1985/04/02~:i~.Hallt Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
PRES ~NT:
~BSF/~'r:
PRESENT:
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, 0verholt and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Ron Bates
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
FIRE CHIEF: Bob Simpson
AUDITOR: Gary Hunui
MANAGEMENT AUDITOR: William Smith
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
CIVIL ENGINEER - DESIGN: Arthur Daw
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
~__NV_0~TION: A Moment of Silence was observed in lieu of the Invocation.
F]~AG SALUTE: Council Member E. Llewellyn Overholt, Jr. led the assembly in
~.~---~ledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
~__~9~:,' PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Roth
aVad authorized by the City Council:
"Angel Day" in Anaheim, April 9, 1985,
"Crossing Guard Week" lnAnaheim, April 1985,
"Volunteer Recognition Month" in Anaheim, April 1985,
"Federation Month" in A~heim, April 1985,
"Child Abuse Prevention Month" in Anaheim, April 1985,
"Earthquake Preparedness Week" in Anaheim, April 15-20, 1985.
The Crossing Guard Week proclamation was accepted by Chuck St~lter, General
Manager Colman Security and Gladis Bennick, Supervisor. Mr. Stolter also
acknowledged the contingent of Crossing Guards who were able to be present in
~he Chamber audience and asked them to stand; the Federation Month
}Toclamation was accepted by Myra Stockman and the Earthquake Preparedness
proclamation was accepted by Bob Berg.
119: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT: A Resolution of Support was unanimously adopted
by tP~ City Council and presented to Mike Feeney, Anaheim Fire Department and
Richard Dyer Anaheim Police Association, commending the Organization's
Committee Members, players and coaches for their commitment to the Anaheim
Police Officers Widow and Orphans Benefit Fund and encouraging all citizens of
236
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Anaheim to support the Police-Fire Charity Football Game to be held April 5,
1985. The funds from this event will be for the Fund and also the Children's
Hospital of Orange County. Mr. Feeney and Dyer then presented the Resolution
to Randy Records of the Anaheim Police Department, the Honorary Captain for
the Widows and Orphans Fund, whose father died in a tragic automobile accident
last year on the night of the game.
119: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT: A Resolution of Support was unanimously adopted
by the City Council and presented to Mr. Earl Nellesen, Chairman of the 1985
Good Friday Breakfast on the l?th Anniversary of the YMCA's sponsorship of the
Anaheim traditional Good Friday Breakfast to be celebrated April 5, 1985, and
commending the Committee for their fine effort in bringing all together in
this celebration of fellowship.
119: PRESENTATION - MICRO LOG AUTO-DIALER COMPUTER SYSTEM: Mr. Chuck Allee,
President, Anaheim Host Lions Club on behalf of the Club and their twin Lions
Club in the Orient, the Host Lions Club of Hong Kong, presented a check in the
amount of 52,000.00 as partial payment for the purchase of a survey 8
auto-dial computer system developed and manufactured by the Micro Log
Corporation. He then introduced Mr. Eddie McGuire, District Governor of the
Lions Club who briefed the Council on the forthcoming trip of a delegation
from the Anaheim Host Lions to Hong Kong on the occasion of that club's 30th
anniversary.
Police Chief, Jimmie Kennedy, accepted the check on behalf of the Anaheim
Police Department and also introduced the Vice President of Micro Log, Graham
Hartwell and Mary Peters, Director of Marketing who had worked with the
Department in set up of the auto dial computer. He thanked Mr. Allee and the
Lions for their financial assistance to a community-oriented program.
119: RATIFICATION OF RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: The Council ratified a
Resolution of Congratulations which was presented to the Salvation Army on
March 31, 1985 by Councilwoman Kaywood, on the occasion of the groundbreaking
of a new 53.1 million facility by the Salvation Army which would house more
than 140 persons providing them with a home style atmosphere.
119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Resolution of Congratulations was
unanimously adopted by the City Council to be presented to former Councilman,
and Mayor for four terms, Jack C. Dutton, on the occasion of his 75th birthday.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meetings held October 2, 1984, March 12 and March 19, 1985. Councilman Bay
seconded the motion. Councilman Pickler abstained on the minutes of
October 2, 1984 since he was not present at that meeting. MOTION CARRIED.
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. Councilman Overholt seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
237
City,~all, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,207,155.90 for the
period ending March 22, 1985 and $1,457,700.23 for the period ending March 29,
1985, in accordance with the 1984-85 Budget, were approved.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilwoman Kaywood
offered Resolution Nos. 85R-125 through 85R-127, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance
Nos. 4589 and 4590 for first reading. Refer to Ordinance 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 Westinghouse Electric Corporation for equitable
indemnity purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 18, 1984.
bL Claim submitted by Mary Gallegos and Manuel Gallegos for indemnity
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 21, 1982.
c. Claim submitted by William C. Pfau for personal injuries sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 13, 1985.
d. Claim submitted by Margte E. Howard for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 15, 1985.
e. Claim submitted by Terry L. Risley Davis for property damage sustained
purportedly due to an automobile accident with a City vehicle on or about
December 8, 1984.
f. Claim submitted by Michael Tholen and Linda Tholen for personal
injuries sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
February 2, 1985.
g, Claim submitted by Velma H. Brewer for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 9, 1984.
h. Claim submitted by Rod G. Mittelsdorf for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 8, 1985.
i. Claim submitted by Johnny R. Alley for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 22, 1985.
