehrle. Councilman Hunter clarified that he has not changed his mind and that the Council should appoint Bill Ehrle because Mr. Ehrle has earned that appointment. Councilwoman Kaywood emphasized and reiterated her strong opposition to appointing Bill Ehrle to the Council. 112/101: CITY OF ANAHEIM - LITIGATION MATTERS: Councilman Hunter reported on his meetings with the City's Attorneys relative to the California Angels litigation matters as well as his phone contacts daily with several of the principals involved in the Angels' lawsuit in the spirit of reconciliation. The California Angels have agreed to dismiss what is called their advertisement lawsuit set for trial in March of 1987 over the Union 76 Advertisement which will save the taxpayers a considerable amount of money. It shows there is now finally movement on behalf of the Angels and he believes on behalf of the City that in 1987 the City will do its best to put aside a lot of animosities, misgivings and differences and bring about a new spirit of reconciliation to settle the lawsuits that are costing the taxpayers millions of dollars. It was time that these issues were out in the open and that the City settle its differences with its friends and one of the major tenants in the City. There were other issues that today in Closed Session the Council can work on as well such as doing something to settle the lawsuit with AMEA (Anaheim Municipal Employees Association). Councilman Pickler agreed that he would like to See the City settle matters with the California Angels. He emphasized that it was a two-way street with cooperation necessary on both sides. Relative to the AMEA issue, the Council was looking out for the interest of the citizens Just as with the Angels lawsuit. It was not Just a matter of looking out for the interests of Just one group but the interests of the 237,000 citizens of Anaheim. He felt, however, that litigation matters should be discussed in a Closed Session. ll4: ANNOUNCmV~NT 0~ MAYOR BAY'S RETIREMENT FROM NORTH AME~IGAN ROCKWELL; Mayor'Bay announced that he has processed his formal retirement from North American ROckwell after 32 years of service with that Corporation. His formal date of retirement is February 20, 1987 but, in fact, the retirement is effective as of December 15, 1986, the balance of the days to February 20, 1987 representing accumulated vacation. As promised in his campaign, if he were elected Mayor, he was going to retire in order to work full-time on the Mayoral duties of the City. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Bay announced that a Closed Session would be held to confer with the 'City Attorney regarding: (a) Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), to wit: Golden West Baseball Co. vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 40-92-46. 1057 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986~ 10:00 A.M. (b) Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9c. Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch break. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CAR/LIED. (12:20 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (1:39 p.m.) 134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 216: APPLICANT: City of Anaheim Planning Commission 200 So. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, Ca. 92805 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan proposing a redesignation from medium density residential designation to designations including but not limited to low-medium density residential, low-density residential and/or general commercial for an area of approximately 21 acres bounded by La Palma Avenue, Lemon Street, Wtlhelmina Street and the public alley westerly of Anaheim Boulevard. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-296 approved Exhibit A; approved EIR - Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: Automatic review of approved General Plan Amendments by the City Council. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin December 5, 1986. Posting of property December 5, 1986. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 5, 1986. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 1986. Greg Hastings, Associate Planner, briefed portions of the staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 1986 relative to the proposed General Plan Amendment which was initiated by the Planning Commission in response to a neighborhood request. The amendment involves 21 acres containing 102 lots and 156 dwelling units. Forty-eight percent of the area is currently zoned RM-1200, 34 percent, KM-2400 and 3 percent commercial-general. The current general plan is medium density allowing 36 units per acre. Exhibit A, as proposed by the Planning Commission, would allow 18 units per acre. Approximately 75 percent of the properties currently not zoned RM-2400 are in favor of the proposed amendment to the General Plan. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Phyllis Boydstun, 728 North Janss. She owns the building at 703 North Anaheim Boulevard. She favors the down grading in zoning. At the present time, the east side of Zeyn is zoned PD-C (Commercial Parking). The City 1058 109 Cit~ Hall, Anmheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. is going to widen Anaheim Boulevard thus decreasing the frontage on some of the properties that are there at present. By taking the PD-C away she is concerned that only small businesses will locate on Anaheim Boulevard, whereas she was hoping for better projects to locate there after the widening. If there was no place to park that would not occur. Greg Hastings. The General Plan Amendment (GPA) would allow the densities to be reduced to the RM-2400 zone. Currently the PD-C zone involves 15 properties and 14 of the 15 have asked that their properties be redesignated and rezoned to low medium density and RM-2400. The original intent of the PD-C was to allow for parking areas for commercial frontage on Anaheim Boulevard. To date, none of that property has been utilized for parking purposes. It is basically single-family homes. It is not clear if the widening of Anaheim Boulevard would have any bearing on using those properties for parking lots rather than the single-family homes. PUBLIC DISCUSSION- IN FAVOR: Ketth Pepper, 817 North Lemon, Anaheim. He first introduced his neighbor Dr. William Koon, 821 North Lemon who narrated a slide presentation which showed