1984/10/16City Ha~!, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
WATER ENGINEER MANAGER: Ray Auerbach
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: Reverend Louis Rohrs, Trinity United Methodist Church, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Roth and
authorized by the City Council:
"U.C.I. Poison Center Day" October 20, 1984.
The proclamation was accepted by Randy Middlebrook, Senior Administrative
Analyst, Office of the Director U.C.I. Medical Center.
119: RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION: A Resolution of Commendation was
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Robert G. Beck,
President, congratulating the fine Anaheim Business, Family Medical Pharmacy
on their 75th anniversary of establishment in the City of Anaheim and
recognizing them for their outstanding service the City's citizens.
119: RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION: A Resolution of Commendation was
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Art Castillo, a City
employee, on his prompt action in detecting a potentially disastrous fire in
the E1 Rancho Plaza Office Complex. The Mayor, on behalf of the Council and
the City emphasized how proud they all were of Mr. Castillo's actions, not
only as a member of the Anaheim community, but also as an employee of the City.
MINUTES: Approval of the minutes was deferred to the next regular meeting.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood 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 Pickler seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
1002
100
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,079,682.57, in
accordance with the 1984-85 Budget, were approved.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickler,
seconded by Councilman Overholt, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilman Pickler
offered Resolution Nos. 84R-410 through 84R-413, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by James P. Webb for personal property damages
sustained purportedly due to equipment failure on the part of the City at 1231
Raleigh Street, on or about August 18, 1984.
b. Claim submitted by Mr. & Mrs. James A. Olson for personal property
damages sustained purportedly due to improper materials permitted by City
during building of 671 Andover Drive, on or about August 1, 1984.
c. Claim submitted by Larry Charles Fogliasso for personal property
damages sustained purportedly due to broken manhole in the street on La Palma
near Tustin Avenue, on or about August 31, 1984.
d. Claim submitted by Kenneth Orrion Rogers for personal property damages
sustained purportedly due to a hole in street at the intersection of Citron
and La Palma, on or about September 7, 1984.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 107: Planning Department, Building Division Report--Monthly Report
for September 1984.
b. 105: Public Utilities Board--Minutes of September 13, 1984.
c. Community Redevelopment Commission--Minutes of September 19, 1984.
3. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Caine, Gressel, Midgley, Slater, Inc.,
to provide advice on financing for low/moderate income housing at a cost of
~15,000 for developing a Financing Agenda Plan and for advisory services with
a maximum of $10,000 per individual project or task.
4. 150/106: Accepting a donation from the Anaheim Tennis Club in the amount
of ~2,000 for the 21st Annual Anaheim Junior Tennis Tournament, and
appropriating said funds into Account No. 3222, Program No. 275.
5. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Willdan Associates in the amount of
~4,750 for engineering services for the design of a parking lot with security
lighting at Pelanconi Park.
1003
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
6. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Stan Smith Associates in the amount of
52,710 to provide professional services for the development of a plaza area at
the entrance to the Pearson Park Amphitheater.
7. 153: Approving increases in premium rates for the 1985 Medical/Dental
coverage.
8. 153: Approving the proposal and premium rates of Inland Health Plan as a
provider of City HMO medical care, effective January 1, 1985, and authorizing
the Human Resources Director to prepare necessary documents.
9. 153: Authorizing an amendment to the City Comprehensive Medical Plan to
provide for 100% payment of surgeon fees for certain designated procedures on
an out-patient basis, to be effective January 1, 1985.
10. 123/153: Authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with
Michael A. Bell, to provide for reimbursement of moving expenses, in an amount
not to exceed 52,500.
11. 175: Authorizing Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Changing Times
Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of 57,537.50 for additional conduit in
connection with the electrical conduit installation, Palais Road-Ashtngton
Lane-Chalet Avenue-Empire Street, Account No. 55-669-6329-00753.
12. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 84R-410: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT:
CONSTRUCTION OF RESTROOM BUILDING AT LA PALMA PARK, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
~CCOUNT NOS. 25-827-7105-27060, 16-827-7105-2712F, 16-827-7103-2712D,
16-827-7103-27160, 16-827-7105-27160, 16-827-7105-27080 and
16-827-7105-2712G. (opening of bids on November 15, 1984)
13. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 84R-411: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE PATRICK HENRY NEIGHBORHOOD STREET
AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS, WEST STREET-ROMNEYA DRIVE TO CARBON CREEK
CHANNEL; ROMNEYA DRIVE-CITRON LANE TO WEST STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
ACCOUNT NOS. 25-791-6325-E1320, 25-792-6325-E2920, 25-792-6325-E2980 and
51-606-6329-00740. (Gillespte Construction, in the amount of $441,384.80)
14. 179: RESOLUTION NO. 84R-412: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NO.
2776 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 76R-192 NULL AND VOID. (to permit auto
repair in an existing service station on property located at 934 South Beach
Boulevard, as a condition of approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2538)
15. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 84R-413: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION.
1004
Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984,.!0:00 A.M.
ALL MOTIONS ON ABOVE ITEMS CARRIED.
Roll Call Vote on Resolutions 84R-410, 84R-411 and 84R-413:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 84R-410, 84R-411 84R-413 duly passed and
adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 84R-412:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 84R-412 duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR.
108: APPLICATION FOR ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT - SPANGLER'S CAFE: Councilwoman
Kaywood asked whether the residents of Hazard Street had been notified of the
subject application; City Clerk, Leonora Sohl stated that the residents were
not specifically notified.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted the application stated that non-alcoholic beverages
only would be served. She wanted to know the type of noise that might emanate
from the business and whether parking was immediately adjacent to the facility
or if there would be an impact on the residents. She asked if the matter
could be continued one week to get that information.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone was present who could respond to the questions
posed.
Lisa Helen Gunther~ 805 Kenmore Street, stated that there was parking in front
of the building and that relative to any noise impacting residents, there were
no residential neighbors. They were located on the corner of Ball Road and
Beach Boulevard in what was previously the Auto Parts Store.
It was determined that the map submitted showing the location of the proposed
facility was not clear in indicating the specific location of the facility.
The proposed business did not back up to residential.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the application for an
entertainment permit submitted by Lisa Helen Gunther, for Spangler's Cafe,
3009 West Ball Road, for poetry reading, performance art, and occasional
musical performances, from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Police. Councilman Pickler seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
1005
City Hall~ Anah.eim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 1.6~ 1984, 10:00 A.M.
HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION - WELL 31: City Manager William Talley briefed the
Council on memorandum dated October 11, 1984 from the Public Utilities General
Manager recommending that the Council authorize the Mayor to file a letter
(copy attached to the report) to be sent to the Orange County Water District
supporting the drilling of test wells in the vicinity of the City's Linda
Vista Reservoir.
Councilman Pickler asked for information relative to the request; Ray
Auerbach, Water Engineer Manager, thereupon further briefed the information
contained in the subject report which summarized the problem giving an
historic overview of what was being done to correct the situation.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter to
be sent to the Orange County Water District supporting the drilling of test
wells in the vicinity of the City's Linda Vista Reservoir as recommended by
staff. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
175/123: FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT - CH2M HILL - ENGINEERING SERVICES:
Councilman Roth moved to authorize the First Amendment to an agreement with
CH2M Hill for engineering services for the Olive Hills Reservoir cover, in an
amount not to exceed $261,300 for final design work, construction engineering
and inspections and optional items of an environmental impact report and
geological engineering if required as recommended in memorandum dated
October 9, 1984 from the Public Utilities Board. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
123: APPROVING THE IMPERIAL HIGHWAY ACCESS TO THE CANYON PLAZA SHOPPING
CENTER: Approving a proposed agreement in concept only with Canyon Plaza
~hopping Center to provide permanent access to Canyon Plaza Shopping Center
from Imperial Highway. This matter was continued from the meeting of
September 18 and October 9, 1984 - see minutes those dates.
City Clerk Sohl announced that a telephone request had been received from
Mr LeFevre for a one week continuance indicating that Mr. Alan Watts would be
present today to represent him.
