1983/08/09City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
CITY ENGINEER: William Devitt
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: The Reverend Rick Gastil, Hotline Help Center, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ben Bay led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held July 12, 1983. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
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 Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of ~1,772,042.34, in
accordance with the 1983-84 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. 83R-315 through 83R-321, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
A. Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
1. Claim submitted by Genevieve Sylvester for personal injury and
property damages purportedly sustained due to an accident in which a
City-owned vehicle was involved on Freeway SR 91 Westbound, on or about
May 28, 1983.
660
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
2. Claim submitted by Henry Perkins for personal injury and property
damages purportedly sustained due to an accident in which a City-owned
vehicle was involved on Freeway SR 91 Westbound, on or about May 28, 1983.
3. Claim submitted by Irwin Perkins for personal injury and property
damages purportedly sustained due to an accident in which a City-owned
vehicle was involved on Freeway SR 91 Westbound, on or about May 28, 1983.
4. Claim submitted by Susan Roberts for personal property damages to car
purportedly sustained due to a malfunctioning traffic signal at the
intersection of Manchester Avenue and Santa Ana Street, on or about
June 28, 1983.
B. Claim rejected and referred to Governmental Programs Division, Markel
Services, Inc.:
5. Claim submitted by James Clayton Carden for false arrest and
imprisonment and personal injury damages purportedly sustained due to
actions of Anaheim Police Officers at 2421 East Ball Road, Apartment 109,
on or about March 20, 1983.
C. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim denied:
6. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim submitted by National
Union Fire Insurance Company for payment of Workmen's Compensation
BENEFITS PAID TO Teresa Gonzalez by claimant's insured, Szabo Food
Service, for personal injury damages purportedly sustained due to a
slip-and-fall accident at Anaheim Stadium, on or about January 29, 1983.
D. Claim allowed payment:
7. Clai~ submitted by Minnie Ingram for property damages to fence
purportedly sustained due to an accident involving a City-owned vehicle in
the alley at the rear of 411 East Broadway, on or about June 6, 1983.
($145)
2. 123: Rescinding an existing agreement and authorizing a new agreement
with Recreation Systems, Inc., in the amount of $6,610, for architectural
design services for the restroom/concession building at Pearson Park
Amphitheatre.
3. 129/112/106: Transferring 337,200 in the 1982/83 appropriations from the
Fire Department to the City Attorney's Department to cover contract legal
services for two unanticipated major litigations.
4. 158: Granting an electrical easement to the Southern California Edison
Company at the Burrell Water Tank site, located at 4390 East Nohl Ranch Road,
C.P. 216, and authorizing execution of a deed therefor.
661
City. Hall.~ Anaheim~' California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9~ 1983~ 10.:00 A.M.
5. 158: Authorizing payment in the amount of $10,500 to Larry Greenfield for
leasehold interest in the Coffee Shop at 547 South Anaheim Boulevard, with
payment to be made prior to August 18, 1983, as required by the Anaheim
Boulevard Street Widening Project, Account No. 13-792-7101-E2580 (R/W 2800-9A).
6. 123/140: Approving a letter agreement with Blurock Partnership in the
amount of $1,000 for schematic design documents for a grant application, and
authorizing the City Librarian to execute said agreement.
124: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-315: 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: FOYER CANOPY
AT THE CONVENTION CENTER, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 24-969-7107.
(Bids to be opened September 1, 1983, 2:00 p.m.)
165: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-316: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE CENTER STREET PARKING STRUCTURE, 235 EAST
CENTER STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 82-362-6325. (Ray Wilson
Company, $2,683,000)
175: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-317: 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
CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: PRESSURE
REDUCING STATION #17 AT SOUTH STREET AND MANCHESTER AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 51-611-6329-27310-34320. (Tennyson Pipeline Company,
contractor)
169: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-318: 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
CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: CONVERSION
OF EXISTING STREET LIGHTS FOR HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LUNINAIRES, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 01-677-6328-1217B-37300. (High-Sodium Conversion
Company, contractor)
158.123: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-319: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACC~ING AN E~MENT AGREEMENT. (SAVI Ranch Associates for
an easement for a sanitary sewer across a portion of SAVI property, in
connection with the Weir Canyon Road Sewer Project)
103: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-320: A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM MAKING A PROPOSAL FOR A DISTRICT REORGANIZATION
DESIGNATED AS ORANGE COUNTY REORGANIZATION NO. 67, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NO. 83R-291. (in connection with the Lakeview-Orangethorpe No. 6 Annexation)
662
.City Ha.ll7 Anaheim~ .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 97 19837 10:00 A.M.