J. Claim submitted by Brian D. Robertson for personal injuries sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or February 12, 1985.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 105: Community Services Board--Minutes of February 14, 1985. 238
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
b. 105: Senior Citizens Commission--Minutes of January 10, 1985.
c. 105: Project Area Committee--Minutes of February 12, 1985.
d. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Southern California Cas
Company Pacific Lighting Gas Supply Company Notice to Customers of Filing
of Application and Public Hearing in Application No. 85-03-045.
e. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission--Minutes of March 6, 1985.
3. 185: Receiving and filing the Annual Report to Development Agreement No.
83-02 dated February 22, 1985, SAVI Ranch Associates as submitted by Hillman
Properties West, Inc. and finding that SAVI has complied in good faith with
the terms of this Agreement.
4. 123: Authorizing a third amendment to an agreement with Safety Striping
Service, Inc., for street and pavement stripings and marking services,
increasing the contract by 56,149, bringing the original contract amount to
~162,259.
5. 160: Accepting the bid of Siemens-Allis in the amount of 567,924.80 for
ten each 69KV disconnect switches without ground switches and four each 69KV
disconnect switches with ground switches, in accordance with Bid No. 4177.
6. 160: Accepting the bid of Westinghouse Electric Company in the amount of
528,394.22 for three each 500 KVA three-phase padmount transformers, in
accordance with Bid No. 4179.
7. 108: Approving an application for a Public Dance Permit submitted by
Manuel Gomez, for Anaheim Dance Promotion, to hold a dance at the Anaheim
Convention Center, April 6, 1985, from 6:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., in accordance
with the recommendation of the Chief of Police.
8. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-125: 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 IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT:
PELANCONI PARK PARKING LOT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO.
16-809-7105-09080. (Opening of bids on April 25, 1985, 2:00 p.m.)
9. 129: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-126: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM DECLARING THE NECESSITY PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 39576.5
TO CONTRACT FOR THE CUTTING AND REMOVAL OF ALL RANK GROWTH AND WEEDS, AND
REMOVAL OF RUBBISH, REFUSE AND DIRT UPON AN~f PARCEL OR PARCELS OF REAL
PROPERTY OR ANY PUBLIC STREETS WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALLING FOR BIDS
THEREON, AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE THEREFOR, ACCOUNT NO.
01-202-6320. (1985-1986) (Opening of bids on April 25, 1985, 2:00 p.m.)
10. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-127: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALI,Y ACCEPTING THE COMPLETIONAND THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
239
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
WIT: EMPIRE STREET STORM DRAIN, LINCOLN AVENUE TO BROADWAY, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 01-791-6325-E1370AND 51-606-6329-02260. (Schuler
Engineering Corporation, contractor, and authorizing filing of the Notice of
Completion therefor)
11. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-128: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION.
12. 142/101/124: ORDINANCE NO. 4589: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL 0 THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 11.04.095 TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
PERTAINING TO FIRES ON STADIUM, CONVENTION CENTER, AND GOLF COURSE
PROPERTIES. (First Reading)
13. 142/149: ORDINANCE NO. 4590: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING SECTION 14.32.158 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT PARKING
BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND SIX O'CLOCK A.M. ON A PORTION OF ADELE STREET. (First
Reading, from Poplar Street to East Street)
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 85R-125 through 85R-128:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 85R-125 through 85R-128, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
118: REJECTING CLAIMS FILED AGAINST THE CITY: Mr. Ron Bates, Assistant City
Manager stated that amongst the subject claims there was one submitted by
Disneyland and that claim was presently in the process of being settled.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to reject all claims and referring them to
Risk Management with the exception of the claim submitted by Disneyland.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
114: CITY OF GARDEN GROVE - RESOLUTION NO. 6611-85 SUPPORTING SENATE
BILL 75: Councilman Bay moved that a Resolution of Support be drawn for the
City of Anaheim sim/lar to the subject resolution regarding providing relief
to the taxpayers from "deep pocket" lawsuits while affording protection to
accident victims and that the Council take action on that Resolution in one
week. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
158/149: SALE OF CITY OWNED PARCEL - 2920 EAST LINCOLN AVENUE: Submitted was
report dated March 27, 1985 from the Engineering Division, recommending that
the Council accept the highest bid and approving the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute the Purchase & Sale Agreement and the Grant Deed, and authorizing the
Real Property Section to open an escrow not to exceed 60 days.
Councilman Pickler moved to continue approval of the subject request for one
week.
Before action was ~aken, Assistant City Manager Ron Bates, explained for
Councilwoman Kaywood that the delay would not harm anything but from the
240
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
City's standpoint, staff was trying to get the property into escrow as soon as
possible.
Councilman Pickler then explained for Councilman 0verholt the reason he was
requesting the continuance was that he had talked to City Management and staff
relative to the property as well as working with Calmark Development on the
possibility of exchanging the subject site for the Fremont School site.