Mr. Alan Watts, 1055 North Main Street, Santa Aha, Attorney speaking on behalf
of Messrs. Rinker, LeFevre and the Canyon Plaza Shopping Center, first stated
that Mr. Floyd Faran0, Attorney representing Mr. Shantz handed him a letter as
he walked into the meeting today but he had not had an opportunity to read it
in its entirety. The first paragraph indicated his client's opposed the
granting of any permanent access arrangement. In view of the fact that Mr.
LeFevre asked for a continuance, he (Watts) felt it would be preferable to
continue the matter for a couple of weeks as in the interim, the principals
could possibly come to some arrangement that would be satisfactory to everyone.
Councilman Overholt asked if his client would be opposed to continuing the
matter for one month; there was no objection by either Mr. Watts or Farano.
MOTION: Councilman Overholt moved to continue consideration of a proposed
agreement in concept only with Canyon Plaza Shopping Center to provide
permanent access to the Center from Imperial Highway until November 20, 1984.
Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
1006
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1984, 10:00 A.M.
107/106/153: ADDITION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS: Councilman Bay referred
to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times describing some of the problems
of Code Enforcement in the North Central City area of Anaheim (i.e. - Pauline
Topeka, Sabina, Claudina area). It brought to his attention the numerous
complaints coming into the City with regard to Code Enforcement. The problem
areas in the City which he would personally term to be the priority areas
relative to Code Enforcement problems were the North Central City Area/Jeffrey
Area/Patrick Henry Area/Anna Drive Area.
During budget hearings, the Council had increased the number of Code
Enforcement Officers by one for a total of seven, who together with a
supervisor and one clerk made nine employees involved in the Code Enforcement
effort. It was his opinion from the results of the survey that he initiated,
there were more people in the City than he thought who were concerned about
Code Enforcement. (Councilman Bay indicated he would make the survey
information available to City Administration once elections were over.) At
present, the return was at two-and-one-half to three percent of the total
number of letters sent out.
MOTION: Councilman Bay thereupon moved that the Council add three new Code
Enforcement Officers to increase the City's enforcement efforts with
particular emphasis on four areas: North Central City Area/Jeffrey
Area/Patrick Henry Area/Anna Drive area.
Before any action was taken, Councilman Bay stated he would defer to the City
Manager on how to pay for those additions and what it was going to cost.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion.
City Manager Talley stated, relative to funding, he would recommend that the
Council, at least on a temporary basis, authorize the use of contingency
funds. The cost would be approximately 3100,000 including three cars and some
equipment and hopefully having the new officers on board between November and
December, 1984. Until the results of the November Elections were in and the
City knew exactly where it was going to stand, he did not want to contemplate
what all the revenue sources of the City were going to be.
Councilman Pickler agreed that the matter of Code Enforcement was a concern of
the entire Council and needed their attention; Councilman Overholt stated that
the poll Councilman Bay was taking probably reflected something the Council
had felt for some time. He suggested if there was some way to call that
information out of the poll and make it immediately available in some form to
give credibility to his (Bay's) personal concern it would be helpful. He
suggested that the information be released in some manner which would not
prejudice his (Bay's) campaign so that the facts and figures would be before
the City.
Councilman Bay reiterated that the responses were still coming in. At present
the responses on the singular letters were up over 850. There were places for
two answers across the questions in the survey. The number of people
answering that question was well over 1,300 at this point. In answer to the
question if a citizen had a choice, what would be the number one priority on
1007
Ctt~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1984, 10:00 A.M.
which to spend more City money, the rough data showed that Code Enforcement
was showing on 20 percent of those returns, roughly 1,300 people. That was a
fair sample to tell him that priority would probably hold as a trend.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was supportive of the motion although somewhat
surprised considering all the years of trying to fight for it and hearing a
new word, proactive, and the objection to proactive enforcement when the need
was so great. At that time, she had to make a motion as a private citizen to
go door to door in the Patrick Henry area because they could not do so as a
Council. If Councilman Bay's poll showed the City had been out of touch with
the people, she wanted to further consider that the City go back to publishing
a City newsletter once or twice a year with some questions where the citizens
would have an opportunity to answer as to their concerns so that they would
not have to wait for an election.
Councilman Overholt asked Mr. Talley, based upon Councilman Bay's
representations, would he (Talley) have any concern about the need for three
additional Code Enforcement Officers.