158: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-321: A RESOLUTION oF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Orange
County Water District; Anaheim Chamber of Commerce Building Limited
Partnership; Angel Ureno, et al.; Will Dee Pickerel, et al.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
MOTION CARRIED. The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 83R-315 through 83R-321,
both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
105: APPOINTMENTS TO FILL TERMS TO EXPIRE JUNE 307 1985, FOR THE PROJECT AREA
COMMITTEE: Mayor Roth noted that a letter had been received from Mr. Ian
Skfdmore, dated June 30, 1983, expressing an interest to again serve on a City
Board or Commission. Discussion then followed between Council Members
relative to the requirements necessary to be a member of the Project Area
Committee (PAC) at the conclusion of which the Mayor opened the floor to
nominations.
Councilwoman Kaywood nominated Mrs. Fern Jackson and Dr. B. J. Knowles.
Councilman Pickler moved to close nominations. Councilman Overholt seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
A roll call vote was then taken on Mrs. Jackson and Dr. Knowles.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
Mrs. Jackson and Dr. Knowles were thereupon appointed to the Project Area
Committee for the terms ending June 30, 1985, subject to their meeting the
requirements to be a member of PAC (either living in or owning a business in
the Redevelopment Project Area).
It was determined that the remaining vacant position on the Committee be
continued for one week.
179: CONTROLLED ACCESS AREA - PEP, ALTA HILLS: Consideration of a proposal to
make the Peralta Hills area a controlled access area--continued from the
meeting of July 12, 1983 (see minutes that date). Submitted was an extensive
report dated August 2, 1983, from the Planning Department, Zoning Division,
which also included an analysis from the City Attorney and the Traffic
Engineer (on file in the City Clerk's office).
Mr. Alan Orsborne, 560 Peralta Hills Drive, stated he had submitted today a
list of the people in the area who indicated their favorable inclination
toward the establishment of a controlled access community, 164, and also those
663
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
who were in opposition, 8. The 164 represented 70 percent of the property
owners in Peralta Hills. They did not have a 100 percent response and he felt
it could be presumed that those who did not respond might be favorably
inclined.
Mayor Roth referred to the staff report, particularly Recommendation No. 2,
"That the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association shall enter into a hold
harmless agreement with the City of Anaheim." He asked Mr. Orsborne's
response to that.
Mr. Orsborne answered that he was not in a position to respond pro or con for
the entire Association. When they got to the point where they were asking for
an actual establishment of the controlled access community, they might address
that issue at the time. Today, they were asking the Council to indicate their
support for the efforts of the people in Peralta Hills to establish such a
community and give them a license to proceed. They needed such support in
order to have Senator Seymour intercede on their behalf.
Mayor Roth stated he was supportive of the concept in general. It would now
be necessary to get legislative approval and the matter would subsequently
come back to the Council for final approval. He was inclined to support the
request, including the three recommendations in the staff report.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved that the Council approve the concept of the
controlled access on public streets in the Peralta Hills area, subject to the
following recommendations that before any construction occurs or any
encroachments into public rights of ways are granted:
1. That written evidence be submitted showing that a majority of the members
of the Peralta Hills Homeowners' Association support this concept and agree to
accept full financial responsibility for all expenses associated with the
proposal, including posting of a security acceptable to the City (i.e. bond or
letter of agreement) to guarantee removal of all facilities and repair of
property if the homeowners abandon the system.
2. That the Paralta Hills Homeowners' Association shall enter into a hold
harmless agreement with the City of Anaheim.
