1985/05/14City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sob/
PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon Hoyt
ASSISTANT PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Edward Alario
ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER: Darrell Ament
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING:
Norman J. Priest
FINANCE DIRECTOR: George Ferrone
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Father John Lenihan, St. Boniface Catholic Church, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Irv Pickler led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: INTRODUCTION: Mayor Roth then welcomed Ms. Tamara Sorensen, the 1985
Cinco De Mayo Queen, and on behalf of the Council and the City congratulated
her on winning the title and presented her with roses.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Roth
and authorized by the City Council:
"Human Resources Development Week" in Anaheim, May 19-25, 1985,
"California Traffic Safety Week" in Anaheim, May 19-25, 1985,
"Block Parent Program Week", May 13, 1985,
"Very Special Arts Festival, Magic in the Air Day" in Anaheim, May 18, 1985,
"Armed Forces Day" in Anaheim, May 17, 1985,
"Cover Expo Days" in Anaheim, May 18 & 19, 1985,
"Police Week" in Anaheim, May 12-18, 1985,
"National Tourism Week" in Anaheim, May 19-25, 1985.
The Human Resources Development Week proclamation was accepted by Virginia
Mort; California Traffic Safety Week by Lt. James Thalman; Block Parent
355
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Program Week by Bill Thompson; Very Special Arts Festival by Carol Arnesen;
Police Week in Anaheim by Chief Jimmie Kennedy, and National Tourism Week by
William Snyder.
119: RESOLUTION OF WELCOME: A Resolution of Welcome was unanimously adopted
by the City Council to be presented to Dr. Bonganjalo Goba, of South Africa,
guest of honor at the Black Business Alliance of Orange County meeting.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meetings held December 4, 1984 and April 30, 1985. Councilman Roth abstained
on the minutes of April 30, 1985 since he was not present at that meeting.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READINC - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances an~ 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 Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,666,363.31, 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-184 through 85R-189, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance
No. 4610 for first reading.
1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Burton E. Anakin (Main action: Stinson Jr. vs. City
of Anaheim) for leave to present late claim against the City of Anaheim for
indemnity purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 21, 1982.
b. Claim submitted by Coleman Security Services, Inc. for indemnity and
contribution purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 27, 1983.
c. Claim submitted by James Broten & Connie Broten for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 7, 1985.
d. Claim submitted by Angelita Taylor for personal injury sustained
purportedly due to police actions on or about December 22, 1984.
e. Claim submitted by R. J. Noble Company for personal injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 23, 1984.
356
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
f. Claim submitted by Stewart Green Associates for personal injury
sustained purportedly due to contractual breach on or about September 30, 1984.
g. Claim submitted by Szabo Food Service Company for indemnity and
contribution purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 12, 1984.
h. Claim submitted by Clifford B. Murr for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 26, 1985.
i. Claim submitted by Santa Faract for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 12, 1984.
Claims recommended to be accepted:
J. Claim submitted by Lisa Chevallier for property damage due to actions
of the City on or about March 19, 1985.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission--Minutes of April 10, 1985.
b. 156: Police Department--Crime and Clearance Analysis for the month of
March.
3. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for the eight
month period ended February 28, 1985.
4. 153: Receiving and filing the Affirmative Action Annual Report for the
calendar year 1984.
5. 169: Authorizing Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Fecit Strata
Construction in the amount of $24,192.03 for additional work in connection
with the Lincoln Avenue Street Improvement, Sunkist to State College
Boulevard, Account No. 12-792-6325-E2970.
6. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Coleman Security Service, Inc., at a
cost of $255,000 to provide a minimum of forty-six school crossing guards, for
the period July 1, 1985 through June 30, 1986.
7. 160: Accepting the low bid of Interior Supply Co. in the amount of
$97,926.13 for resurfacing restroom floors at Anaheim Stadium, in accordance
with Bid No. 4209.
8. 160: Accepting the low bid of Floor Systems in the amount of $48,713.55
for re-carpeting the Convention Center arena concourse steps, landings and
walkways, per Bid No. 4201.
9. 129/119: RESOLUTION 85R-184: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING CERTAIN MUNICIPAL PROPERTY IS NO LONGER NEEDED FOR
PUBLIC USE AND AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF SAME. (Approving the donation of
two obsolete fire pumpers with scrap value of approximately $1,000 each to the
3.57
].70
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985; 10:00 A.M.
cities of La Paz and Mexicali, Mexico, ~rlth delivery by the Orange-County
Firemen's Association)
10. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-185: 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:
HARBOR BOULEVARD STREET, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT, BROADWAY TO B~I.I. ROAD,
IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (Finding and determining that public convenience and
necessity require the Harbor Boulevard Street, Water and Sewer Improvement,
Broadway to Ball Road, Account Nos. 12-793-6325-E3760, 11-790-6325-E0580 and
52-606-6329-02246; and opening of bids on June 6, 1985.
11. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-186: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PELANCONI PARK PARKING LOT, IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM. (Awarding a contract to the lowest and best responsible
bidder, R. J. Noble Company, in the amount of ~36,849 for Construction of
Parking Lots and Light Improvements for Pelanconi Park, Account No.
16-809-7105-09080)
12. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-187: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 0F THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND AT3. UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: CONSTRUCTION OF W~.LLS 40 AND 41 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (Accepting the
completion of construction of Wells Nos. 40 and 41 (drilling), Account Nos.
53-619-6329-09019 and 53-619-6329-09030, Stang Hydronics, Inc., contractor,
and authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion therefor)
13. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-188: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCTAND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: CONSTRUCTION OF WATER IMPROVEMENTS ON WEIR CANYON ROAD FROM SOUTHERLY OF
LA PALMAAVENUE TO THE RIVERSIDE FREEWAY NORTHERLY OFF RAMP IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM. (Accepting the completion of construction of Water Improvements on
Weir Canyon Road, Account Nos. 54-605-6329-01716 and 54-605-6329-01716, Macco
Constructors, Inc., contractor, and authorizing filing of the Notice of
Completion therefor)
14. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-189: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF
PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND
TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL
WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: PATRICK HENRY NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM. (Accepting the completion of construction of Patrick Henry
Neighborhood Street and Storm Drain Improvements, Account Nos.