the types of homes and dwellings existing in the subject area. It is a distinguished and established neighborhood with most of the homes built in the 1920's. They have personally talked to over 300 neighbors and there is a consensus that the proposed amendment should occur. The Council's approval today will ensure that the confusion that has existed on the City Planning map since 1951 will be rectified and also ensure that the neighborhood will continue to experience orderly growth. Keith Pepper. He reiterated the reason for the request is to remove the confusion currently existing between the Planning maps and the Zoning maps. They initially considered requesting a single-family zone but chose RM-2400 as the type of zone which most accurately ~ollow~ the scheme of the neighborhood, He then explained the extensive efforts made to inform the neighborhood of their proposal and the steps taken to solicit approval from those in the area. In concluding, he asked two things - that the Council direct the Planning staff to review any currently proposed project in the area as RM-2400 and, on behalf of himself and the 68 property owners he represents, he is asking that the Council approve the proposed GPA. In answer to Council questions, he explained that relative to parking on Anaheim Boulevard, when he spoke to Mr. Taormina, it was felt that parking on Anaheim Boulevard is the responsibility of businesses and they did not want to take the ~esponsibility of coming into the residential neighborhood and changing it into a parking lot. He felt businesses should provide the parking onsite. 1059 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. Councilman Hunter. He reported he owns property at 721 North Lemon which is in the subject area of discussion. He is one of the off-site property owners that signed a declaration in favor of the proposal. He questioned the City Attorney on whether or not he should vote on the issue. City Attorney Jack White. He recommended Councilman Hunter declare a Conflict of Interest and sign a declaration so stating and not take part in the discussion or voting on the matter. Bob McCorkle, 607 North Zeyn, Anaheim. The 700 block of Zeyn is all single-family residential. All the homes are well kept and many people like himself are working to improve their homes and are investing a great deal of time and money in doing so. To have someone come in and take out one of the homes and put in a parking lot in his view would be devastating. Councilman Bay. The only thing he would caution is when the final widening of North Anaheim Boulevard takes place within the next three to five years and new businesses do develop, if they are limited to the alley in depth on both sides after the widening, undoubtedly the same kind of small businesses will locate there as arethere now, on which the City receives many complaints regarding their impact on traffic, parking and the people involved in those businesses. They are, therefore, imposing some limits on the type of commercial development that may locate on that portion of Anaheim Boulevard. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pickler, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, 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 Hunter abstained. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 86R-556 for adoption, approving General Plan Amendment No. 216, Exhibit A as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 86R-556: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 216, EXHIBIT A. Roll Call Vote; 1060 Cit~ Hall, Aneheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16, 1986, 10:00 A.M. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL HEMBERS: Hunter ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-556 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC HEA~ING - CONDITIONAL USE pF. RMIT NO. 2797 (READV.) AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: APPLICANT: Luco D. and Madeline D. Caliano 16055 Gallatin Fountain Valley, Ca. 92708 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To expand a board and care facility for a maximum of 10 developmentally disabled persons on RS-7200 zoned property located at 1329 Jasmine Place, with Code waiver of maximum fence height in front yard. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-263 granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2797 for a maximum of eight persons as requested by the applicant. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decisio~was requested by Mayor Bay at the Council meeting of November 18, 1986. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin December 4, 1986. Posting of property December 5, 1986. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 5, 1986. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated October 27, 1986. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Elizabeth Halahan, 2455 Harriett Lane was present to answer questions. COUNCIL CONCERNS: Mayor Bay. He is opposed to social engineering coming out of Sacramento being imposed on cities without too much decision making at the local level. Under State law a person may run this type of operation in residential areas with up to six people without any permits from the City or the City knowing it is there. He also opposes this type of function going on in residential neighborhoods. Elizabeth Halahan. According to one of the Department Heads at the County Licensing Division, John Grant, she thought she had been advised on the original application that notification would go to the City to ensure that not more than one such facility per 300 feet or 1000 feet could exist. 