Calmark had not yet had an opportunity to get back to him.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion but stated he would not be in favor of
a further continuance. Councilman Bay voted "no." MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Roth expressed concern over the possibility of jeopardizing the sale;
Art Daw, Civil Engineering - Design, stated that the provisions at the time
the property was offered was that the City would either accept or reject the
offer within 15 days and next Tuesday, April 9, 1985, would be the 15th day.
They had received no indication that the purchaser would withdraw before that
time, but it was not possible to know what could occur. The offer was not
irrevocable and could be withdrawnwithin that period of time.
Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon changed her "yes" vote to "no." Amended vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Pickler, Overholt and Roth
Kaywood and Bay
None
MOTION CARRIED.
142/149: ORDINANCE NO. 4591: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4591 for
first reading. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4591: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING, NUNC PRO TUNC, ORDINANCE NO. 4561 PERTAINING TO PROHIBITED PARKING.
105: APPOINTMENTS TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION - TERMS EXPIRING DECEMBER 31~ 1984
AND 1985: City Clerk Leonora N. Sohl announced that 11 applications had been
received as well as two letters from Marie Gibbs and Carrie Gibbs whom she had
tried to contact so that formal applications could be submitted by them.
Councilman Roth moved to continue the subject appointments for one week.
Councilman 0verholt seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was opposed to a
continuance since the Youth Commission was operating without a quorum and the
vacancies had been advertised for some time. She was pleased that they had
received so many excellent applications. Four appointments needed to be made
and of those not appointed, she recommended they should be contacted to serve
on one of the many committees.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion of continuance. Councilwoman
Kaywood voted "no." MOTION CARRIED.
241
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
105: APPOINTMENT TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD - TERM ENDING JUNE 30~
1988: Councilman Roth moved to continue the appointment to the Community
Services Board for one week. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
108: APPLICATION FOR A PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT - VIETNAMESE ACTOR ASSOCIATION:
Councilman Pickler moved to approve an application for a Public Dance Permit
submitted by Long Duc Le, for the Vietnamese Actor Association, to hold a
dance at the Anaheim Convention Center on April 6, 1985, from 7:30 p.m. to
1:00 a.m., in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police.
Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
152/117/137: REPLACEMENT OF LOST BONDS: Councilman Roth offered Resolution
No. 85R-129 for adoption, establishing a procedure and authorizing the City
Treasurer to issue bonds or bond coupons to replace lost, stolen, destroyed or
mutilated bonds or bond coupons, as recommended in memorandum dated
March 21, 1985 from the City Treasurer Mary Turner. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-129: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE AND AUTHORIZATION FOR ISSUANCE OF BONDS OR
BOND COUPONS TO REPLACE LOST, STOLEN, DESTROYED OR MUTILATED BONDS OR BOND
COUPONS.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, 0verholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-129 duly passed and adopted. MOTION
CARRIED.
108: HEARING - GRANADA INN APPEAL OF TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX: Steven C.
Nock, Attorney for Ankirk, appealing the decision of the Hearing Officer
denying abatement of the tax assessment due on the Granada Inn, per Audit
No. 84252, on the Transient Occupancy Tax due. This matter was continued from
the meeting of March 5, 1985, to this date.
PETITIONER'S STATEMENT:
~teven C. Nock, Legal Counsel for the owners of Oranada Inn,
explained that Anklrk was the Management Company for Granada
Inn. He referred to and read his letter dated April 1, 1985,
which explained his client's case in detail submitted yesterday
to the City Council and the Hearing Officer (on file in the City
Clerk's Office). He also expanded on some of the points
contained therein emphasizing what he considered the key point -
"...that there was no clear legal answer and no guidelines
available from the City during the entire audit period. The
fact that the old ordinance was ambiguous and uncertain to the
general public is made very clear by the fact that the City
adopted a new ordinance effective March, 1984 which clearly
states what written formalities are required to qualify for the
242
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Transient Tax Exemption." He was not asking that the Council
overturn the Hearing Officer's determination but that the
Council look at the broad picture and waive the penalty to
prevent an injustice. If not waived, there will be a
substantial injustice inasmuch as the City did not make
available to the public the guidelines by which the auditors
were enforcing the written requirement agreement, and different
taxpayers were asked to meet different standards depending on
who was interpreting the ordinance, and where evidence was
simply not attainable which would have established many of the
transactions as exempt under the standards set by the Hearing
Officer. For those reasons they were requesting that the City
Council waive the penalty portion of the assessment.
Bill Packard, 3702 South Parton, Santa Aha, authorized Agent for
the owners of the Granada Inn, answered questions posed by
Council Members relative to their largest corporate client
Hughes Aircraft and also questions regarding a City audit
performed three years ago. He explained that the same
management team was on the property for nine years and the
registration cards used were the same as those used for that
entire period. If they were informed three years ago that they
were in violation, they would have corrected the problem.
STAFF INPUT AND ANSWERS TO COUNCIL qUESTIONS GIVEN:
Acting City Attorney Jack White, Bob Simpson, Hearing Officer,
Gary Hunui, In-Charge Auditor and Bill Smith, Audit Manager.