25-791-6325-E1320, 25-792-6325-E2920, 25-792-6325-E2980 and 51-606-6329-00740,
Gillespie Construction, Inc., contractor; and authorizing the filing of the
Notice of Completion therefor)
358
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
15. 149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4610: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANA}~_EIM
AMENDING CHAPTER 14.32 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING
RESTRICTIONS ON MELROSE STREET, SOUTH OF VERMONT AVENUE. (Amending Section
14.32.110 of the Code, pertaining to parking restrictions on Melrose Street,
south of Vermont Avenue (first reading).
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 85R-184 through 85/{-189:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 85R-184 through 85R-189, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar. MOTION CARRIED.
123: BENCHMARK CONSULTING SERVICES -ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGY FOR ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Norm Priest, Director of Community Development and Planning,
explained for Councilman Overholt that relative to the subject proposal, it
would help to assess where the City stands and to set some goals as to where
the City should be compared with other jurisdictions in the area and around
the State in terms of developing a specific economic development program. Ron
Thompson, Economic Development Manager, was taking the leadership in that
effort. There was a need for additional expertise to help form a program of
action.
Councilman Overholt stated he was thoroughly supportive, but since people
seemed to be concerned about studies, he wanted to raise the issue openly and
also pledge his support.
Councilman Bay referred to the great deal of information collected during the
time the Industrial Development Board (IDB) existed. He asked (1) if the
information collected at that time was still available and, (2) if the whole
action was going to be coordinated with the IDB and if the talent on that
Board was going to be utilized.
Mr. Priest explained that staff had already met with Mr. Hughes and would
continue to do so to ensure that whatever information was collected and still
exist from the Anaheim Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) will be
incorporated into the effort and they will also use the IDB.
MOTION: Councilman Overholt moved to approve an agreement with Benchmark
Consulting Services in an amount not to exceed 318,000, to perform an
assessment of, and strategy for, economic development, as recommended in
memorandum dated May 7, 1985. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
137: APPOINTMENT OF FINANCING TEAM - TAX REVENUE AND ANTICIPATION NOTE
ISSUE: City Manager William Talley and Director of Finance George Ferrone
answered questions posed by Councilman Bay relating to statements contained in
staff report dated May 6, 1985 from Mr. Ferrone relative to the subject.
359
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
At the conclusion of discussion and questioning, Councilman Pickler moved to
authorize an agreement with Merill Lynch, Financial Advisor in the amount of
$29,750 and Jones Hall Hill & White, Bond Counsel in an amount not to exceed
$12,000 plus out of pocket expenses not to exceed $2,500, as a Financing Team
for the sale of Tax Revenue and Anticipation Notes, as recommended in
memorandum dated May 6, 1985. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
106: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN POLICY ISSUES - PUBLIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT: (1)
Undergrounding of existing overhead utilities, 2) water revenue bond issue and
3) development contributions toward new construction.
City Manager Talley explained that subject issues were three of the six
Council was going to want to discuss as part of making their determination
over the next couple of years on where they wanted the City to be heading.
Mr. Ed Alario, Assistant General Manager Operations, gave a presentation on
the issues of undergrounding of existing overhead utilities and developer
contributions over new construction, briefing the reports attached to the
memorandum dated May ?, 1985 from the Public Utilities General Manager; Mr.
Darrell Ament, Assistant General Manager for Management Services presented the
water revenue b~nd issue, the background date for which was also contained in
an attachment to the May 7, 1985 memorandum. Questions were posed and
comments made by Council Members on the issues after each presentation. After
the extensive discussion on undergrounding, Gordon Hoyt, Public Utilities
General Manager, explained at the moment his Department had no policy on
undergrounding and that was the issue being raised - whether there should be
such a policy and program developed, should it be City-wide or more
specifically in the CR area, etc. He was not looking for any action today
other than to expose the Council to a discussion of the important issues so
that the Council could set a policy or decide on any other alternative they
wished. Figures could be assembled to indicate the kinds of costs that would
be involved with undergrounding on a City-wide basis and to make some
comparisons of maintenance and special costs of the two systems in order to
formulate series of alternatives for financing that might be of interest to
the Council.
Relative to the water bond issue, in concluding his presentation, Mr. Ament
pointed out that in the budget being presented, the utilities were
contemplating going forth with the revenue bond issue assuming Council and
voter approval. Under current policy, the Department only had a choice
between rates and a bond issue but they were going to try to look at some
alternatives that would be less of a burden on the rate payers and community
to present to the voters. The Council should be aware that this matter will
be a policy issue and the budget as presented anticipated a water bond issue.
Mr. Alario briefed the policy issue relative to the feasibility of developer
contribution towards the installation of overhead and underground line
extensions. In the water utility, the largest portion of the costs were borne
by the developers but in the electric utility that was not the case.
Approximately 14 percent of the cost of new development was absorbed by the
developer and the remaining split amongst all the rate payers. He then
360
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
briefed Attachment "A# to the subject report, approximate develope~
contribution for new service which compared developer contributions both
residential and commercial/industrial with other cities.
At the conclusion of further discussion on the latter issue, Councilwoman
Kaywood moved to continue the three subject issues to be considered in
conjunctionwith the 1985/86 Resource Allocation Plan. Councilman Overholt
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
175/123: ADDITIONS AND REMODELING - UTILITY CONTROL CENTER AT LEWIS
SUBSTATION: Councilman Pickler moved to authorize an agreement with Bechtel
Power Corporation of California for an amount not to exceed $60,848 to provide
architectural, engineering and drafting services for the additions and
remodeling of the Utility Control Center at Lewis Substation, as recommended
in memorandum dated May 7, 1985 from the Secretary of the Public Utilities
Board. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
175/113: DESTRUCTION OF RECORDS - SUNDESERT NUCLEAR AND SAN JOAqUIN NUCLEAR
PROJECTS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD: Councilman Overholt offered Resolution No.
85R-190, authorizing the destruction of certain Public Utilities Department
records in connection with the Sundesert Nuclear and San Joaquin Nuclear
projects more than two years old. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-190: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS MORE THAN TWO
YEARS OLD.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-190 duly passed and adopted.
175: POWER GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION PROJECTS: Receiving and filing the
report on City's participation in power generation and transmission projects.
This matter was continued from the meeting of April 16, 1985.