1061 City B~]m~ Anahe!m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. STAFF INPUT: Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning. The County sends the City a letter when application is made indicating they have received it. It gives the City 30 days to respond if there is another such facility within 1000 feet of the one being proposed. Staff does check to make sure there are no conditional use permits for similar activities nearby. Elizabeth Halahan. The Federal and State Government has mandated that a residential setting be provided in which to care for the developmentally disabled. Emphasis is place heavily on mainstreaming the individual and this is the methodology for doing so. The house is laid out in such a fashion as to be able to accommodate the eight people proposed. It contains five bedroom, three baths and a large living room. It has three different wings or bedroom areas and each has its own bath. She went to the neighbors who would have easy accessibility and visual accessibility to the young men and the people living in the house and asked again for their signatures of approval of the additional two people. She did obtain those signatures. She then answered questions posed by Councilman Roth relative to concerns expressed by neighbors at the Planning Commission meeting. The young men were not mentally ill but have Cerebral Palsy. Some have visual problems and spasticity. They are between the ages of 20 and 28 years. She then explained what had occurred relative to the two incidents that had been cited by the neighbors. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Frank Buford, resident and homeowner, 2141 Coronet Avenue. Ne spoke with Ms. Halahan about two months ago and she explained what she was trying to do. He was very much in favor of helping people but he was not certain how this request might affect the value of his property or the resale value if he chose to sell. He has observed the people she is working with. They walk the street and go to work. He has never heard anything that was negative. He sees no problem in what she is doing. He reiterated his main concern is any adverse effect the facility might have on his property especially since this was his first home. Hazel Van Campen, 2135 Cornet Avenue (14 years). The subject house is a big one which previously housed a family of ten. She is in favor of the request. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Roth, 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 1062 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. 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. MOTION CAR/tIED. Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 86R-557 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2797 in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendations and conditions allowing a maximum of eight developmentally disabled persons at the facility. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 86R-557: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PF/LMIT NO. 2797. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBF/LS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter and Kaywood Bay None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-557 duly passed and adopted. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3614: APPLICANT: United Suites of America, Inc., 415 New Port Center Drive, ~ 420 New Port Beach, Ca. 92660 REQUEST/ZONING/LOCATION: To construct one freestanding changeable copy sign on HL zoned property located at 3100 East Frontera Street, with Code waiver of maximum area of freestanding signs. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC86-272 granted Variance No. 3614. Further, the Planning Director or his authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of categorical exemptions, Class 11, as defined in the State Environmental Impact Report guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. HEARING SET ON: Review requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the meeting of November 18, 1986. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin December 4, 1986. Posting of property December 5, 1986. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 5, 1986. PLANNING STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated October 27, 1986. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: Mr. Jerry Murdock, 611 Rock Springs Road, Escondido, was present to answer questions. 1063 Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCILMINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. COUNCIL CONCERNS: Councilwoman Kaywood. The request was for a freestanding changeable copy sign that would be facing the freeway at more than double the maximum area allowed. At the time of approval of the project there was discussion regarding the unlikely spot the developer had chosen to construct the hotel and there were not going to be any special privileges claimed for future requests. She felt the proposed sign was more like a billboard than a sign which concerned her greatly. Three-hundred and fifty square feet were allowed and the applicant is requesting 685 square feet. She is opposed to the request. It will be a distraction for motorists traveling the freeway and thus be the cause of accidents. Jerry Murdock. It is actually three signs on one board - the identification sign for the Embassy Suites on the top, a message center in the middle which will be used for events in Anaheim and around Orange County and public service messages, and below that an identification sign for Wooley's Restaurant. It is advertising more than one thing plus a public service message portion which is computerized. Councilwoman Kaywood asked if the sign was something Caltrans would have to become involved with. STAFF INPUT: Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning stated she has typically notified Caltrans when they have property or streets within 300 feet of such requests. There have been two in the past of similar type applications that were approved. Caltrans did know about the other two but made no comment. The general concern has been with physical activity when there is a business doing something next to the freeway. They have never commented negatively on signs. She confirmed that the sign would be located 85 feet from the east property line. COUNCIL ACTION: Mayor Bay closed the public hearing. Councilman Pickler. He asked Mr. Murdock if the sign could be reduced in any way. Jerry Murdock. The Institute of Technology of Southern California did a study on how high a letter has to be to respond to it and that was how they set up the sign. The setback from the nearest part of the freeway is from 100 to 110 feet. On one side is the recycling facility and on the other the off-ramp going up. City Attorney, Jack White. Much of this discussion is related to the sign in relation to the freeway which causes him some concern in that the City 1064 1.03 Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. Municipal Code currently contains a provision that would prohibit this type of reader board, "...if the primary purpose is to be viewable from the freeway." In making this determination, the