City Manager Talley stated his inclination would be that the citizens would
use as many of those positions as the Council chose to appoint. He heard two
things - there were specific areas that Councilman Bay requested that
Enforcement concentrate on, and the bulk of the time should be spent in those
areas. He had not heard direction from the Council that staff change their
method of Code Enforcement. They were not going to change procedures, but
apply more hours to existing problems on neighborhoods as requested by the
Council; Councilman Bay stated that the City Manager had a clear understanding
of his motion. He did not use the word proactive or reactive and if he were
going to use any word, it would be active. He was not asking for change in
policy, but that more dollars and effort be put into the present effort.
Councilman Pickler referred to the Enforcement procedures being used in Santa
Ana and asked for a report as to how that procedure was working and the
results being obtained.
City Manager Talley stated a report would be prepared explaining the
differences between the procedures used by Anaheim and those of Santa Ana and
why staff favored the approach being used by Anaheim relative to results.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion including the addition that
funding for the positions temporarily be taken from the Council contingency
fund. MOTION CARRIED.
170: FINAL MAP TRACT NO. 10617 (.READV.~--FINAL MAP: Developer, Anaheim Hills
Development; Tract is located on the side of Imperial Highway, south of Nohl
Ranch Road and contains 29 proposed RS-HS-10,000(SC) zoned lots (25 units).
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Pickler, the proposed
subdivision, together with its design and improvement, was found to be
consistent with the City's General Plan, and the City Council approved Final
Map Tract No. 10617 (readvertised), as recommended by the City Engineer in his
memorandum dated October 8, 1984. MOTION CARRIED.
1008
94,
Cit7 Hal. l~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~. 1984, 10:00 A.M.
000/107/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4546: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No.
4546 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4546: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AMENDING SUBSECTION .020 OF SECTION 17.08.385, AND ADDING NEW SECTION
17.08.439, TO CHAPTER 17.08 OF TITLE 17 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO SUBDIVISIONS. (fees for benefit areas)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4546 duly passed and adopted.
148: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MEETING - THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1984:
Councilwoman Kaywood reported on the subject meeting where Councilman Pickler
was installed as second Vice President of the Orange County League.
Councilwoman Kaywood also reported on the announcement that the United States
Congress had denied funding for the All-River Plan. Such action presented the
possibility of a grave disaster which would cost billions of dollars of damage
in the Orange County area where ultimately the Federal Government would have
to step in, and which would prove to be more costly in the long run.
Councilman Pickler commented that with their representatives in Washington,
Congressmen Patterson and Dannemyer, he felt they would continue their efforts
to see what could be done to obtain the necessary funding.
139: INFORMATION MEETING - PROPOSITION 36: Councilman Pickler announced that
an information meeting on Proposition 36 was going to be held at the Garden
Grove Community Center Wednesday, October 17, 1984, at 7:30 p.m. He
encouraged everyone able to do so to attend this important meeting where the
pros and cons of the issue would be aired.
119/153: DISABILITY RETIREMENT ABUSES: Councilman Overholt first
congratulated the Register for their series of articles the last three days on
the Pension Crisis specifically dealing with d~sab~l~ty retirement abuse
particularly in the safety end of Municipal Government. He felt the Register
had taken a bold stand and the articles were very illuminating relative to an
issue of concern. He (Overholt) maintained that such abuses would ultimately
bankrupt the whole pension system and he suggested that the Council commend
the Register for their articles and also communicate with Senator John Seymour
from the Local District and Senator Newton Russell from Glendale who were the
ones speaking out on the issue, and to do whatever could be done to support
them in their efforts to bring the matter before the legislature to bring
about reform that would ultimately eliminate abuses and make it a viable
program. He asked Mr. Talley if he had any comments as to how the City could
support the Register in their efforts.
1009
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~..~984~ 10:00 A.M.
City Manager Talley stated he had already written a letter to the Register.
Otherwise, he would encourage working through the Orange County League of
Cities since he felt that when groups of cities got behind an issue, it was
the only chance they had to offset the powerful influences of the employee
lobbies in Sacramento.
MOTION: Councilman Overholt moved to authorize the Mayor to contact Senators
Seymour and Russell, and the Register, on behalf of the Council, commending
the Register for their articles relating to disability retirements, and
indicating the Council is 100% behind them.