After a brief Council discussion, it was determined that due to the time
restrictions, the subject discussion should take place at a later date.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to continue discussion on the subject
report to Tuesday, May 21, 1985, at 1:30 p.m. Councilman Overholt seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
123: REVIEW OF THE BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE: Waiving Council Policy 401
and authorizing an agreement with Ralph Andersen and Associates in an amount
not to exceed $20,000 for Phase One, and on an hourly basis ranging from ~39
to $99 as specified in the agreement for Phase Two, and in an amount not to
exceed $30,000 for Phase Three (if initiated), plus out of pocket expenses,
for review of the business license ordinance, as recommended in memorandum
361
166
City Hsll~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
dated April 15, 1985. This matter was continued from the meeting of May 7,
1985, to this date.
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive Council Policy No. 401 and authorize the
subject agreement. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion for the purpose of
discussion.
Councilman Roth moved to continue consideration of the subject agreement for
one week in accordance with the request of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce in
their letter of May 9, 1985. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
Before action was taken, Councilman Overholt asked why it was necessary to
have an outside consultant make a study of the business license tax structure
rather than having it conducted by staff. He read the draft staff report
submitted in 1977 that apparently created controversy prior to his being
elected to the Council. He thought the report was excellent and questioned
whether an update of that report as an alternative to an outside report would
not serve the same purpose. However, if hiring a consultant was justified, he
had no concern in authorizing the expenditure of $20,000 as the first Phase of
the study knowing that it could be stopped at any time and knowing that the
City did not have to commit to the second and third Phase if it chose not to
do so.
Mr. Talley then reiterated some of the concerns expressed at the meeting of
May 7, 1985. Staff could study the issue as it did in 1927, but it did not
have the necessary expertise to present to Council more than what he would
consider a compilation of existing practices in California nor to advise the
Council on the most appropriate way to index or compute any changes in the
business license fees so that they would be equitable in the future. As a
result, the information could be attacked by someone who could point to other
examples utilizing a different procedure etc. He did not feel that City staff
would be giving the Council the best of advice on how to plan for the future.
Business license fees were direct revenues to the City designed to help fund
the general services provided by local government and designed to have
business pay its fair share. He did not feel a staff report would withstand
the scrutiny of serious questions.
Councilman 0verholt stated he was concerned with the request of the Chamber.
As a former member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce, he had great
difficulty seeing himself in that position where he would feel it would be
within its province to say whether the City should or should not spend $20,000
at the outset to study a fee structure that had been in existence for over 27
years.
Councilman Pickler recognized Allan Hughes, Executive Director Anaheim Chamber
of Commerce who was present in the Chamber audience; Mr. Hughes pointed out
that in his letter the Chamber was not opposing the study but felt it was
appropriate and would anticipate that the City would look at the business
license ordinance every year. The Chamber felt, however, that City staff was
more than competent to conduct the study and considered the expenditure of
$50,000 mot be a good investment of City funds.
362
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985; 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Bay favored the motion of continuance since he felt the issue to be
important enough to continue it one week to give the Chamber an opportunity to
speak to it.
A vote was then taken on the motion of continuance and failed to carry by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Bay and Roth
Kaywood, Pickler and Overholt
None
Councilman Overholt, now speaking to the motion of approval, stated that some
of the criticism surrounding the subject had been that the study presumes that
the business license tax will be raised. If that was the case, he was going
to vote against the motion but that was not what he saw in reading the
proposed contract. If after the first Phase the determination is to raise the
rates, he would not vote to do so. If instead the results were that there
were more equitable alternatives in comparison to other cities, then he would
give careful consideration to that recommendation.
City Manager Talley then briefed a portion of the contract which outlined its
purposes, - (1) to improve the equity of the business license tax, (2) to
improve the future ability of the tax to generate revenue to support the
provision of City services - not raise, but generate and, (3) to simplify
administration of and compliance with the tax wherever possible. He pointed
out also that there was not one word about an increase in Phase One or Phase
Two.
Jack White, Acting City Attorney then clarified the agreement was to be
carried out in three Phases. It did not specifically say that it would take
an affirmative action of the Council going from Phase One to Phase Two to
Phase Three but it did contain a 15-day cancellation provision. The Council
could approve the agreement subject to adding to the language relative to
requiring approval before proceeding with each Phase.
Councilwoman Kaywood was agreeable to amending her motion accordingly.
Councilman Bay stated, understanding that the motion would only include
proceeding with Phase One at this time, with a limit of $20,000, and that
Phase Two and Three would take additional Council action, he still wanted to
voice his opposition. He had read the 1977 report and was very interested in
the data reflecting cases where the business license tax was lower than the
cost to issue the license. He was certain those facts were still available
and could be further analyzed. The $1.3 million in revenues that the City
collected now were impacted by the negatives, i.e., spending more money in
administering than issuing. He suggested that the City do away with what
might be deemed nuisance business licenses that cost more to administer than
issue. If that point was not looked at first, it was difficult to determine
if a $20,000 study was needed or not.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion amended as follows: Waiving
Council Policy 401 and authorizing an agreement with Ralph Andersen and
363
City Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Associates in an amount not to exceed 520,000 for Phase One. Before Phase Two
is initiated, further affirmative action of the Council is required and before
Phase Three is initiated the same will apply.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCLLMEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler and Overholt
Bay and Roth
None
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Attorney requested a Closed Session to
discuss pending and potential litigation significant exposure to litigation
and labor relations with no action anticipated.
The Mayor announced that a Closed Session would be held with the City's
Attorneys to discuss the matters announced by the City Attorney pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9A.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch
break. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (12:40 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilman Overholt. (1:59 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Chairman Roth reconvened the Anaheim
Redevelopment Agency, all Agency Members being present with the exception of
Agency Member Overholt, for the purpose of conducting a Joint Public Hearing
with the City Council. (1:59 p.m.)
161/114/123: JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENTAGENCY/CITY
COUNCIL: To consider a proposed Disposition and Development Agreement with
The Memorial Manor relating to property located at the northeast corner of
Center and Philadelphia Streets, (261-279 East Center Street), in
Redevelopment Project Alpha, known as Parcel ll-D.
Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director of Community Development,
briefed the Council/Agency on the proposed agreement and project, a 75-unit,
ten-story senior citizen development wherein the developer would subsequently
submit an application to ~UD for Section 202, Section 8 funding upon approval
of the agreement.
After the presentation by staff, Mayor/Chairman Roth asked if anyone wished to
speak either in favor or in opposition relative to the proposed Disposition
and Development Agreement and sale of Real Property; there being no response,
the Mayor/Chairman closed the public hearing.
Agency Member Kaywood offered Resolution No. ARA85-9 for adoption, certifying
an initial study. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. ARA85-9: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIMREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CERTIFYING AN INITIALSTUD¥ WHICH FINDS AND DETERMINES THAT THE PROPOSED SALE
AND REDEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
364
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ ~0:00 A.M.
ALPHA WILL HAVE NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONM~NT AND THAT A SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NEED NOT BE PREPARED.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AGENCY/COUNCILMEMBERS:
AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA85-9 duly passed and adopted.
Agency Member Kaywood offered Resolution No. ARA85-10 for adoption, approving
the proposed sale of real property in Redevelopment Project Alpha; approving
the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement pertaining thereto, and
authorizing the execution of said agreement. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. ARA85-10: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APPROVING THE PROPOSED SALE OF RF2.L PROPERTY IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA;
APPROVING THE PROPOSED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PERTAINING
THERETO; AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SAID DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
A~SENT:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA85-10 duly passed and adopted.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 85R-191 for adoption, Certifying
the Initial Study with respect to the proposed Disposition and Development
Agreement with The Anaheim Memorial Manor, the developer; finding that the
consideration for the sale of the property thereunder is not less than fair
market value in accordance with covenants and conditions governing such sale;
and approving the sale of such property and said Disposition and Development
Agreement. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-191: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM CERTIFYING THE INITIAL STUDY WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED DISPOSITION
AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND ANAHEIM
MEMORIAL MANOR, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION, AND FINDING THAT THE
CONSIDERATION FOR THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY THEREUNDER IS NOT LESS THAN FAIR
MARKET VALUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS GOVERNING SUCH SALE;
AND APPROVING THE SALE OF SUCH PROPERTYAND SAID DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt
365
272
City Hall~ Anahetm~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985; 10:00 A.M.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-191 duly passed and adopted
MOTION: Agency Member Kaywood moved to authorize a Lease Agreement relating
to the subject. Agency Member Bay seconded the motion. Agency Member
Overholt was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Agency Member Roth moved to
adjourn. Agency Member Bay seconded the motion. Agency Member Overholt was
absent. MOTION CARRIED. (2:03 p.m.)
107/142: PUBLIC HEARING - 1982 EDITION OF UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL; SPA AND HOT
TUB CODE: To consider adoption of the 1982 Edition of the International
Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa
and Hot Tub Code, with amendments thereto, to be know~l as the Anaheim Swimming
Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, amending Title 15 by adding thereto a new Chapter
15.30. Submitted was report dated April 15, 1985 from the Community
Development and PlaY,Ling Department, recommending adoption of the subject Code.
The Mayor asked if anyone was present to speak to the issue; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4604 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4604: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIMADOPTING, BY
REFERENCE, A SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE ENTITLED THE "UNIFORM
SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE, 1982 EDITION, OF THE INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS," WITH AMENDMENTS THERETO,
AND ADDING NEW CHAPTER 15.30 TO TITLE 15 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4604 duly passed and adopted.
176: PUBLIC HEARING -ABANDONMENT NO. 84-15A: In accordance with application
filed by Presley of Southern California, public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of two easements which were formerly deeded to the City for access
to Olive Hills Reservoir located south of Nohl Ranch Road, east of Villareal
Drive, pursuant to Resolution No. 85R-143, duly published in the Anaheim
Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated March 26, 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.
366
269
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
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 Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-192 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 84-15A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-192: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND
SERVICE EASEMENTS. (84-15A)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-192 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3464 (REVISION NO. 1) (READV.) AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT: Doyle E. and Marjorie L. Smith,
28544 Nuevo Valley Drive, Nuevo, CA.
92367.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To establish a 4-lot, RS-7200 single-family
residential subdivision on property located at 1643 West Cerritos Avenue, with
the following Code waivers: (a) required lot frontage, (b) minimum lot width
and frontage, (c) minimum front yard setback, (d) minimum rear yard setback,
(e) permitted orientation of structures.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC85-82, granted Variance
No. 3464, approved EIR - negative declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Review requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the Council meeting of April 23,
1985.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRF2iENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anahelm Bulletin May 2, 1985.
Posting of property May 5, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 5, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated April 1, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Lynn E. Thompson, 1433 West Janeen Way, Agent for the applicant.
Relative to the petitions submitted in opposition, he spoke with
four individuals and asked all the same question. What
information was given at the time they were asked to sign the
367
270
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
petition. He received four varying answers. Many people who
signed the petitions lived in subdivisions which required the
same variances being requested, which are technical in nature.
He then spoke to those five variances and explained the reasons
for the deviations from standard emphasizing and reiterating
that they were technical in nature and had been previously
approved in all tracts in the surrounding area.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
OPPOSED: Pat Morgan, 1635 West Cerritos.
There were approximately 145 who signed the petitions in
opposition to the proposed project. She then submitted another
letter of opposition from a resident who could not be present
(Bosworth). They are opposed to Variance No. 3464 which allows
multiple housing to be built on the subject property. Changing
the property from single-family residents to a 4-lot subdivision
will create several unacceptable conditions in the area -
(1) increase traffic and parking problems and create dangerous
traffic situations, (2) air and noise pollution, (3) invasion of
privacy. They would welcome a single-family residence
compatible with other homes in the area.
Phillis Killingsworth, 1625 West Cerritos.
The area consists of single one-story homes. A letter from the
previous owner of the property, Leona Montgomery which she
submitted, clarified that before the home was sold to the
Smiths, she explained it was a single-family residential area
and that the neighbors would strenuously object to putting more
than one house on the lot. Therefore, the Smiths could not now
claim amy hardship since they were fully aware of the situation.
Eugene Dunham, 1642 West Buena Vista Avenue.
The subject property does not qualify for the special zone
variances being requested and if granted would diminish the
quality of life in the neighborhood.
John Helps, 1670 West Cerritos.
