1982/02/09City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February ~ 1982~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Nopkins
DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
FINANCE DIRECTOR: George P. Ferrone
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ronald L. Thompson
PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon W. Hoyt
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: The Reverend Rick Gastil, Melodyland Hotline Center, gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Seymour
and authorized by the City Council.
"We Believe in Marriage Day" - February 14, 1982
The proclamation was accepted by Tom and Barbara Dennis and Ruth Cook.
119: PRESENTATION: Reverend Park of Seoul, Korea, introduced the three
Korean Teen Life Singers, also from Seoul, to the Council and audience.
After singing two selections, they presented the Mayor with a pictorial
book illustrating their City and also a City flag. The Mayor welcomed the
group on behalf of the Council and presented them with miniature United States
and City flags.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meetings held May 5, 1981, and DecemBer 8, 1981. Councilman Bay seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Bay moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda,
after reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to
waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the
title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such
ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
135
City Hall, Anaheim, California -COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1982~ 1:30~ P'M~
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,982~471,64~ in accordance
with the 1981~82 Budget, were approved~
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTALMOTION CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the following items were approved as
recommended.
a. 123: Authorizing a First Amendment to the agreement with Price. Waterhouse
and Company, increasing the total fee for auditing services to $10,00fl~ for
their independent audit of the fiscal activities of the Comm~,nity Development
Block Grant Program for Fiscal Years 1979~80 and
b_. 137: Authorizing the participation of the City as a sponsor for the
Bond Analysts California Tour, at a cost of approximately $2,500 to be shared
by Utilities, Redevelopment and Finance Departments,
MOTION CARRIED.
128: MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENT ~ SIX MONTMS ENDED DECEMBER 31.,_198!: Finance
Director, George Ferrone, confirmed for Councilman Bay that page one of his report
dated February 3, 1982, where it stated, "Collections are 100.0% of the year~to-
date anticipated revenues,'~ included the Southern California Edison refund.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to receive and file the Monthly Financial Statement
for the six months ended December 31, 1981. Councilman Overholt seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
107/158: GFELLER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - REQUEST TO ACT AS CITY'S AGENT FOR
PROCESSING ~AND USE APPLICATIONS AND REIMEURSEMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS:
Councilman Bay referred to report dated January 28, 1982, from the Planning
Director, Ron Thompson. Speaking to Mr. Thompson, he asked that they not
only work with t~e minimum number of dwelling units of approximately 190, as
stated on page two, but that they work with the maximum number, or something
between the minimum and maximum.
Mr. Ron Thompson, Planning Director, confirmed that the 190 temporary mobile
home shelter park sites, as indicated, was a minimum number.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to authorize the Gfeller Development Company to
act as the City's agent for the purpose of processing land. use applications in
establishing two temporary shelter mobilehome parks on City-owned Shorb Wells
property and on the City-owned property located southerly of Lincoln Avenue
and adjacent to the Santa Aha River, and authorizing reimbursement for environ-
mental impact' report and soil analysis costs on the Shorb Wells property in an
amount not to exceed $45,000, if the site is not ultimately approved for
mobilehome park uses. Councilwoman K~ywogd seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
136
City Hall, Anaheim, California ~ COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9, 1982, 1:30 P.Mg.
175: DISPOSITION OF WHOLESALE ELECTRIC OVERCHARGE REFUNDS (FERC DOCKET NO.
ER-76-205) TO ELIGIBLE ANAHEIM RETAIL ELECTRIC CONSIrb~RS: Mayor Seymour
referred to report dated February 2, 1982, from the Public Utilities General
Manager, Gordon Hoyt, outlining the recommended plan to distribute the
approximate $6,300,000 refunded by the Southern California Edison Company
pursuant to the subject docket (report on file in the City Clerk's office).