Mr. White clarified the difference between the old ordinance and
the new ordinance adopted approximately a year ago noting that
the hearing was under the old ordinance. Today what the Council
was looking at, because of the difficulty in obtaining the
evidence necessary to dispute the issue of the principal amount
of the tax due, the appellant was saying that to this point,
rather than search back for more evidence, he is willing to pay
the principal amount and is asking relief from the penalty
provision. The ordinance provided for that if two things
happened: (1) if the Council finds that relief is necessary to
avoid a substantial injustice of the operator and, (2) there is
a 4/5ths vote of the Council to relieve all or part of that
penalty paid. The information the Council was hearing was going
toward the reasonableness of their relying upon the best
practices of what happened since the previous audit and whether
or not it was a substantial injustice. He also confirmed for
the Mayor that through the Business License Division in
coordination with his office, copies of the revised ordinance
were distributed to all hotel and motel operators in the City.
At the conclusion of the extensive hearing, Mr. Nock in his
s,,mmation stated that the hearing followed the same line as the
previous hearings with the Hearing Officer, the problem being
that the ordinance was not clear and predictable and perhaps the
243
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
reason the scope of the original ordinance did not include a
review of the written agreements was because there was no policy
at that time. Even a distinction between corporate and
individual tenants was not in the ordinance and if that had been
known, they would have made such a distinction. He again
reiterated the essential point of the appeal was one of
injustice that a tax ordinance should be sufficiently clear so
that tax paying members of the community could look at the
ordinance and know what they had to do. He did not believe that
was the case and asked that the Council waive the penalty
portion of the assessment.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved that the tax be assessed but that the
penalty portion of ~4,900 be waived. Councilman Roth seconded the motion for
the purpose of discussion.
Mr. White clarified for Councilman Overholt it was his understanding from the
April 1, 1985 letter, the issue was the waiver of the penalty. The motion
should incorporate the finding that the waiver was reasonably necessary to
avoid a substantial injustice to the operator and would require four
affirmative votes.
Councilman Overholt thereupon seconded the motion modified as outlined by the
City Attorney.
Mr. Hunui stated that the exact penalty total $4,927.95 was assessed on all
findings and not just the findings discussed relative to people staying over
30 days; Councilman Bay asked for clarification that Mr. Hunui was saying that
the penalty was also against the funds received for kitchen utensils and
miscellaneous rentals, per Schedule 1, as he had previously explained.
Mr. Hunui answered that was correct and also assessed on people who stay over
30 days under the new ordinance after March 1, 1984.
Councilwoman Kaywood then posed additional questions to staff and Mr. Nock for
purposes of clarification. Since it was determined that the registration
cards included not only the arrival date of a guest but also the check-out
date which would determine if there were stays over 30 days, she did not
understand the problem. She also felt that staff had fully informed the
petitioner as to their obligations.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted
"no." MOTION CARRIED.
105: REQUEST TO ELIMINATE MANDATORY ATTENDANCE AT PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETINGS BY A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Councilwoman
Kaywood explained why she felt it was an honor for a Planning Commissioner to
be appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The feeling she was
getting was that the Planning Commission did not feel that they had any kind
of input or anything to gain which she considered to be a poor outlook. She
also felt it was essential that the two bodies have a liaison.
244
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Gerald Bushore, Planning Commissioner, explained the problem arose 3 or 4
years ago when Charlene Barnes-LaClaire was the appointee to the Commission
and was having difficulty in making all of the meetings. It was at that time
he offered to be the designated Member of the Planning Commission to the Parks
and Recreation Commission and had been so ever since. Due to business
conflicts, he could no longer attend the meetings. At the Planning Commission
meeting, they tried to find someone else but everyone seemed to be under a
time constraint and it was impossible to change the Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting date. The discussion then evolved to whether or not it was
necessary for the Planning Commission to be at those meetings all the time.
If there was some way where they could go to the meetings when Planning
Commission input was needed, it would open up a seat on the Commission where
someone else could serve better and the Planning Commission Member could be in
an advisory capacity or ex-officio. They were looking to the Council for some
insight.
Councilman 0verholt stated perhaps the Council should put someone else on the
Planning Commission who had the time. He (0verholt) was on the Commission for
seven years and had a great deal of difficulty understanding why no one on the
Planning Commission had time to participate.
Mr. Bushore stated he was on the Parks and Recreation Commission because he
wanted to be there. He was too busy but he could continue to attend if the
Parks and Recreation Commission realized if he did attend he was going to be
late or that he could not be at some of the meetings.
Councilman Overholt stated it was his opinion it was essential to have a
Member of the Planning Commission at those meetings. To say that the Planning
Commission Member should not be a regular Member of that Commission went
against the grain of what the Parks and Recreation Commission was all about.
It brought together school people, City people and staff. He did not know how
it was possible to know in advance when there was something going to be
discussed when the Planning Commission Member should be present. There should
be somebody at those meetings on a regular basis.
Councilman Roth moved to continue the issue for 30 days to permit Mr. Bushore
to discuss the matter with the Planning Commission relaying to them the
concerns of several Members of the Council and to work out an agreeable
arrangement where there could perhaps be a rotation of Commissioners at the
Parks and Recreation Commission meetings for a certain period of time.