Before any action was taken, Councilman Roth stated if the main thrust was
with regard to abuses, he was concerned about that; however, he did not have
an opportunity to read the articles in the Register and wanted to do so before
he took any action.
Councilman Overholt moved to continue the foregoing motion for one week.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler asked the City Manager to submit a copy of the articles to
Council Members for their review.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to
discuss potential litigation and labor relations with no action anticipated;
the City Attorney requested a Closed Session to discuss litigation and
potential litigation with action anticipated.
The Mayor announced that a Closed Session would be held to consult with the
City Attorney to discuss pending and potential litigation.
Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session and a lunch break.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (11:13 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilman Overholt. (1:52 p.m.)
112: MARIE LANDERS VS. THE CITY OF ANAHEIM: Authorizing the City Attorney
and Cotkin, Collins, Kolts and Franscell to settle Orange County Superior
Court Case No. 32-22-82, Marie Landers vs. the City of Anaheim, et al, for a
sum not to exceed 552,500. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by
Councilman Pickler. Councilman Overholt was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
112: JAMES GLUTH VS. THE CITY OF ANAHEIM: Authorizing the City Attorney and
Kinkle, Rodiger and Spriggs to settle Orange County Superior Court Case no.
38-33-48, James Gluth vs. the City of Anaheim, for the sum not to exceed
550,000. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Pickler.
Councilman Overholt was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2608 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION: Application submitted by A. G. and Doris K. Richter, to permit
on-sale alcoi~c~J in a proposed restaurant and cocktail lounge on CL zoned
property loca'~!i at 1086 "A" North State College Boulevard, with a Code waiver
of minimum numbe~ of parking spaces.
1010
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC84-174, 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, and further, granted Conditional
Use Permit No. 2608 and Negative Declaration, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That all on-site trash storage areas shall be reconstructed in
accordance with approved plans on file with the Street Maintenance and
Sanitation Division.
2. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of the CL
Zone, unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
3. That the owner of subject property shall submit a letter requesting
termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2339 to the Planning Department.
4. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 through 3.
5. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or prior to the time that a building permit is issued, or within a
period of one year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first,
Condition No. 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for
further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with
Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
6. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first,
Condition Nos. 1 and 4, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
7. That any entertainment provided on the premises shall require an
entertainment permit from the City and shall be limited to live music and
customer dancing only; no dancing by entertainers or other performers shall be
permitted.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler at the meeting of October 11, 1984 and public hearing scheduled this
date.
The Mayor asked if the applicant or applicant's agent was present to answer
questions of Councilman Pickler.
Mr. Steven Silverstein, Attorney, 2001 East First Street, was present on
behalf of the applicant.
Councilman Pickler explained that his main concern was relative to the
entertainment plan for the facility.
1011
City Hal~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
Mr. Silverstein stated the business was going to have after dinner dancing
compatible with what was presently allowed at the Black Angus Restaurant
located in the same center. He noted that in a previous discussion with
Councilman Pickler, he (Pickler) had some concern about off-color or risque
entertainment that might be planned. He (Stlverstein) emphasized that there
was no such entertainment contemplated. In the updated floor plan submitted
to the City, there was going to be a small stage for a band in a dancing area
for couples. It was going to be a first-class restaurant with valet parking.
They had already acquired an approved entertainment permit.
Anntka Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning, explained that the
entertainment permit had been processed and what the Council was considering
today was the on-sale alcoholic beverage request and a parking waiver. The
entertainment was an accessory function and the application was processed
after the Planning Commission considered the CUP.
Councilman Bay stated the concern he read from the Planning Commission meeting
by one of the Commissioners who was opposed was that he did not have a great
deal of concern over the restaurant or cocktail lounge, but over entertainment
and dancing in the area adding to the parking deficiency and the potential for
noise and problems in an area surrounded by residential. He (Bay) was not
aware an entertainment permit had already been granted. If it turned out to
be a problem in that area, he wanted to know what the Council could do in a
short period of time.
Miss Santalahti answered that the CUP was for on-sale alcohol and if there
were problems, the Council could consider termination.