The Public Utilities Board recommendation was that the refund be-placed in
the ECABF Balancing Account, thus eliminating the need for 12.9% ECABF increase
and to maintain rate stability to the end of the current fiscal year; whereas,
the recommendation of the Public Utilities General Manager was to distribute
the entire refund, including interest accrued to February 15, 1982, directly
to the customers as a one-time credit. He explained that Mr. Bill Erickson
had previously submitted a recommendation as to what might be appropriate
in the way of a refund or investment. Mr. Erickson now wanted an opportunity
to speak to the matter.
Mr. Bill Erickson, 301 East Nort5 Street, took exception to the action being
proposed by the Public Utilities General Manager and gave his reasons why,
his last point Being that he would study the proposal submitted, and if not
satisfied, would try to gain support for a City-wide initiative to form a
committee to ferret out all alternatives as to how to properly dispose of
the refund.
Mayor Seymour stated that Mr. Erickson had come to him and registered his concern
that the Council would be moving to make the refund in the fashion recommended
whereas he (Erickson) felt there should be a Citizens Committee to do so.
His (Seymour's) personal feeling, as expressed to Mr. Erickson~ was that the
method being recommended, that the $6.3 million, including any and all interest,
be refunded in the form of a credit based upon a formula that would disburse
the monies to the rate payers in the same percentage and format as they paid
for their electricity, was the most equitable program and policy the Council
could adop~ and that it should be in the hands of the rate payers as quickly
as possible without any delay. He felt there was an overriding concern on the
part of the rate payers and he sensed that their wishes would be to give them
their money back simply, directly and as soon as possible. He further felt
that the recommendation would do just that.
Public Utilities General Manager, Gordon Hoyt, then explained for the Mayor
that disbursement would begin approximately February 15, 1982, and it would
take approximately two months to complete.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved to adopt the recommended plan prepared by the
Public Utilities GeneralManager to distribute wholesale electric overcharge
refunds (FERC Docket No. ER-76-205) in the amount of $6,300,000 to all eligible
Anaheim electric consumers, as recommended in memorandum dated February 2, 1982,
from the Public Utilities General Manager. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL RESOLUTION CONSENT CALENDAR:
offered Resolution No. 82R-67 and 82R-68 for adoption.
Book.
Councilman Roth
Refer to Resolution
137
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES ~ February 9~ 1982~ 1:30
155: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-67: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ADOPTING AMENDED GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE EVALUATION OF
PROJECTS AND THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATIONS FURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
123: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-68: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING SUPPLEMENT NO, 12 TO LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO,
07-5055 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
SUPPLF~MENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood~ Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 82R-67 and 82R~68 duly passed and adopted.
123: PROGRAM CONTRACTORS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION SERVICE PROGRAM
(RCS): Councilwoman Kab~wood moved to authorize agreements with Volt Energy
Systems, Inc., for personnel services and with Enercom, Inc,, for a software
package for the implementation of the Residential Conservation Service (RCS)
Program, as recommended in memorandum dated February 2, 1982, from the Public
Utilities Board. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
175: MEAD-PHOENIX DC INTERTIE PROJECT FINANCING DOCUMENTS - PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC POWER AUTHORITY:
Councilman Roth moved to continue consideration of the subject for one week
at the request of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, who wanted an opportunity
to study the matter more thoroughly. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay and Councilman Seymour asked to be
provided with the following information in the interim: (il How would
transmission Be accomplished from Lake Mead to Anaheim; (2k A ballpark esti-
mate, if the City participated fully in the program, based on the $30-$43 million
total cost estimate, how the City would get its money §ack once they owned the
transmission lines; (3) How many megawatts are going to have to be transmitted
over those lines at some given price in order to insure a return on the potential
$50 million. Councilman Roth stated, considering the magnitude of the invest-
ment, even if the Chamber recommended approval, it should go to the vote of
the people. Mr. Hoyt stated that they could always do that before participating
in the final effort.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion of continuance. MOTION CARRIED.
138
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February ~, 1982~ 1:30 P.M.