Councilman 0verholt seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay stated he did not see a need for Mr.
Bushore to report back in 30 days. He had no problem with the motion but felt
that the issue was one that the Planning Commission should solve. The Council
expressed a strong opinion that they wanted a Planning Commissioner at the
Parks and Recreation Commission meetings and however they worked that out
would be fine. He was hearing that the Council majority did not want to
remove the requirement for attendance of a Planning Commissioner at the Parks
and Recreation Commission meetings. If Mr. Bushore went back and told them,
it was an issue for the Planning Commission to work out.
245
~ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Overholt stated that the Planning Commission did not appoint the
liaison to the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Council did. Mr. Bushore
was saying that he was the appointed person and if there was going to be a
rotation, the Council was going to have to make that appointment.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2599 (READVERTISED) - REVISED PLANS:
Application submitted by Commonwealth Financial Corporation, to permit a
7-story, 224-room hotel complex with on-sale of alcoholic beverages on
RS-A-43,000 zoned property located on the south side of Frontera Street and
east of Glassell Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) minimum number
of parking spaces, (b) maximum structural height.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-71, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2599, and previously approved a negative
declaration status.
City Clerk Sohl announced that Councilwoman Kaywood had requested a review of
the Planning Commission's decision on Conditional Use Permit No. 2599 ~n a
letter dated March 25, 1985 and, therefore, a public hearing would be
scheduled at a later date. (Appeal period ended March 26, 1985).
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4585: Amending Title 18, adding new Subsection .095 to
Section 18.61.020, Subsection .145, amending Subsection .605 and repealing
Subsection .400, all of Section 18.61.050 of Chapter 18.61 of the Code,
relating to commercial offices and sales businesses in industrial zones. This
matter was discussed at meetings of March 5, March 12 and March 19, 1985 (see
minutes those dates).
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4585 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4585: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SUBSECTION
.095 TO SECTION 18.61;020, ADDING SUBSECTION .145, AMENDING SUBSECTION .605
AND REPEALING SUBSECTION .400, ALL OF SECTION 18.61.050 OF CHAPTER 18.61 OF
TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT-.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kay~ood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4585 duly passed and adopted.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Attorney requested a Closed Session to
discuss potential litigation with no action anticipated.
The Mayor announced that a Closed Session would be held with the City's
Attorneys pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.A.
246
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch break.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (12:25 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, ali Council Members
being present. (1:56 p.m)
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 84-12A: In accordance with application
filed by Ormond Construction Company, public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of existing electrical easement extending easterly from Euclid
Street approximately 279 feet south of Palm Lane, pursuant to Resolution No.
85R-112 duly published in the Anaheim and notices thereof posted in accordance
with a law.
Report of the City Engineer dated February 25, 1985 was submitted,
recommending approval of said abandonment.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The City Engineer
determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an
Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 85R-130 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 84-12A, as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-130: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING AN EXISTING ELECTRICAL EASEMENT EXTENDING EASTERLY FROM
EUCLID STREET APPROXIMATELY 279 FEET SOUTH OF PALM LANE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-130 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2652 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: Shiran A. Damani, et al., (Prince Supermarket).
1200 West Cerritos, Anaheim, CA.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To permit a convenience market with off-sale beer
and wine on RM-1200 zoned property located at 1200 West Cerritos Avenue.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC85-34 denied Conditional Use
Permit No. 2652, approved EIR - negative declaration.
247
City Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
HEARING SET ON:
Council meeting of February 26, 1985. Review requested by Councilman Pickler.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 21, 1985.
Posting of property March 19, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 22, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated February 4, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Frank Lowry, Attorney, Farano & K/ever, 100 South Anaheim
Boulevard, representing the applicant.
He first referred to an amendment to the Planning Commission
resolution issued to correct an error indicating that there were
478 signatures in opposition to the conditional use permit at
the Planning Commission hearing, which should have stated that
those signatures were in favor. He also had a supplemental
petition containing 75 additional signatures now totalling over
550 signatures in favor. He was certain there were a few
signatures not from those in the immediate area but claimed at
least 90 percent accuracy. He felt that the Planning Commission
in considering the matter did not find a great problem with a
convenience market at the subject location or even beer and
wine, but the market had a history of small violations of the
Zoning Code. Last July Mr. Damani finally began to learn how to
run a market in the United States and he had spent a great deal
of money to conform. He (Lowry) asked the Code Enforcement
Supervisor, John Poole to run a check on the market to see if
there were any remaining violations and as of 4:30 p.m.
yesterday afternoon, Mr. Poole stated that the market was
"clean." He (Lowry) checked at 12 noon today. There were no
known violations and all conditions have been complied with,
except one and if the application is granted, the applicant
would ask the Council to waive that condition, i.e., removal of
the canopies. His client felt those were attractive and if
removed would leave only an elongated rectangle. Convenience
Markets located all over the City served a need and none were
without beer and wine. He then reported on the convenience
markets serving the area located from one half mile to one and
three quarter miles away and all had beer and wine. To deny the
applicant a beer and wine license put him in a helpless
situation to compete. Since the applicant presently, and since
July, was not in violation of any City ordinances, he should be
granted a beer and wine license. Otherwise, he could not
compete and his business would fail without the ability to offer
the same services offered by competitors in the neigborhood.