Councilman Bay noted that would be a revocation procedure and he wanted to
know if there was a shorter span of time to review entertainment permits; City
Attorney Hopkins answered "yes."
Councilman Pickler reiterated his concern over the type of entertainment that
was going to take place and if the applicant would stipulate that there was
just going to be dining and dancing. If so, that would satisfy his concern.
Hr. Silverstein explained that the restaurant was going to have after dinner
dancing at approximately 9:00 p.m. with a live group or sometimes recorded
music. They were not going to provide dancing entertainment but dancing for
customers. They were not going to have performing dancers.
Mayor Roth asked for confirmation that there would not be live entertainment
except for the music and the only dancing would be for customers; Mr.
Silverstetn confirmed that was correct. He also clarified for Councilman Bay
the building itself was a narrow deep space and there would be no noise
emanating to the outside.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if there was an existing shortage of parking spaces
and if there were any complaints; Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, reported that
a parking study was conducted and it was found that there was adequate surface
parking in the area.
1012
9O
Cit7 Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~. 1984, 10:00 A.M.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor 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. 84R-443 for adoption granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 2608, upholding the findings of the City Planning
Commission, subject to the stipulation by the applicant that the only live
entertainment would be a live band and customer dancing. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 84R-443: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2608.
Roi1 Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:COUNCIL MEMBER:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler and Roth
None
Overholt
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 84R-443 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Overholt returned to Council Chambers (2:10 p.m.)
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2616 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION: Application submitted by Edward E. Matthews, to permit a
gymnastic training center with 29 parking spaces on ML(SC) zoned property
located at 4511 Eisenhower Circle.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC84-181, 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 basks o£ the ~n~t~al study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment, and further, granted Conditional
Use Permit No. 2616 and Negative Declaration, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That a traffic signal assessment fee equaling the difference between
the industrial and commercial assessment fees shall be paid to the City of
Anaheim in an amount as determined by the City Council.
2. That fire sprinklers shall be installed as required by the City Fire
Marshall.
1013
Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16~ 1984, 10:00 A.M.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file with the Street Maintenance and Sanitation Division.
4. That due to the change in use and/or occupancy of the building, plans
shall be submitted to the Building Division showing compliance with the
minimum standards of the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building,
Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of
Anaheim. The appropriate permits shall be obtained for any necessary work.
5. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of the ML
Zone, unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
6. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 and 2.
7. That prior to commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of
one year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition
Nos. 1 and 4, above-mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further
time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section
18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
8. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first,
Condition Nos. 2, 3 and 6, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
9. That all activities shall be conducted wholly inside the building.
10. That 29 vehicle parking spaces shall be maintained on the premises at
all times for the employees and customers of the proposed use.
11. That this use permit shall expire on October 16, 1987.
A review of the Planning Commission's action was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood and public hearing scheduled this date.
The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
Mr. Dennis Mailly, 10624 Ramblewood, Stanton, was present to answer questions.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated her concern had been the Traffic Engineer's
comments during the Planning Commission hearing relative to the severe parking
shortage in the area. She asked to hear first from Mr. Singer.
Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, first stated that there was, in fact, a parking
problem in the general area. He had read and investigated the parking study
submitted by the applicant which was conducted by Herman Kimmel & Associates,
Inc., dated August 10, 1984 (made a part of the record) and also discussed the
matter with Zoning Code Enforcement Officers who found an inordinate amount of
1014
88
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
parking in the Eisenhower Circle area even with only two-thirds of the
buildings presently occupied. Since there was already a serious parking
problem on that street, he made a recommendation to the Planning Commission to
be concerned with parking and not grant parking waivers in the area. He also
confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that some shortages were taking place
because on-site parking areas were being used for storage. Truck storage took
up parking spaces. He reiterated, the area was cluttered with the vehicles
even at this time when not all of the buildings were presently occupied.
After additional input from Miss Santalahti, Councilwoman Kaywood stated if
parking spaces were being used for storage, she questioned ~f the Council
would not have the authority to have those spaces cleared and used for parking
as they were intended.
Miss Santalahti explained in the industrial area, the Code provided for
standard industrial activities. There was a tendency for some of the
businesses to enclose outdoor areas and especially in spec complexes such as
the subject.