He refuted the conclusions reached by the Planning Commission as
well as the evidence and reports offered when the Commission
granted the variance (see minutes of the Planning Commission
hearing dated April 1, 1985). He submitted photographs and
tract maps showing lot and street comparisons of both portions
of 0rangewood and Cerritos Avenue pointing out that the Planning
Commission stated the two areas were identical for lot
development. The residents disagreed and felt they were not
even comparable. The proposed development does not live up to
the intent of the RS-7200 zoning. They are substandard sized
lots unless the private street is included. In concluding his
presentation, he stated the 145 signatures opposing the higher
density attests to the fact that the proposal would be
detrimental to the City of Anaheim.
368
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Mayor Roth.
By a show of hands, it was determined that approximately 40
people were present in the Chamber audience in opposition to the
granting of Variance No. 3464.
EXHIBITS, MATERIALS SUBMITTED:
Letter dated May 3, 1985 from Leona Montgomery. Letter dated
May 14, 1985 from Elena Bosworth. Tract maps and photographs
showing portions of Orangewood and Cerritos Avenues.
IN FAVOR:
No one was present to speak in favor.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
SPECIAL CONCERNS OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Councilwoman Kaywood.
If no variances were granted, the proposed development could not
be built. As explained by staff, the applicant would need a
parcel map to build a second dwelling on the property and
because of the width of the parcel, it would need a variance.
Unless the property was combined with an adjacent piece of
property where they could share a public street, a aecond unit
could not be added. If four, five or six of the eight lots were
petitioning for a change in use, she could look more favorably
on the proposal but where people wished their neighborhood to
remain as is, the project would definitely have an impact on the
surrounding homes.
Annfka Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning.
She confirmed that if the variance were approved, four two-story
homes could be built and in the RS-7200 zone they are allowed to
use the private street as part of the area requirement of that
zone as long as all the criteria were met.
Councilman Bay.
He agreed with the residents in their concern that the
development will have an impact on that neighborhood as well as
a change in future development.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the City Council approved the negative
declaration upon finding that it has considered the negative declaration
together with any comments received during the public review process, and
further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 85R-193 for adoption, denying
Variance No. 3464. Refer to Resolution Book.
369
268
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14; 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-193: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 3464.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-193 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3470 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
APPLICANT:
Bernard J. Stahl and Bill J. Nickel,
P. O. Box 225, Stanton, CA. 90680.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To construct a 28-unit apartment complex on EM-1200
zoned property located at 1668 South Nutwood Street, with Code waiver of
maximum structural height.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC85-91 granted Variance No. 3470,
approved EIR - negative declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Review requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the meeting of April 23, 1985.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin May 2, 1985.
Posting of property May 5, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - May 4, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated April 1, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Steve Speck, 3140 Redhill Avenue, Costa Mesa, CA. 92626.
They are requesting an addition of two one-bedroom units to a
26-unit apartment complex already approved and under
construction. The two units do not alter the height of the
project or exterior elevations. Instead, they are asking for
approval of two lower level units on the same level as the one
existing handicapped unit shown on the plans. With the two
added units, the project is consistent with the City's parking
standards, remains within the allowed density, and is
undistinguishable from the outside. With only one exception,
none of the units from any of the directions are less than 150
feet from the nearest single-family residential. In one of the
directions, they exceed 190 feet and the corner unit exceeds 240
feet. Both units are separated from the nearest single-family
residences by Nutwood Avenue and also a wing of the apartment
complex. The units are designed as units and no parking is
displaced or any other facilities to accommodate the request.
He urged the Council's confirmation of the Planning Commission's
37O
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
approval of the request. He then confirmed for the Mayor that
they are requesting two additional one-bedroom apartment units,
half ground level and half subterranean. They are not
completely underground. A portion of the units are subterranean
but they still have windows at sidewalk level and above.
After Council questions were posed to Mr. Speck, Councilman Bay
stated that relative to height variance, that problem seems to
be arising quite often. He had previously recommended to staff
that it might be better for everyone concerned if there were
some height limits by specific feet of structure from ground
level and he assumed staff was working on that. He also assumed
the subject instance would be a precedent of three-stories
within 106 feet of single-family.
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning.
The project is two-stories from the single-family to the west.
It is not the footage that is the issue but a basement which
within the Zoning Code is not considered a story. However, it
excludes any living units from that basement and that is the
critical decision involved in this case.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
IN FAVOR: Jim Stovall.
He is in the hotel business in Anaheim and was present to give
backing to the project as well as to the two builders involved,
Mr. Stovall and Mr. Nichols, whom he had known for 19 years.
They are qualified builders and had built apartment complexes in
the City of Anaheim. He (Stovall) had no financial interest in
the development.
Bill Nichol.
He was present to answer questions. He confirmed they are not
changing anything but were only taking advantage of the two
units they lost earlier. There was more than adequate storage.
Every garage unit had an 8 X 10 storage area for each individual
apartment. He then stipulated for Councilman Pickler that these
two units would be modified for the handicapped if approved.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION-
OPPOSITION: Nancy Hollis-Schaffer, 1715 South Nutwood.
The apartment complex is in the center of single-family
dwellings. Relative to tuckunder tandem parking and the height
of the structure, there are signatures of all adjacent property
owners on the petitions previously submitted in opposition to
granting the variance. The original proposal over a year ago
was denied by the Planning Commission primarily because of
density within their area. She also submitted a picture taken
from the home of Charles Kimberling, 1719 Heritage Circle, taken
that morning from the upstairs window of Mr. Kimberling's
condominium at the northeast corner of the subject
371
266
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
development. The subject structure was less than 20 feet from
his windows. The units were actually two-stories being called
one-story. The units cut off his air and view and to add two
more units to the project is an insult to the intelligence and
integrity of the Planning Department and the Community.
Rita Ray, 1927 Chateau.
It seemed there was a plan to get around the Building Codes and
if a precedent was being set in this case the variance should
not be allowed since to her understanding no underground living
quarters had been approved in the City.
SUMMATION BY APPLICANT: Steven Speck.
He agreed with Mrs. Schaffer that two sides of the project are
surrounded by RM-1200. They had no Code violations. The
project is under construction, approved and near completion.
They are not asking for a zone change or an increase at all to
the height of the project.