Also, if the petition is granted, the applicant will request
termination of the two previous conditional use permits.
248
City Hall~ Auaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
COUNCIL CONCERNS:
Councilwoman Kaywood.
At the time of the approval of the market, it was made very
clear there would be no sale of beer and wine at any time
because of the location and many police complaints. However,
the applicant still chose to open the business. Since there
were five markets in the area selling beer and wine, there was
no reason to add another one.
PUBLIC INPUT
IN FAVOR:
A1 Kopek, owner of the apartment house adjacent to the market.
He knew Mr. Damani and was glad to have him as a neighbor. Mr.
Damani had improved the appearance of the business. The way he
is managing the business and keeping it clean, if he has a beer
and wine license it will not be any worse and he will make sure
young people will not hang around for any reason.
Ferren Muller, 1226 West Cerritos.
Having lived there for 7 years he has seen an improvement. He
would like to speak for most of the people in the neighborhood
who do not have vehicles and who would have to walk one or one
and a half miles to buy alcohol.
IN OPPOSITION:
Howie Schulman, 1371 Walnut.
EXHIBITS, MATERIALS SUBMITTED:
Petition containing approximately 75 signatures supporting
Conditional Use Permit No. 2652.
FINAL SUMMATION BY APPLICANT:
Floyd Farano, Attorney representing Prince Market, referred to
minutes of the Council meeting of October 28, 1980 during which
time the discussion and issues of whether to grant a full permit
were extensively discussed by the Council. His interpretation
of what took place was an either/or situation. It was not a
prohibition against either beer and wine or gasoline, it was
against both. The operator at the time opted for gasoline
sales. The applicant was present to give up the gasoline
sales. There was no desire or intention to sell gasoline but
the alcoholic beverages are a necessity to the continued success
of the market, or any success. Studies have been conducted
establishing that beer and wine make up 50 to 75 percent of
sales of convenience markets - if not sales, profit levels. He
did not think that Mr. Damani should continually do without the
permission he needs to stay in business because of past records
of previous operators. Mr. Damani asked him to accept any
condition the Council might be interested in placing on any
approval. He suggested that Mr. Damani be given a trial or a
temporary permit be granted to be reviewed at the end of two
years and that the applicant will stipulate that an Enforcement
Officer may present himself anytime unannounced on the property
249
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
for inspection and if the property in the manner in which it is
operated is not in compliance, the applicant will voluntarily
come back for a review and a show-cause hearing for the purpose
of possibly revoking the permit.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - 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. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-131 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 2652, upholding the decision of the City Planning
Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-131: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2652.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-131 duly passed and adopted.
Before concluding, Assistant City Attorney Jack White confirmed for Councilman
0verholt that the convenience market could still continue since there was an
existing conditional use permit on the market.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 1936 - EXTENSION OF TIME:
APPLICANT:
Jonathon T. Y. Yeh,
420 South Beach Boulevard, Anaheim, CA.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: Request for an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 1936, to expand an existing motel on CL zoned property located at
420 South Beach Boulevard with the following Code waivers: (a) maximum wall
height, (deleted) (b) maximum structural height, (c) permitted encroachment
into required yard, (deleted) (d) minimum landscaped area. (deleted)
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Extension of time approved by the Planning
Commission to expire February 6, 1986.
HEARING SET ON:
Council meeting of February 26, 1985.
Kaywood.
Review requested by Councilwoman
25O
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
PUBLIC NOTICEREQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 21, 1985.
Posting of property March 22, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 22, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated February 4, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Jonathan Yeh, 420 South Beach Boulevard, one of the proponents.
The original CUP was granted 2 years ago. They applied for one
extension and then another because in the past they had not been
able to amass enough funds to build. They have developed the
detailed design of the units. The original permit approved 19
units. Their funding was good enough for 10 units so they were
going to build 10 units at this time. They have checked with
the Zoning Officer and City Engineer during their detailed
design tried to limit the building to 20 feet according to City
Code. The corner of the new units is 40 feet away from the
property line and all other parts of the newly-built units will
be further away from that point. They were not asking for the
waiver and they were going to conform to all conditions the City
imposed under the original CUP. He confirmed for the Mayor and
Councilwoman Kaywood that there were now no waivers at all being
requested. He did not need a waiver of the structural height.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler move to approve the requested extension of time to
expire February 26, 1986. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for five minutes.
(2:33 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (2:38 p.m)
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2658 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION:
APPLICANT:
Atlantic Richfield Co., (ARCO AM/PM Mini Market),
Mike Slaven, Home Federal Savings.
625 Broadway Street, San Diego, CA. 92101
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To permit a freestanding automatic teller machine
kiosk in conjunction with an existing convenience market with gasoline sales
on CL(SC) zoned property located at 5700 East La Palma Avenue, with Code
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC85-61 denied Conditional Use
Permit No. 2658, EIR - negative declaration recommended be granted.