Councilwoman Kaywood surmised then that the situation had nothing to do with
the applicant; Miss Santalahti answered "no" and that it was a pre-existing
problem.
Councilwoman Kaywood then posed a line of questioning to Mr. Mailly wherein he
reported that a maximum class would consist of no more than 50 children which
would require 8 coaches or a maximum of 8 vehicles if the coaches did not
carpool, the parking survey indicated for every 7 vehicles dropping off
students, only three vehicles stayed for a short time. They did want to
remain at the facility after the three-year period which was granted by the
City Planning Commission. The immediate problem in the area was the boating
facility located next door. That business was using their outside parking for
storage and as a result were encroaching on parking spaces in the street as
well as at the subject location. The boating business had outgrown its
facility.
Councilwoman Kaywood suggested that perhaps the City needed to take another
look at its requirements. If insufficient parking was being required, that
would need to be taken care of up front. She saw no reason to punish the
applicant if that were the case. Mr. Matlly then explained for Councilman ~ay
that 50 children would be their maximum class and earliest classes that would
have any impact would be at 3:00 p.m. Otherwise, most of the classes would be
at night and half of the facilities would be used for team girls which meant
there was no parent participation involved with regard to viewing their
children working out. The girls would be dropped off and would stay at the
facility two and a half to three hours. Most traffic would be from 4:00 p.m.
on. They did not have the need for outside storage and thus the entire 29
parking spaces would be used for parking only and not for storage.
Councilman Pickler suggested perhaps the Council could add a condition that
there be a one-year review; Mr. Matlly stated the only problem would be
relative to their lease. If after a year the Council decided the facility was
not large enough for their needs, it could cause problems for them.
1015
Cit~ Hall~ Anaheim~ .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that since a CUP was involved, it could be revoked
at any time for cause.
Councilman Bay stated at 3:00 p.m. the heavy rush hour started as a result of
the exodus from the industrial area. This was a commercial operation being
allowed in the northeast industrial area under a CUP. Normally when a
commercial use was approved in the industrial area, particularly the northeast
industrial area, there was service to the industrial area involved. He
questioned the service of the proposed function to that area and he did not
see any direct relationship between gymnastic classes for children and
industrial customers or uses.
Mr. Mailly stated something on their agenda to do would be to start aerobic
classes but that would probably take place in the morning.
Councilman Bay continued that he could not support the subject CUP unless
there was a service to the industrial community. This operation, in effect,
was importing automobiles at one of the peak traffic hours with mothers
transporting their children between the ages of 2 and 15 or between 8 and 14
as stated by Mr. Mallly into the area. It was adding a traffic impact to an
area that was going to continue growing traffic wise.
Mayor Roth then read Item No. 18 (d) on Page 7-c of the staff report to the
Planning Commission of September 5, 1984 indicating that the traffic generated
by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and
highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; Mr. Singer
stated that was a standard report and there would not be significant traffic
impact from the proposed facility because the activity would not be taking
place during peak hour but at a time when everybody was leaving the area and
reverse lanes would be available.
Carolyn Friedlander, 9303 Maple, explained that most of the larger classes
would be after 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. During the 3:00 p.m. time slot, most
children were still getting out of school. Most activity would take place
during evening hours and the one and a half hour classes started at 6:30 p.m.
She realized this was not an aid to the industrial area, but every year they
did donate their gym to the Special Olympics which was something of community
value.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak; there being no response, he
closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pickler, 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.
1016
Ci.t~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
Counctlwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 84R-414 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 2616, upholding the findings of the City Planning
Commission and granting the use for three years. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 84R-414: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2616.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
Bay
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 84R-414 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2612 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION: Application submitted by Edward L. and Patricia B. Scanlan, to
expand an existing board and care facility for a maximum of 15 adults on
RM-1200 zoned property located at 328 North Vine Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC84-170, 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, and further, granted Conditional
Use Permit No. 2612 and Negative Declaration, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved
plans on file with the Street Maintenance and Sanitation Division.
2. That the existing structure shall be brought up to the minimum
standards of the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing,
Electrical, Housing, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of
Anaheim.