105: REPORT RELATING TO THE STATUS OF THE YOUTH COMMISSION: (Continued from
the meeting of January 1.9, 1982--see minutes that date.) On motion by Council-
woman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, consideration of the subject was
continued to March 2, 1982, to give an opportunity for the Anaheim Union High
School District and Orange Unified School District an opportunity to submit
their input. MOTION CARRIED.
105: APPOINTMENT TO THE GOLF~COURSE ADVISORY COMMISSION: (Continued from
the meetings of December 22, 1981, Jannary 19, 1982, and January 26, 1982--see
minutes those dates.) Mayor Seymour opened nominations. Councilman Roth
nominated Tom Hoag; Councilwoman Kaywood nominated Michael Jacobs.
Councilman Overholt moved to close nominations. Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor noted that Mr. Jacobs and Mr. Hoag were present; Councilwoman Kaywood
asked to hear from Mr. Jacobs.
Mr. Michael Jacobs thereupon answered questions posed by Councilwoman Kaywood;
Mr. Hoag answered questions posed by Council Members Roth and Overholt.
The Mayor then asked for a Roll Call Vote on the nominations in the order in
which they were offered: Tom Hoag:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Bay, Roth and Seymour
Kaywood
None
Mr. Hoag was thereby appointed to the Golf Course Advisory Commission. Council-
woman Kaywood changed her vote to make the appointment unanimous.
156: STAFF RESPONSE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISKMENT OF A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION:
(Continued from the meetings of January 5, 1982, and January 12, 1982--see minutes
those dates.) Councilman Overholt moved to continue the subject for one week
to February 16, 1982. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Seymour asked that Mr. Louis Dexter, now Director-Treasurer of the Public
Safety Coalition, be notified to appear at that meeting as requested in his
letter dated February 5, 1982.
166: REQUEST FOR DISPLAY DF TEMPORARY FLAGS AND BANNERS SEVEN DAYS A WEEK:
Request by Sally Talebi, for Webster Heights condominiums, for an amendment to
Subsection 18.05.085.050 of the Code relating to permitted days of display for
temporary flags and banners in residential zones.
Sally Talebi, Tarbell Realty, Orange, representing Webster Heights condominiums,
stated they were requesting special permission to allow them to display their
flags seven days a week instead of only weekends and holidays as is normally allowed.
Their project was on a street with many apartment buildings and it was difficult
for agents or prospective buyers to see where they were. As well, because of the
depressed real estate situation, they were asking for this special permission for
six months.
139
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES ~ February 9~ 1982, 1:30
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood stated that the subject project was given many
benefits and special privileges. Now they were requesting that the Code
permitting temporary flags and banners in residential zones be amended to
accommodate theirp request. She maintained that they could not bend any further
in this case and thereupon moved to deny the request, as recommended in
memorandum dated February 3, 1982, from the Assistant Director for Zoning.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1584 AND.VARIANCE NO. 2756 - SXTSNTION OF
TIME: Councilman Roth moved to approve the one-year retroactive extension of
time requested by P & L Builders in their letter dated January 18, 1982, on
Conditional Use Permit No. 1584 and Variance No. 2266, to establish a model
home complex, with certain Code waivers on the east side of Anaheim Hills Road,
south of Santa Aha Canyon Road, and as recommended in memorandum dated
January 25, 1982, from the Assistant Director of Zoning; extention of time to
expire January 6, 1983. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
107: HOUSING TASK FORCE - REPORT FROM THE ANAHEIM TASK FORCE COMMITTEE: (See
minutes of October 13, 1981, and October 27, 1981, and January 26, 1982, and
February 2, 1982, all pertaining to the subject.l
After City Attorney William Hopkins again explained the Fair Political Practices
Commission (FPPC) ruling relative to the three Council Members who had a conflict
of interest (see minutes of February 2, 1982, where the explanation was given),
Mayor Seymour and Councilman Overholt stated they were going to abstain from all
discussions and decisions relative to an Occupancy Inspection Ordinance; Council-
man Overholt stated he presently had the same interests he had when the matter
was first broached in October of 1981 (see minutes of October 13, 1981, and
October 27, 1981),-i.e., a representation of clients who owned rental property
in the City and who would be adversely affected by such an ordinance; Mayor
Seymour confirmed the basis of his conflict which continued at present was as
a result of an interest he had in his company and being involved in the property
management business and personal ownership of a number of rental properties.