3. That the design of access gates and guard house (and other related
facilities) be subject to the review and approval of appropriate City
departments (Fire, Traffic, Engineering, Sanitation, Police, Planning and
Zoning.
It was noted that the matter would return to the City Council for final
approval subsequent to action by the Legislature. Councilman Pickler seconded
the motion.
Before action was taken, Councilman Overholt noted it was indicated in the
staff report that the residents were unwilling to enter into an agreement
holding the City harmless if any litigation ensued. If that were the case, he
felt they had a built-in problem that they might not be able to overcome.
664
City Hall~. Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983.~ 10:00 A.M.
Mr. Orsborne stated he was surprised to find that statement in the staff
report. As he stated earlier, he was in no position to speak for the entire
Association, but he would find it acceptable to follow staff's recommendation
in that regard (Recommendation No. 2) and have it included in the motion as
proposed. He did not know where the statement came from, but it could have
been an impression that was left. He did not intend that it should be so.
Councilman Overholt then asked that the staff prepare a one-sentence amendment
to the report, deleting any reference to a refusal to consider holding the
City harmless. He would not approve the motion if that was the present
position of the spokesman.
Miss Santalahti stated that she had asked the question relative to the hold
harmless agreement and the answer was as stated in the staff report.
Councilman Overholt stated, since Mr. Orsborne stated that was not his
position, he was requesting that the report be corrected based on his
(Orsborne) stated position. The staff report also made reference to the
Westmont area. As Mr. Orsborne knew, there was also interest in that area to
do the same as requested in Peralta Hills, not to close Westmont, but Lancer
and Park Avenue. He felt it was an identical situation to that of Peralta
Hills and he asked staff to look at that to ascertain if it was, in fact,
different than Peralta Hills. If Peralta Hills was successful, and he
supported the concept, the people in Westmont wanted to do the same thing and
the Council should be equally sympathetic to their request.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was also supportive relative to Mr. Orsborne's
request, but she felt while the process was taking place, they should think
about situations that could result in delays in people getting through to the
area when a resident was entertaining large groups, and how emergency vehicles
would get through.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED.
170: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11305~ REV. 1 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Anacal
Engineering Co., requesting an extension of time to Tentative Tract No. 11305,
Rev. 1, to establish a 2-lot, 104-unit condominium subdivision on RS-A-43,000
zoned property located at 2170 South Harbor Boulevard. Submitted was a report
from the Zoning Division dated July 26, 1983, recommending approval of the
requested extension of time.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time
to Tentative Tract No. 11305, Revision 1, to expire September 29, 1984, as
recommended. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
108: REHEARING - ENTERTAINMENT A~PLICATION, HOLLYWOOD A GOr~p.: Robert Wayne
Copel'and, fo'r a rehearing in c~nnection with the denial of an Entertainment
Permit Application for Hollywood A Go-Go, 2810 West Lincoln Avenue, for not
more than six go-go dancers, seven days a week, from 2:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
Submitted was a report from the Police Department dated June 24, 1983,
recommending that the business be denied an Entertainment Permit for female
go-go dancers.
665
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9.~ 1983.~ 10:00 A.M.
The Mayor asked to hear from Mr. Copeland.
Mr. Robert Wayne Copeland, 2902 West Ball Road, stated he agreed relative to
the past record of the business that it had not been well run. However, it
had five owners since 1972 and all had been granted entertainment permits. He
planned to spend $60,000 refurbishing the business and making it a better
place for people to come. The business had been closed for eight months and
the clientele that had frequented the business had dispersed by now. That was
not the kind of clientele he wanted. All the people that worked for him were
screened and licensed by the Anaheim Police Department. There was a bar one
block west by the name of Oscars that had mud wrestling and bikini
entertainment. To the east was the Humdinger, and they had bikini dancing.
He needed the permit to compete in business with them. For the last 13 years
he had been in the bar business in Anaheim. He had never been arrested and
always cooperated with the Police. He was only asking to be judged on his own
merits instead of someone else's. It was easy for the Council to grant him an
entertainment permit and it was just as easy to take it away, if warranted.
All he was asking for was a chance.