251
City Hall~ A~mhe!m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2, 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
HEARING SET ON:
Appeal by Home Federal Savings, March 4, 1985.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin March 21, 1985.
Posting of property March 22, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - March 22, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 4, 1985.
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT AND ANSWER TO QUESTIONS POSED BY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mike Slaven, representing Home Federal Savings, applicant.
The subject Arco site where they proposed to place the automatic
teller machine can support the additional use. At the request
of the City Traffic Department, Home Federal relocated the kiosk
and had a professional traffic engineering study performed which
concluded that the site will support an automatic teller
machine. The additional use will not bring about a huge influx
of new customers. The program is only with ARCO in conjunction
with their AM/PM Mini Markets that are open 24 hours. Arco
performed a study showing only 18 percent of the people
utilizing the stations or over 80 percent of the people were on
the site already and did not come just to use the tellers. Two
locations in San Diego have been in existence for approximately
18 months and the others were open two weeks ago in Sacramento.
No traffic problems have been experienced at the San Diego
locations. Home Savings also took a lot of responsibility for
security and basically the reason why they picked Arco is
because those sites are opened 24 hours, brightly lit, have
excellent street exposure and continuous staff on the premises.
On Home Federal's 20 remote (off-site) locations, robbery data
showed only two robberies occurring in San Diego County.
COUNCIL CONCERNS:
Councilman Pickler.
The subject market does a thriving business at present and an
added use would have an adverse impact on that small parcel.
Councilman Bay.
The report from the Police Chief dated March 22, 1985 outlined
specific concern-s. There were 64 robberies occurring in
convenience markets in 1984 in Anaheim and it was the Chief's
opinion that adding kiosks may further impact robberies on or
around the premises of AM/PM or convenience markets. He (Bay)
is also concerned about a third use on the property as well as
over how many more such requests will be received.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
Expressed concern that there will be other requests such as
those received at the time Arco applied for dual uses, i.e.,
AM/PM
252
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
markets along with gasoline sales. Arco initially came in for
three locations but ended up applying for many more. She felt
requesting a third use was out of line.
Councilman Roth.
He was interested in getting data relative to traffic and the
safety factor at such installation, since he felt this is a
concept of the future.
Councilman Overholt.
His primary concern over the proposed use is based on the
concern of the Police Department. The safety factor had to be
considered and they should move slowly relative to this new
concept.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
IN FAVOR: None.
IN OPPOSITION:
None.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-132 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 2658, upholding the decision of the City Planning
Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-132: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85R-132.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, 0verholt and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-132 duly passed and adopted.
179: REHEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3453:
APPLICANT:
Arthur and MarJorie Stahovich,
805 Ramblewood Drive, Anaheim, CA.
92804.
253
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To construct an 8-unit apartment complex on property
located at 3639 West Savanna Street with code waiver of maximum structural
height.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: ResolutiOn No. PC85-06 granted Variance No. 3453,
and approved EIR negative declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Council meeting of January 29, 1985. Review requested by Councilwoman Kaywood.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 7, 1985.
Posting of property February 7, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 7, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated January 7, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Art Stahovich, 805 Ramblewood Avenue.
The rehearing was requested regarding the left turn lane on
Knott Avenue at Savanna Street. It was important that there
should be a left turn lane but he did not know why it should be
his responsibility and that was the reason he appealed. His is
a small project and too many expenses will place him out of the
market. He noted in the current estimate Just handed to him,
however, that the cost to put in the left turn lane is $255.95
which is considerably less than the estimated figure given at
the previous hearing.
STAFF INPUT:
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
At the time of the last Council hearing (January 29, 1985) his
estimate was far greater becaus he did not know the limits of
the work required. Since then it has been determined that the
cost is approximately 3250.00.
Mr. Stahovich stated for that amount he did not want to appeal
the condition, but in researching the matter he discovered that
with regard to the storm drain which is another condition
(Condition No. 10), in 1980 the City was to install the flood
control and it was agreed to by the City Engineer at the time
the Waddle property was approved. The cost of the improvement
would be approximately $35,000 to 340,000. The condition was
imposed upon his project but at the time of the hearing, he did
not have the foregoing information.
Jack White, Assistant City Attorney.
The condition requires that the property owner front the cost of
installing the storm drain. It also provides that he have
available the opportunity to enter into a reimbursement
agreement, and upon doing so the City would assess any
254
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
subsequent developers within the area of benefit for the storm
drain fees, which would be reimbursed to the applicant for the
portion of those costs in excess of his fair share.
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning.
Mr. Stahovich had a letter dated May 27, 1980 from Bill Devitt,
City Engineer sent to the City of Buena Park, confirming a
telephone conversation concerning Mr. Waddle's property
immediately to the west stating, "The drainage of Savanna Street
will be westerly to a catch basin and storm drain that outlets
into the Carbon Creek Channel. This storm drain will be
constructed by Mr. Waddle within an easement dedicated to the
City of Anaheim. The City of Anaheim has agreed to share the
cost of this storm drain on a 50-50 basis with Mr. Waddle."
This referred to the previous action in the City of Buena Park.
MOTION: Councilman Bay stated he remembered the hearings and questioned the
status of that agreement between the City and Mr. Waddle. He then moved that
the Council continue the rehearing and refer the matter hack to staff to
research the issue and subsequently report the Council in two weeks.