Jack White, Acting City Attorney.
Relative to specifying that the two additional units be
designated for the handicapped, there are two ways to do so.
The stipulation was to make the two additional units handicapped
accessible. The Council could, with the stipulation of the
applicant, require that a covenant be recorded against the
property providing that those two additional units would be
limited to occupancy by the handicapped but he was not sure that
was the stipulation by the applicant. Mr. Speck indicated they
would be provided as handicapped accessible.
Steve Speck.
They would accept a covenant that the units be handicapped
accessible; Mr. White pointed out that he was not restricting
the occupancy only to handicapped.
Councilman Pickler.
The reason he is going to vote for approval is based on the fact
that the units are going to be used for the handicapped and he
felt that some effort should be put into advertising them as
such; Mr. Speck agreed but the only concern that the property
owners would have would be a particular restriction and they
would prefer to call it a covenant. The only other thing he
would suggest is some form of schedule or time frame associated
with the restriction. If there were no handicapped people who
made use of the units, they would like those units available to
others. He also gave their commitment to try to get handicapped
people into those units.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Roth closed the public hearing.
372
Cit7 Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Ma7 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Bay.
If the project lends itself to holding to meet the height
requirements, he can go along with the idea. He could see using
partially underground units to relieve some of the impacts but
he did not want to see it used to stack that much more on the
square footage in the future.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
She was concerned about the precedent that could be set in
granting approval.
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-194 for adoption, granting
Variance No. 3470, subject to the following: The stipulation that a covenant
be recorded specifying the two additional parking level dwelling units be
designed and constructed as handicapped accessible units. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-194: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3470.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay, Pickler and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-194 duly passed and adopted.
179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2599 (READV)
REVISED PLANS:
APPLICANT: Commonwealth Financial Corporation~
P. o. Box 76478, Los Angeles, CA. 90076
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: 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 side of Glassell Street, with the
following Code waivers: (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) maximum
structural height.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Resolution No. PC85-71 granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 2599, approved EIR - negative declaration.
HEARING SET ON:
Review requested by Councilwoman Kaywood during the appeal period ending
373
264
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985; 10:00 A.M.
March 26, 1985. This matter was continued from the meeting of April 30, 1985
and May ?, 1985, (see minutes those dates).
PUBLIC NOTICEREQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin April 18, 1985.
Posting of property April 19, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 19, 1985.
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 4, 1985.
Mayor Roth asked if an agreement was reached between the applicant and the
owner of WCS International, relative to the private easement as discussed at
the previous meeting (see minutes of May 7, 1985).
Jack White, Acting City Attorney.
The document he had was an unsigned copy of a letter on Orange
County Steel Salvage, Inc. (WCS) letterhead addressed to Bob
Fuller that sets forth the fact that Mr. Adams indicates he is
willing "...to cooperate with your sewer needs, we still believe
that use of your private ingress/egress easement over part of
the former Newklrk Street is both unnecessary and unsafe for
public access associated with your hotel project." It did not,
in his opinion, tie the two together and did not indicate there
is an agreement as yet as to the location or willingness to
grant the necessary sewer easement but indicates Mr. Adams would
be willing to work with Mr. Fuller to do that.
Phillip Anthony, representing Orange County Steel Salvage, Inc.
(WCS).
Mr. Fuller did call Mr. Adams and they talked last Friday. The
May 13, 1985 letter is their response and it is as far as Mr.
Adams is able to go at this time. He does want to cooperate
with Mr. Fuller on the sewer easement but that had not been
designed, there are no precise plans for it and even more than
that, Mr. Adams does not own part of the land and cannot
guarantee to provide an easement on land he does not own. The
public access problem is an entirely different and separate
issue. The letter conveys their willingness to solve the
problem in its time. He was asking if the Council approve the
plan that they clarify their intent not to allow public access
from that rear easement. They would still have the easement for
their private purposes. They are asking that the Council
indicate the easement is not a necessary or safe place for
public access.
Councilman 0verholt entered the Council Chamber. (4:02 p.m.)
Jack White, Acting City Attorney.
He referred to his memorandum dated May 9, 1985, responding to
the request of Councilman Overholt at the last meeting. The
Council is in a position, if they find approval of the hotel
374
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
project would create an unsafe condition as to the u~e of the
private access easement, to condition approval of the project on
the fact that access would not be taken across that private
easement for purposes of delivery trucks, hotel patrons or other
access the Council would deem appropriate. As an alternative to
that, at Councilman 0verholt'a suggestion, he responded about
simply making a finding as part of the approval that it was the
intention of the City Council to approve or deny use of the
easement but leave the parties to their respective legal
positions with regard to whether the easement would be over
burdened by the fact that it would be used for hotel purposes.
He would feel comfortable with either of those approaches.
Robert Fuller.
Relative to Councilwoman Kaywood's question on a parking waiver
for the restaurant, he met with Mr. Singer, Traffic Engineer,
who suggested that they bond for any extra parking that would be
required. They would bond for the entire cost of that structure
and if it was found to be needed by the City, they would build
it.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer.
The restaurant development was heard before the Planning
Commission yesterday and one of the conditions of the
development of the restaurant included a provision for a bond to
be posted for a future parking structure for a period of three
years after occupancy of the hotel. Within those three years, a
parking study would be conducted to determine how much
additional parking, if any, will be required. They had done a
similar thing on other projects.
COUNCIL ACTION:
After discussing the issue with the City Attorney relative to a further
clarification on the question of the easement as well as an issue that was
broached at the last meeting relative to the present operation of Orange
County Steel Salvage, Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 85R-195 for
adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2599 but subject to an
additional condition as follows:
That the private access easement not be used for access to the hotel
by the general public or hotel patrons or in connection with delivery trucks
either to or from the hotel and that the hotel owner/operator will not object
to the activities of the recycling center as long as the business is being
conducted in accordance with all present use permits issued by the City.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-195: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2599.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Anthony confirmed that the resolution as offered
with the additional condition expressed their request very well; Mr. Fuller
also accepted the condition as stated.
$75
262
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing Resolution.
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-195 duly passed and adopted.