Councilman Bay then read from the Police Department report the many incidents
that had taken place at the business since 1972, which were on file in that
department. He felt that Mr. Copeland would have a great task before he could
change the image of that location.
Mr. Copeland stated he had a decent track record and considered himself to be
a decent person. He had been familiar with the business before, but he would
like to be held accountable on his own merits. He had been in the City for
approximately 15 years and ran the business right down the street, the
Humdinger, but did not own it.
After further questioning of Mr. Copeland by Council Members, the Mayor asked
if anyone was present who wished to speak on the matter.
Mr. Ed Anderson, owner of the Western Skies Mobile Home Park, located across
Dale (same side of Lincoln) as the proposed business, stated there were
several cocktail lounges in the area, that the Police had gone through the
Park chasing people presumed to be from local bistros. He asked that the
Council consider the matter carefully before granting permission for another
such business.
Mr. Alfred Vanderboss, 2240 Orange Avenue, owner of Al's Hobby Repair Shop,
2814 West Lincoln, one door south of the subject business, stated if the
situation was approved, he was going to have to move. He had nothing but
trouble when the bar was operating at the location. The bikers would come to
his place of business and tear up his merchandise and he had to replace the
glass on his store twice. There were also other problems, such as narcotics,
constant harassment, and the Police were on the premises all the time. He was
opposed and was also speaking for two other businesses in that location,
Advanced Prosthetics and Lindel Market.
666
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
Lydia Sleppy, 2828 West Lincoln, representing Reinvestment Management Company,
owners of the Villa del Sol apartments, a 207-unit complex, stated she
understood now why things had been quiet in the area, because the bar had been
closed. On several occasions, they had "victims" come to their apartments who
were abused, beaten up or drunk coming from that bar. There was not only a
concern relative to the clientele, but also the traffic pattern in the area,
especially on Dale Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. It was obviously a dangerous
area and becoming increasingly so with new developments on Dale Avenue and no
widening of the street.
Mr. Copeland stated, in answer to the concerns expressed, that the place was
already a bar and the request today was for an Entertainment Permit. There
was going to be a bar there in any case and it was licensed by the Alcoholic
Beverage Board. If someone was going to be running a business there, he felt
it should be someone who was going to do a good job. He could understand the
feelings of each of those who spoke, but wanted to make the business a
different place. He realized that everybody prior had said the same thing,
but everybody else did not have his track record. The apartment complex was
far removed from the business, as well as the mobile home park. He could only
understand Mr. Vanderboss' complaints, since he was in close proximity.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood stated there were already bars one block east
and one block west with questionable entertainment. There was too much of a
proliferation in the area and she thereupon moved to deny the Entertainment
Permit Application for Hollywood A Go-Go, 2810 West Lincoln Avenue.
Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
107: APPEAL OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND ORDER TO COMPLY--502 NORTH ZEYN
STREET: Mary Ann Simpson, Attorney for Robert and Patricia Carson, appealing
the Notice of Violation of the Uniform Housing Code in connection with
property located at 502 North Zeyn Street.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved that a public hearing on the appeal of Robert
and Patricia Carson, owners of 502 North Zeyn Street, Anaheim, regarding
violation of the Uniform Housing Code existing at 502 North Zeyn Street, be
set for September 6, 1983, 1:30 p.m. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
179: ORDINANCE NO8. 4445 AND 4446~ Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos.
4445 and 4446 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4445: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE. ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-36(6), RM-2400, north
side of Falmouth, south side of Coronet, west of Romneya Drive, Tract 11464,
M. J. Brock)
ORDINANCE NO. 4446: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (82-83-30, CL, 3311 West Ball
Road)
667
City Hall~. Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Au~ust 9.~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
175.120: RECENT THUNDERSTORMS AND INTERRUPTION OF ELECTRIC UTILITY SERVICES
IN SOME AREAS OF ANAHEIM: Councilwoman Kaywood stated relative to the subject
interruptzon of service caused by damage from the recent thunderstorms, four
transformers were hit by lightning and all the emergency numbers were busy
from the thousands of calls that must have been placed. She was one of those
calling, since her electricity was off for three and one-half hours and she,
too, would have liked to know when service was going to be restored.