Councilman Roth seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mary Bader, 6701 Savanna Street, stated the water
force was so great coming down the drain that a couple of years ago the City
put in a temporary black top but it had since washed away. She also had a
letter stating the City would bear all costs relative to the storm drain. At
a Planning Commission hearing, they never agreed to pay anything but were told
the City would pay 50 percent. They kept quiet or would never have received a
Certificate of Occupancy. They were allowed to put in 8 units only on almost
an acre of land. The City had a responsibility that has not been fulfilled.
She suggested that the City go back as far as the commitment of Mr. Deitz.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion of continuance. MOTION CARRIED.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4588: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4588 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4588: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP R~FERRED T~ ~N TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(79-80-25(2), RM-3000(SC), south of Nob/ Ranch Road, east of Anaheim Hills
Golf Course)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, 0verholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4588 duly passed and adopted.
179: ORDINANCE NOS. 4592 THROUGH 4596: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance
Nos. 4592 through 4596, both inclusive, for first reading. Refer to Ordinance
Book.
255
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~, 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 4592: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(84-85-16, RM-1200, 3233 West Lincoln Avenue)
ORDINANCE NO. 4593: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE ~RTATING TO ZONING.
(83-84-19, CO, 2401 East Katella Avenue)
ORDINANCE NO. 4594: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(83-84-29, RM-1200, 2910 to 2918 West Ball Road)
ORDINANCE NO. 4595: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE R~LATING TO ZONING.
(84-85-14 zone, 406 East South Street)
ORDINANCE NO. 4596: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(70-71-49(38), ML, northwest corner Red Gum and Coronado)
139: AB 1543 (ROBINSON) - COURT FINES: Councilman Pickler referred to the
subject bill which the Board of Supervisors were supporting which would result
in raising of fees which the County collected from court fines from 15 to 40
percent. A group from the League of Cities including himself talked to
Supervisors Riley and Clark to apoint where they were going to consent to a
proposal supporting AB1543 but were going to hold off for two weeks to give
Cities and City Managers an opportunity to peruse the proposal and give their
input to the Supervisors.
114: MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM - TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS:
Councilman Bay reported on the status of the subject program and the several
meetings he had recently attended, the thrust being the formulation of an
acceptable Joint powers agreement which was going to be presented to both
Supervisors Nestande and Riley's staff tomorrow so that everyone would be
fully briefed and informed before the next meeting of the cities and counties
next Friday morning.
148: NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE - WASHINGTON D.C.:
(March 23 through 26, 1985) Mayor Roth reported on subject conference attended
by himself, and Councilmen Overholt and Pickler, where issues pertinent to the
City were discussed with lawmakers, specifically the impact of the Supreme
Court ruling approximately six weeks ago relative to the Fair Labor Standards
Act which would have a significant adverse impact on Anaheim. The City was
asking for legislative action on an emergency basis in order to have an
opportunity to look at the matter in depth. Letters need to be written not
only by Anaheim, but all 26 cities in Orange County. In Anaheim alone the
impact would he ~650,000 to ~1 million. It was a high priority item and he
was certain that staff would follow up.
Another item discussed was the traffic flow around the Disneyland and
Convention Center area. Anaheim's program was presented to show the need for
some financial support for the project. There was 31.8 million in a special
256
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 2~ 1985, 10:00 A.M.
fund to be used at the discretion of the Secretary of Transportation on
innovative ways of expeditinE/reEulating traffic flows which information could
be shared with other cities. The City was requesting approximately $900,000
in research monies for a program that was going to cost the City approximately
~11 million. The trip was very beneficial and productive for Anaheim.
135: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA OF THE ANAHEIM HILLS GOLF COURSE:
Mayor Roth reported on the concern already being expressed relative to
proposed development of property in the area of the Anaheim Hills Golf
Course. Residents were presently organizing a letter writting campaign and
political activity relative to the issue. The matter was discussed at a Golf
Course Commission hearing and apparently got out of hand.
Councilman Pickler felt it would be more appropriate for a public reaction
after the report was submitted. He felt the public was assuming a lot of
things that were not going to happen.
Councilwoman Kaywood felt since the Council had seen nothing, it was premature
for anyone to start a campaign. There was no way she was going to do anything
to harm the area. There would also have to be public hearings before anything
could happen.
Councilman Bay stated the Council first needed to be informed on the proposed
plan. He wanted within the next week or two to see information by the Golf
Course Commission, at least a status report in order to have a better picture
relative to the concerns being expressed.
Councilman Pickler stated the Council liaison was going to be meeting with the
Golf Course Commission. This was just a preliminary to the EIR and they were
merely trying to get input. However, areas of concern arose which had nothing
to do with what was supposed to be tak/ng place.
Councilman Bay stated he had heard statements that the Anaheim Hills Golf
Course was showing a profit and suggested that perhaps some facts on just how
the Hills Course had done in the last 5 years on its own might be something
that the Public Information Office could put out to the newspapers to make the
public aware of the total factors involved.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman R0th moved to adjourn. Councilman Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:47 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
257