179: CONTINUED REHEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 2460, 2461 and 2462:
APPLICANT:
Riviera Mobilehome Parks, (a joint venture)
300 West Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA.
ZONING/LOCATION/REQUEST: To add, amend or delete conditions of approval of
Conditional Use Permit Nos. 2460, 2461 and 2462 on proposed RM-1000 zoned
property located at 300 West Katella Avenue. CUP 2460, to permit a 17-story,
852 room hotel; CUP 2461, to permit two 14-story office complexes; CUP 2462,
to permit two 180-unit condominium towers.
Environmental Impact Report No. 262 relating to the subject conditional use
permits was certified by the City Council at their meeting of January 24, 1984
as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act along
with the Statement of Overriding Consideration.
HEARING SET ON:
Council meeting of February 28, 1984. Review requested by Councilman Pickler
and rehearing granted by the Council relative to certain requested amendments
at the meeting of April 3, 1984 and continued from the meetings of May 15,
June 5, July 24, October 9, November 27, December 18, 1984, February 12,
March 5, April 16 and May 7, 1985 to this date (see minutes those dates).
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin February 2, 1985.
Posting of property February 1, 1985.
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - January 31, 1985.
STAFF INPUT:
See Staff Report from the Planning Department/Planning Division dated
December 11, 1984 and February 26, 1985; Staff Report from City Attorney's
Office dated February 6, 1985 and April 8, 1985.
APPLICANT'S
STATEMENT:
Floyd Farano, Attorney representing Riviera Mobilehome Parks.
Since the Council meeting of April 16, 1985, the principals
(applicant and the Fujishiges) met on three occasions, April 24,
April 29 and May 6, 1985, where it became apparent that the size
of the street was only one issue and that there are additional
issues. The pivotal issue to be addressed and resolved was the
value the Fujishiges place upon their property. During the
meetings, the position of Riviera was as follows:
376
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
(1) That only a pilot street consisting of a 60-foot
right-of-way and 40-foot pavement without curbs, gutters and
sidewalks would be required under the City's imposed conditions.
(2) That the property upon which the required streets would be
constructed pursuant to case law is valued for condemnation
purposes at $30,000 per acre.
The Fujishiges contentions were (1) that they are entitled to
the benefit of a land value of 31 million per acre as the
highest amd best use of the property, (2) that they desire to
have the extension of Clementine and Convention Way constructed
at the present time and that the streets would be developed at
their ultimate width together with curbs, gutters, street
lights, sidewalks, medians, etc., (3) that they desire to have
all utilities installed to the property, i.e., sewers, water,
electricity, etc., (4) that a tunnel under Convention Way or
Clementine Street extensions would be constructed for present
use and potential future development of that property, (5) that
they wanted reservation of air rights for heights in excess of
15 feet above Clementine and Convention Way. It is apparent
from the foregoing that the parties are considerably further
apart than originally anticipated amd that it would not be
possible to resolve the matter without the City's intervention
and participation. They have reviewed the staff report
submitted to the Council by the City Attorney's Office and
considering that report together with the foregoing, Riviera
reached the following conclusion:
That the City Attorney's Office report and proposed resolution
in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2451 neglects to
mention a fifth alternative - namely, that the City of Anaheim
consider assuming the responsibility of acquiring the land and
construction of the street and all improvements in connection
therewith. It is, therefore, recommended and proposed by
Riviera that (a) the City Council delete the Clementine and
Convention Way extension condition from Conditional Use Permit
No. 2461 or (b) that the City of Anaheim intervene and assume
responsibility for the acquisition of the land required to
complete the improvements since it is apparent that Riviera and
the Fujishiges will not be able to negotiate or reach any kind
of result that is acceptable to all parties.
Councilman Overholt.
His understanding of the fifth alternative as stated by Mr.
Farano is that City acquire the right-of-way and install the
street. He asked if that would be at the sole expense of the
taxpayers; Mr. Farano stated he did not think that it would be
or should be. In this case, Riviera would be willing to pay
their fair share of the development of a street that will
benefit them. His guess in splitting the cost between the two
properties would be 70 percent for the Fujishiges and 30 percent
377
26O
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Ma~ 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
for Riviera. When the Fujishige property develops there is an
opportunity for the City to recoup its expenditures and
investment from the Fujishige property.
Councilwoman Kaywood.
She is strongly opposed to having the City use taxpayers money
to build such capital improvements.
After extensive discussion between Council Members where
clarification was given by the City Attorney, Councilman
Overholt asked Mr. Farano if it was his opinion that further
negotiations would be futile, or if started again might result
in some solution.
Mr. Farano.
He felt as the principals left the last meeting that the
position of the FuJishiges was firm and that any further
discussions would not be of benefit. It may well be that
discussions might be resumed with a Member of the Council
present to assist in those discussions.
Masao Fujishige, 1848 Margie Lane.
They want to see the project constructed but as Councilman
Overholt stated, the Council should look out for the interest of
the City. He did not think the City should take a big gamble
such as being involved in a condemnation suit. Once the
condemnation suit started, according to law, he could hire his
lawyer and expert witnesses and as a defendant, he could have it
all paid for by the City. Mr. Farano might say the property is
only worth $30,000 an acre but it could be something like
$3 million and he did not want to see the City being responsible
for something they are not aware of when going in. There was a
big difference between $30,000 an acre and $1 million an acre.
He was willing to gamble if he got a condemnation jury to give
him an award, it would be a lot more than $30,000 an acre. In
the negotiations, they (Fujishiges) said they did not want a
40-foot road since it will not do anybody any good. If a full
size street was constructed, they told Mr. Farano that they
would give him the full 120 feet. They would give the land to
Riviera if Riviera put the improvements in.
Councilman Overholt.
He asked for clarification that if the 120-foot wide street was
installed at the front end of everything, the Fujishiges, in
essence, would dedicate the land to accommodate the 120-foot
street.
Mr. Fujishige.
He confirmed that was correct but before he could dedicate the
land, the City had to initiate condemnation proceedings to
satisfy Internal Revenue Service. He reiterated as long as it
was done under the threat of condemnation, he would have no
problem.
378
257
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Overholt.
At the conclusion of further discussion on the major¥oint of
contention, the dedication necessary for the construction of the
street through the FuJishige property which was a condition of
the development, he asked if there would be benefit in further
discussions.
Jack White.