Mayor Roth stated he had asked the City Manager prior to the meeting, due to
the number of complaints he received from citizens, to investigate why it was
not possible to get through to anyone in the City after dialing for hours. He
was hoping before the meeting was over today that the Utilities Director or
his representative could give a report to the Council.
City Manager William Talley stated he had asked Darrell Ament, Utilities
Management Services Manager, to get that information, but relative to the
damage, they lost a 30-40 MVA transformer at the Sharp Substation. Estimates
as of now were that it might be two to two and one-half months before they
could replace that transformer, which serviced the equivalent of approximately
40,000 people. They had to go out and look for, and on a short-term basis,
borrow one from the Edison Company, and they also rented another. When they
finally isolated the problem, they found that they had ten major and about 70
small neighborhood transformers that had been blown. It took repeated
lightning strikes to do the damage, because the major transformers had
lightning arrestors on them. It was not until 2:36 a.m. this morning that
they finally got the last transformers back in service. He was not prepared
for the questions on the telephones, but would be getting that information and
would give a full report.
119: INTRODUCTION OF VISITORS FROM JAPAN: Mayor Roth then recognized Mrs.
Leah Kazarian, who was in the Chambers audience. Mrs. Kazarian then
introduced to the Council two exchange students from Japan, Terumi Hota and
Mami Okabi.
The Mayor, on behalf of the Council and City, welcomed the students not only
to the United States, but also to Anaheim.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to
discuss potential litigation and personnel matters with no action anticipated;
the City Attorney requested a Closed Cession to discuss litigation and
potential litigation with no action anticipated.
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Pickler
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (11:00 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
'b'~ing present. (1:30 p.m.)
668
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9~ 1983, 10:00 A.M.
176: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONmeNT NO. 82-15A: In accordance with
application filed by R. C. Gilbert, Agent, The Barisic Company, a public
hearing was held on proposed abandonment of a portion of Hayward Street to
conform to a cul-de-sac designed for Tract No. li820, located north of Rome
Avenue, pursuant to Resolution No. 83R-276, duly published in the Anaheim
Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. This matter was
continued from the meeting of July 26, 1983, where extensive input was
received--see minutes that date.
After Mayor Roth asked the City Attorney to explain the purpose of the
proceedings today, he asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
Mr. James Barisic, President, The Barisic Company, Managing Partner, 18002 Sky
Park Circle, Irvine, stated he did not have much to add except that he would
never have requested the proposed abandonment if he knew it was causing a
problem. He asked that the abandonment proceedings be terminated immediately,
and they would proceed on the project as originally approved by City staff and
the Council. (Also see Mr. Barisic's letter dated August 3, 1983, requesting
that proceedings be terminated on Abandonment No. 83-15A--on file in the City
Clerk's office.)
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if as originally approved the project would
encroach into the residential area on Hayward Street; Mr. Barisic answered
there were no encroachments.
The Mayor then asked if anyone wished to speak.
Mrs. Lorraine Truslow, 3127 West Rome, asked for clarification that there
would be no entrance or exit from the project onto Hayward Street, but only on
Beach Boulevard.
City Engineer William Devitt stated that the project did have ingress and
egress from the property to Hayward Street. He clarified for Councilman
Pickler that permanent ingress and egress would be on Hayward, but until
construction was completed, it would be off Beach Boulevard.
Staff and Mr. Barisic then answered additional questions posed by Mrs. Truslow
on the issue of access from Beach Boulevard at the conclusion of which
Councilman Bay noted that the public hearing today dealt only with the
proposed abandonment. They now had a formal letter and statement by the
developer withdrawing his request for the abandonment and that all proceedings
be terminated. He knew also that there were people present from the area and
he had heard talk at the last hearing (see minutes July 26, 1983) when the
developer was not present, expressing concern over the lack of an EIR and
other items not the subject of the hearing at that time. He asked the City
Attorney to clarify for the Council and the residents what the limitations
were on the present abandonment hearing.