3. That the proposal shall comply with all signing requirements of the
RM-1200 Zone, unless a variance allowing sign waivers is approved by the
Planning Commission or City Council.
4. That no more than three (3) resident-owned vehicles shall be parked
and stored on-site.
5. That the maximum occupancy for this facility shall be limited to and
shall not exceed fifteen (15) elderly residents plus one (1) couple for
management and housekeeping duties.
6. The subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 and 2.
1017
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
7. That prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this
resolution, or final building and zoning inspections, whichever occurs first,
Condition Nos. 1, 2 and 6, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
8. That this use shall be limited to the current property owners (Edward L.
and Patricia B. $canlan) and that a covenant shall be recorded on the property
within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this resolution so
restricting said use to insure that any subsequent property owner(s) shall
have to apply for a new conditional use permit to continue the use.
A review of the conditional use permit by the City Council was requested by
the Planning Commission to consider the modification or deletion of Condition
No. 8.
Mayor Roth asked for clarification if the action today was merely to consider
the modification or deletion of Condition No. 8 or the entire conditional use
permit.
Miss Santalahtt answered the entire application was before the Council. The
Planning Commission had taken action on the CUP but towards the end of the
meeting after the item was completed and acted upon, further discussion was
held with the City's Attorney. It was decided that the Commission took action
the way they had not intended to but it was too late to make any change. She
also clarified that there was no one in opposition at the Planning Commission
hearing.
The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
Mrs. Patricia $canlan, owner of the property, stated she had contacted her
lender because they were going to be doing some refurbishing and extensive
financing was necessary. They would not give a loan that would have to be
paid off if the property was ever sold. They could not transfer the loan and
it would be called at that time.
Mayor Roth surmised that the covenant would require an acceleration clause in
the loan meaning in the event that the owner traded, transferred or conveyed
the property in any manner the existing loan would have to be paid off and
they would lose the benefit of the possibility of a loan which could be
assumed by a new buyer.
Mrs. Scanlan then explained for the Mayor that they were proposing to more
fully utilize the existing facilities. They intended to add a bedroom or two
and provide more amenities to the people presently at their facility. They
would not need a more substantial income from the property to do so. There
was now a sharing of rooms. Everyone was happy who lived there and the
community was happy with them. She also explained for Councilwoman Kaywood
that their residents were people who were compatible and were between the ages
of the early 50's through the 90's.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that Mrs. Scanlan was also concerned with the word,
"elderly" that was used instead of senior citizen. She interpreted elderly as
1018
84
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
a person being older than a senior citizen and that was not what Mrs. Scanlan
intended. From the minutes of the Planning Commission hearing, she could tell
that the operation was a very fine one but if it were to be sold, the Planning
Commission was concerned that it would be difficult to know what the next
owner would do and they wanted to have someone come and reapply and that was
the basis of the hearing.
Mrs. Scanlan stated that they were not intending to sell, but it was something
that could not be predicted and they were looking ahead to protect themselves
as much as possible.
Councilman Bay stated relative to Condition No. 8 the Planning Commission
perhaps did not foresee the problem of a lender not wanting to give the
applicant a loan because the CUP was tied to the applicant rather than the
property. If the Council did not tie the present owner and management to the
CUP and it did change hands, what were the limitations of the facility not
being run the way it was being run at present.
Councilman Overholt did not share the concern. The applicant was going to
improve and modify the facility but could not get the financing to do so under
the circumstances. He felt the Council had to deal with the real world and
not put a "noose" around the facility. If Condition No. 8 were not deleted
the applicant could not get the necessary financing to expand to 15
residents.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Roth, seconded by Councilman Pickler, 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 Roth offered Resolution No. 84R-415 for adoption, granting
Conditional Use Permit No. 2612, upholding the findings of the City Planning
Commission but deleting Condition No. 8 of Planning Commission Resolution No.
PC84-170 and relative to Condition No. 5 that the word "elderly" be replaced
by older adult. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 84R-415: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2612.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Overholt, Pickler and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 84R-415 duly passed and adopted.
1019
City Hall, Ana.heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 16, 1984, 10:00 A.M.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed
Session. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
(2:50 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (3:57 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:58 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
1020