applicant should indicate the intent is other than to be viewable primarily from the freeway since it would not be possible even with the variance to approve a sign that was primarily for the purpose of freeway messages using this type of reader board. An identification sign for the hotel is an exception that would be permitted but a changeable reader board does not fall within the exceptions of the Municipal Code. The applicant should address that issue before the Council votes. Jerry Murdock. The message center is not to give messages to freeway travelers but is for the convenience of the people staying at the hotel or people in the area. It is for the convenience of the guests of the hotel and has no advertising value. He confirmed that the whole sign is visible from the freeway. City Attorney White. The test is not whether it is visible from the freeway but whether the primary purpose is to advertise to cars traveling on the freeway. Something needs to be in the record so this will not be usable as a precedent for a subsequent application to show this was somehow approved for a freeway oriented sign as grounds for approval of a sUbsequent sign. The minutes and records should be clear that the purpose of the sign is primarily not to be a message board to freeway traffic even though it is viewable from the freeway. Councilwoman Kaywood asked if Mr. Murdock was willing to remove the reader board and to Just have the other two signs. Jerry Murdock. He does not have the authority to do that. Mr. George Tepich, representing United §uites. He does not like billboard signs either. They designed the sign carefully. The message reader is not a freeway oriented sign message reader. It has several different functions. They could remove it but they would like to have it. They put it in a place on the property which is low and it is not directed for freeway visibility. The property next to them was going to be put up for sale and subsequently developed. He also feels the location of the hotel is a good one. The message reader would benefit the area and the hotel describing events as they occur. Councilwoman Kaywood. She asked if he was willing to remove the reader board. was the only way she would approve it. That 1065 104 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986, 10:00 A.M. George Tepich. They would take it into consideration if the Council refused to approve the request. Councilman Pickler. He feels the reader board is a distraction and is not needed to advertise the facility. It contributes to the safety hazards of the freeway. Glassell is not the street people are going to view the sign from. Reader boards on freeways attract attention. He wants to see the sign reduced to a size that would be more appropriate. Councilwoman Kaywood offered a resolution granting Variance No. 3614 but amending the conditions of approval to delete the reader board portion of the sign. Before action was taken, Councilman Bay, speaking against the proposed resolution, stated that it was explained clearly at the previous public hearing that the subject area was a difficult location for a hotel although they admitted to the need for hotels in the northeast industrial area but on the edges of the industrial development. The property is 40 to 50 feet below the level of Glassell at that point, and without the proper signage it could very likely fail. If there was any chance of improper signage hurting the potential business of the hotel, he will not be a party to limitations that he thinks are unreasonable. A vote was then taken on the proposed resolution and failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler and Kaywood Roth, Hunter and Bay None Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 86R-558 for adoption, granting Variance No. 3614 subject to City Planning Commission conditions. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 86R-558: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3614. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSF2IT: COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL MEMBF2~S Roth, Hunter and Bay Pickler and Kaywood None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 86R-558 duly passed and adopted. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By general consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session to consider the balance of the items previously announced. MOTION CARRIED. (2:52 p.m.) 1066 City Hall~ A,-heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 16~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. AFTER RECESS: being present. The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members (5:14 p.m.) Councilman Bay seconded the motion. ADJOURNMENT: December 22, 1986. (5:15 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK Councilman Pickler moved to adjourn to 9:00 a.m. on Monday, MOTION CARRIED. 1067 102 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 22~ 1986~ 10:00 A.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau Mayor Bay called the meeting to order, which had been adjourned to from th previous regular meeting of December 16, 1986. 130: ORDINANCE NO. 4788 - ASSIGNMENT OF ANAHEIM CABLE TV FRANCHISE: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4788 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4788: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM STORER CABLE TV, INC. TO ML MEDIA PARTNERS, L.P. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth, Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4788 duly passed and adopted. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 4790: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4790 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4790: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIMMUNICIPAL CODE RRL&TING TO ZONING. (Amending Title 18, Reclassification No. 85-86-31 CL, 727 West La Palma). 115: REQUEST TO AMEND THE SMOKING ORDINANCE: Councilwoman Kaywood asked that staff draw up an amendment to the Smoking Ordinance to include no smoking in the Council Chamber. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (9:15 a.m.) AFTER RECESS; The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Roth. (10:18 a.m.) ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Pickler moved to adjourn. seconded the motion. Councilman Roth was absent. LEONORAN. SOHL, CITY CLERK 1068 Councilwoman Kaywood MOTION CARRIED.