City Attorney William Hopkins confirmed that when Mr. Barisic requested
withdrawal of the abandonment, that should end the proceedings, and a motion
to approve the withdrawal would be in order.
669
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to approve the request for withdrawal of
Abandonment No. 82-15A, to abandon a portion of Hayward Street to conform to a
cul-de-sac designed for Tract No. 11820, located North of Rome Avenue.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PEP, MIT NO. 2445 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION: Application submitted by Margot E. Wright, to permit a bed and
breakfast inn on RS-7200 zoned property located at 1327 South Hickory Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC83-107, declared
that the subject project be exempt from the requirement to file an
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act on the basis that there will be no significant
individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approval of
this negative declaration, since the Anaheim General Plan designates the
subject property for iow-density residential land uses commensurate with the
proposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the
proposal; and that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no
significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and
further granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2445, subject to the following
conditions:
1. 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.
2. That the owner of subject property shall comply with Section 2.12.010 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Transient Occupancy Tax.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilman
Pickler at the meeting of June 21, 1983, and public hearing scheduled and
continued from the meeting of July 19, 1983, to this date.
The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
Mrs. Margot Wright~ 1327 South Hickory~ stated she would mainly give her
guests a room and bed to sleep in and breakfast. It was not an inn, but her
home.
Councilman Pickler stated he had a concern with the proposed use being in a
residential area and a concern generally over bed and breakfast inns coming
into Anaheim. He looked at it as setting a precedent and if they allowed one,
it would happen all over the City. He was concerned that the areas in which
they would be allowed would be turned into bed and breakfast row. He realized
that with the Olympics coming to Los Angeles in 1984, that perhaps there might
be something they would want to do to allow such places for a month or two,
but not on a permanent basis. He was being cautious and did not want to move
too fast and felt that nothing would stop the neighbor next door and the one
next to him from doing the same thing, resulting in the changing of the
environment of certain areas.
670
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9~ 1983, 10:00 A.M.
Mrs. Wright emphasized again that it was not an inn. There would be no signs,
since it was her home and she did not wish to advertise it openly. At
present, she was more dependent on her neighbors keeping their residences in a
nice condition. The houses were rented and she had more problems with those
homes, which would be a detriment to her bed and breakfast than the bed and
breakfast would ever be. None of her neighbors were concerned and none were
objecting. Other neighbors parked in front of her home. She did not feel she
was a threat to the community and her proposal could enhance it.
Mrs. Wright then explained for Councilwoman Kaywood that she had spoken to her
neighbors to let them know what she was going to do. No one objected verbally
or had written to her.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
Mayor Roth stated he felt there was a difference in this request for a bed and
breakfast inn versus the next request they were going to be considering for
the same use on West Broadway, since there was a great deal of opposition in
that area. Since there had been an adequate amount of information given in
the Hickory Street area to advise citizens of the proposal and there was no
one in opposition, he was supportive of the request, with a limitation of
perhaps 18 months, which would cover the period through the Olympics. That
would give sufficient time to see if there were any problem areas and to know
the attitude of the neighbors.
Councilman Bay stated the key issue today, as Councilman Pickler expressed,
was the precedent that would be set and, further, there was a difference in
zoning between this request and the next. This was an R-1 single-family
residential area and he personally agreed with Councilman Pickler that to
establish a precedent by this first bed and breakfast being allowed in a
single-family residential area was a very big step for the City and he was not
ready to take it. He could see potential problems in bed and breakfast inns
suddenly springing up all over the City. He knew of a great many residential
areas and not all R-1 that would be very concerned to see commercial
operations starting in their areas, including his. The staff report as he
read it stated that~ "Currently, bed and breakfast inns may be allowable in
any Anaheim zone subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (although
the use is not specifically identified)," There was a hole somewhere in the
zoning laws saying that under a CUP if three Council Members saw fit, they
could start allowing bed and breakfast inns in those residential areas. He
saw nothing that would convince him that a commercial operation even of the
nature proposed was necessitated in his residential area. He opposed granting
of the Conditional Use Permit for two basic reasons, (1) the precedent it
would create in any and all residential areas and, (2) the potential problems,
not necessarily by this one operation, but problems varying by who chose to
get the permit and how they chose to operate.