He felt there would be benefit as long as they proceeded along
the lines that the right-of-way would be dedicated free of
charge, in exchange for improvements. He did not want to get
hung up again on any additional hidden features. As long as it
is understood with Mr. Fujishige that what he (White) is hearing
is a straight swap of right-of-way for improvements and that
they are not now talking about tunnels, air rights, etc.
It was determined in concluding that as suggested by Mr. Farano,
a liaison team consisting of two Council Members would be
helpful in further negotiations with the principals.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to continue Conditional Use Permit Nos. 2460,
2461 and 2462 to Tuesday, May 28, 1985, at 1:30 p.m. Councilman Bay seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Overholt asked Mr. White to arrange for the appropriate meeting.
Council Members Overholt and Pickler were designated the liaison team to meet
with these parties.
170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10982--EXTENSION OF TIME: Application submitted by
Kaufman and Broad, requesting an extension of time to Tentative Tract No.
10982, to establish a 1-lot, 73-unit (plus library site), RM-3000(SC) zoned
subdivision on property located south and west of the intersection Santa Ana
Canyon Road and the proposed southerly extension of Weir Canyon Road.
This matter was submitted for informational purposes only. No action taken by
the Council.
170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11600 (REVISION NO. 1)--EXTENSION OF TIME:
Application submitted by Kent E. Twitchell, Victor Palmieri and Company,
requesting an extension of time to Tentative Tract No. 11600 (Rev. No. 1), to
establish a 12-lot, RS-HS-22,000(SC) zoned subdivision on approximately 8.3
acres located on the east side of Henning Way, south of Arboretum Road.
~he City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Tentative Tract
No. 11600 (Rev. 1), to expire June 2, 1986. This matter was submitted for
informational purposes only. No action taken by the Council.
149/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4607: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4607 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
379
City Hall; Anaheim} California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14} 1985, 10:00 A.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 4607: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION
14.32.189 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
THE SOUTH SIDE OF ORANGETHORPE AVENUE BETWEEN LEMON STREET AND MISSILE WAY.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4607 duly passed and adopted.
142/000/129: ORDINANCE NO. 4608 RRIATING TO PARAMEDIC FEES: Councilman
Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4608 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4608: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADDING NEW CHAPTER 16.24 TO TITLE 16 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO PARAMEDIC FEES.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood,
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4608 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-196 for adoption, establishing
paramedic fees to be charged by the Fire Department for voluntary subscription
of $24 per year per residence, business or industry, and a fee for Basic and
Advanced Support Services of $75 and ~125 respectively, for nonresidents and
nonsubscribers. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-196: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING PARAMEDIC FEES TO BE CHARGED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-196 duly passed and adopted.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4609: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4609 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4609: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BRIATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18, Reclass. 68-69-37(17), ~L, 2880 East Coronado)
38O
City Ha]l~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14, 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
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. 4609 duly passed and adopted.
179: ORDINANCE NOS. 4611 THROUGH 4613: Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance
Nos. 4611 through 4613, both inclusive.
ORDINANCE NO. 4611: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE R~IATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18, Reclass. 79-80-25(3), RM-3,000(SC), south of Nohl Ranch
Road, east of Stage Coach Road)
ORDINANCE NO. 4612: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18, Reclass. 84-85-2, CL(SC), southwest corner of Nohl Ranch
Road and Villa Real Drive)
ORDINANCE NO. 4613: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIMAMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18, Reclass. 84-85-5, RM-1200, 2620 West Ball Road)
101/153: TOM LIEGLER T.wAVING THE EMPLOY OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM: Councilwoman
Kaywood stated the news of Tom Liegler's (General Manager, Anaheim
Stadium/Convention Center/Golf) announcement that he would be leaving the City
of Anaheim for a new challenge in San Diego was received with great sadness on
the part of all the Council but they were very happy for Tom with regard to
his new challenge, overseeing the building of a new Convention Center.
Councilman 0verholt expressed his happiness for Tom and noted that it was a
true compliment to his genius that he was leaving the Family Foresome in such
very good shape.
144: STATUS UPDATE - EASTERN/FOOTHILL CORRIDOR FEE PROGRAM: Councilman Bay
briefed the Council on the numerous meetings that had recently taken place
relative to the subject referring to a report from Joel Fick, Assistant
Director for Planning, that included status through May 10, 1985. A great
deal of work had to be done between the cities regarding fees and the exact
lines of demarcation for benefits, and one issue that had not been discussed
much but would be a major concern, the alignment of the Eastern Corridor
itself. When bringing the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) back to the Council
for approval, it had to be a package; the JPA, the fee structure recommended
and alternatives, areas of benefit, where the A and B zones will be and
alignment. The next meeting at the County level would be in two or three
weeks and there should be City meetings before that time. If the Council had
comments, both he and Councilman Pickler would like to hear those from the
Council. There was also to be a public meeting on Tuesday, May 21, 1985 at
Canyon High School at 7:30 p.m where alignments would be discussed. He
encouraged any and all Members of the Council to attend that scoping meeting.
381
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 14~ 1985~ 10:00 A.M.
MEETING ON JAIL AND DUMP SITE: Mayor Roth reported on his attendance at a
meeting held at Canyon High School on Friday evening, May 10, 1985, attended
by approximately 175 hill and canyon residents. Representation was present
from the Council and also representation from Supervisor Ralph Clark's Office
where the jail and dump site issues were discussed at length. Also at that
meeting the issue of the possibility of development on the Anaheim Hills Golf
Course property was broached, an issue about which many people are concerned
and upset. He explained that the Council had not taken any action on that
matter and that there would be ample opportunity for the residents to discuss
that issue. Of particular concern was the possibility of development around
the third hole. Another agenda item was also added and Residents Opposing
Arterial Roadways, ROAR, were represented at the meeting. That group wants to
completely "can" (NEOCCS) study of 1978. The Council had several times since
then reaffirmed their support of that study. The extension of Imperial to
connect with Loma, the continuation of Serrano, etc. were critical to
circulation in the hill and canyon area which lacked such circulation even
now. He was taking the position and hoped for the Council as well to continue
to support the NEOCCS study of 1928.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to recess into Closed
Session and a dinner break. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED. (5:22 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (7:30 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Koth moved to adjourn. Councilman Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (7:31 p.m.)
LEONORAN. SOKL, CITY CLERK
382