671
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood felt that this case was unique in the fact that there was
no opposition and several who approved of it, if kept low-key. She did not
see it opening the door to a big precedent in this case. They would have to
be viewed one-on-one and the two to be heard today were in no way alike. A
trial period would also be a good way to keep a handle on the situation.
Councilman Pickler expressed additional concerns which resulted from his
personal observations in driving through the area, one in particular being the
fact that he noticed three or four cars parked in front of the subject house
and that there were single-car garages in that area.
Councilman Overholt stated he was going to oppose the request. He felt Mrs.
Wright was an exemplary person and her neighbors were glad to have her there.
The precedent did not bother him, but he had serious concerns, as Councilman
Pickler stated, with the problems they could be facing starting into the field
of short-term transient occupancy of what he called rooming houses in
residential zones. He was not even very pleased with Home Occupation Permits
and felt there were situations where neighbors of people with such permits
were inconvenienced because of the businesses being carried on in their
residential neighborhoods. He felt that the bed and breakfast concept would
lay the City open to individuals taking advantage of that situation and
becoming a nuisance to their neighbors. He felt Anaheim had a wealth of
facilities for people who wished to stay for short periods of time.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman
Pickler, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council finds that subject
project will have no significant individual or cumulative adverse
environmental impact due to the approval of this negative declaration since
the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for iow-medium
residential land uses commensurate with the proposal; that no sensitive
environmental impacts are involved in the proposal; that the Initial Study
submitted by the petitioner indicates no significant individual or cumulative
adverse environmental impacts; and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement
to prepare an EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 83R-322 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 2445, reversing the findings of the City Planning
Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 83R-322: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2445.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Pickler, Overholt and Bay
Kaywood and Roth
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 83R-322 duly passed and adopted.
672
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2454 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Application
by Robert C. and Margaret A. Hawley, to permit a bed and breakfast inn on
RM-2400 zoned property located at 904 West Broadway.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC83-1i3, declared
that the subject project be exempt from the requirement to file an
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act on the basis that there will be no significant
individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approval of
this negative declaration, since the Anaheim General Plan designates the
subject property for low-medium density residential land uses commensurate
with the proposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the
proposal; and that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no
significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and
further granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2454, subject to the following
conditions:
1o 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.
2. That this bed and breakfast inn shall be subject to compliance with
Chapter 2.12, Transient Occupancy Tax of the Anaheim Municipal Code, requiring
the collection of a transient occupancy tax.
3. 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; provided, however, that there shall be no exterior advertising signs
of any type on the premises.
4. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 1 and
3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with.
5. That subject conditional use permit shall expire in two (2) years, on
June 13, 1985.
A review of the Planning Couunission's decision was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood at the meeting of July 5, 1983, and public hearing scheduled this date.
The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicantts agent.
Mrs° Margaret Hawley stated she lived with her family at 904 West Broadway and
they were petitioning for a bed and breakfast inn. It was not her intent to
be a commercial venture at all. She did not have four rooms available as
mentioned in the petition. The Planning Department had asked how many rooms
she would have eventually. At the present time, only one room was available,
because she still had two children living at home. While they were in Europe,
they had taken advantage of bed and breakfast inns,traveling with their small
children. It was a delightful experience and that was the point in trying to
accommodate people with small children in her home. Relative to traffic on
673
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
the street, there would be no more traffic than she had normally, since she
frequently had guests in her home. If there were parking problems, they would
be on the side of the street from Broadway to the alley on Indiana Street.
Her family owned both of the homes on either side of Indiana Street, so there
would be no inconvenience as far as parking was concerned. She did not intend
to have a commercial day-in and day-out operation, but occasional guests from
overseas. Relative to the Olympics, she had relatives of her own visiting and
did not feel four bedrooms would be available at that time either. At most,
it would be one bedroom occasionally.
Mayor Roth explained that the subject Conditional Use Permit was one issue
where perhaps there had been more opposition from neighbors than any other
issue, and that was the reason why he made a distinction between the request
just heard and the subject request for a bed and breakfast inn.
Councilwoman Kaywood then posed questions to Mrs. Hawley. In concluding, she
(Mrs. Hawley) stated it was important to remember that she would be living in
the house as she had for twenty years and she would be the first to object if
the request was for a strictly commercial operation.
The Mayor asked to hear from a spokesman of the neighbors present in
opposition.
Mr. David Alexander, 314 South Indiana Street, immediately to the south of the
subject property, stated that he and some of his neighbors canvassed the area
and collected 94 signatures, all in opposition. Included with the petitions
was a copy of the assessors map of the area on which they had colored those
lots showing the location of residents who were in opposition. (The petition
and map was submitted to the Council--made a part of the record.) Mr.
Alexander then highlighted the major points of opposition, those being:
Visitors, whether one or four, would not be subject to working hours and their
coming and going at different hours would be disturbing; the Traffic Engineer
suggested all traffic be routed through the alley way and that traffic would
be going by his bedroom window; transients would be using the swimming pool,
also located by his bedroom window, who might not observe his right to peace
and quiet; having transients in the neighborhood would hinder their efforts to
establish a successful Neighborhood Watch; such a venture would create parking
problems; and transients could not be screened as could a regular boarder.
Jamie Flynn, 319 ~outh Ohio, stated she moved into the area one ann one-half
years ago. There were a great number of children in that community. People
that did not know where they were going would not be looking for children, but
street signs. She wanted to llve in a traditional neighborhood where she
could raise her children in safety, with no businesses or strangers, and that
was why they chose the subject area.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak.
674
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
Margot Wright, 1327 South Hickory (applicant of the previous request for a bed
and breakfast inn), stated that the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce was being
called regularly by citizens of the United States inquiring about bed and
breakfast inns, and Chambers all over the Nation were being asked the s%me.
There was a need for such places, there was a definite marketing segment, and
although the business would not bring in many tax dollars, it was a minority
that had a place in the business community.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council finds that subject
project will have no significant individual or cumulative adverse
environmental impact due to the approval of this negative declaration since
the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for low-medium
density residential land uses commensurate with the proposal; that no
sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the proposal; that the Initial
Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no significant individual or
cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and is, therefore, exempt from the
requirement to prepare an EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 83R-323 for adoption, denying
Conditional Use Permit No. 2454, reversing the findings of the City Planning
Commission. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 83R-323: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2454.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 83R-323 duly passed and adopted.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2453 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION: Application submitted by Marcel G. and Edna V. Mayer, to retain
a second-family (granny) unit on RS-7200 zoned property located at 1232 West
Romneya Drive.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC83-112, declared
that the subject project be exempt from the requirement to file an
Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act on the basis that there will be no significant
individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact due to the approval of
this negative declaration, since the Anaheim General Plan designates the
subject property for medium density residential land uses commensurate with
the proposal; that no sensitive environmental impacts are involved in the
proposal; and that the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicates no
significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts; and
further granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2453, subject to certain conditions.
675
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 9, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood at the meeting of July 5, 1983, and public hearing scheduled this date.
City Clerk Linda Roberts announced that a request for a continuance of the
public hearing was received from Mr. Mayer, dated August 2, 1983, and
confirmed yesterday when the applicant telephoned from Tucson, Arizona.
The Mayor asked if anyone was present on the subject issue; no one was present.
Councilman Overholt stated that at times he had represented Mr. Mayer and at
one time, the representation involved the subject parcel. He would feel more
comfortable if he disqualified himself on any discussion and voting. He had
received a fee in connection with matters relating to that parcel. He
thereupon stated he would abstain, even on a motion for continuance, as
required under FPPC Rules, and there would be a continuing abstention on the
matter by him.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to continue the public hearing on
Conditional Use Permit No. 2453 to September 6, 1983, at 1:30 p.m. Councilman
Roth seconded the motion. Councilman oVerholt abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By general consent, the Council recessed into Closed
Session. (2:26 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (4:25 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman Pickler
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:26 p.m.)
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK
676