Councilman Roth, although he had a conflict, was able to participate in accordance
with the previous FPPC ruling.
The Mayor asked Councilman Roth, since he was going to chair this portion of the
meeting, to first deliberate on the Occupancy Inspection Ordinance and finalize
that matter so that the full Council could then participate in the discussion
and decision making on the balance of the report from the Housing Task Force.
Councilman Seymour left Council Chambers (2:38 p.~.~.
140
City Hall~ Anaheim~ .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1982~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilmam Overholt stated he was going to remain in the Chamber audience but
would not participate, just as he had done at the meeting of October 22~ 1~81.
Mayor Pro Tem Roth then asked to hear from the Housing Task Force Committee,
focusing on Part One of the discussion on the Occupancy Inspection Ordinance.
Mr. Allan Hughes, previously vice-chairman and now Chairman of the Housing
Task Force Committee, referred to both the majority report and minority report
submitted (on file in the City Clerk's office). Limiting his discussion first
to th~ Rental Certificate Program, he directed their attention to the majority
report and the sheet entitled, "Rental Certificate Program" from which he
read excerpts, the essence being the two following recommendations: That the
Task Force recommend the City "adopt a Rental Certificate program requiring
inspections to assure the maintenance of honsing code standards of all rental
units at the time of change of occupancy.'~' This would be valid for a period
of one year, regardless of the number of changes of occupancy during that
year.
The second, an alternative to the first~"The adoption of a pre-sale inspection
program to ensure that all rental units conform to the State's mfnimum housing
code."
Mr. Hughes then summarized the minority view (see sheet--Rental Certificate
and Sales Certificate Programs) which did not concur with the above two
recommendations.
The following people then spoke in favor of an Occupancy Inspection Ordinance
as recommended in the majority report from the Housing Task Force: Bill Ernst,
Task Force Member and an apartment house owner in Anaheim; Ernie Renallo, Task
Force Member and apartment house owner in Anaheim; Sheri Pignone, past chairman
of the Task Force, 1181 Crown Street.
The following people spoke against an Occupancy Inspection Ordinance: Robert Shaw,
Task Force Member and an apartment house owner in Anaheim; Augie Lopez, Task
Force Member, representing the Anaheim Board of Realtors.
Mr. Fred Larrigan, 1541 West Ball Road, apartment manmger, was not im favor of
an Occupancy Inspection Ordinance, but urged that "teeth' be put into the laws
already on the books and that they be enforced stringently. He wanted to see
an on-site manager for apartment houses in the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Roth explained that the Council would now deliberate and take
action on the foregoing discussion.
Councilman Bay stated he personally felt the additional recommendations from the
Task Force, which they were going to be considering in detail in the second part
of the discussion, offered what possible solutions there were within the law
that the Council had the authority to use, versus some of the things a number of
141
City Hall, Anaheim~ Cs11fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1~82~ 1;30 P,~ __
people felt an inspection program would solve, He did not agree with the latter,
When he considered the way a rental certificate program~ presale inspection
program, or occupancy ordinance would have to be enforced and what would have
to be given up to create and enforce it, from a real-world, practical standpoint~
he did not believe it would work or solve all tbe problems. He wanted to
see that aspect ended now so that the full Council could-move on the problems
realistically. He felt the City's new nuisance ordinance would give them more
power to handle the exception rather than passing a 51anket law,
Councilwoman Kaywood felt that the discussion had zeroed in on the problem~-slum
landlords charging by the head who had no management and did not care, They had
to deal with that and she hoped that they could arrive at a solution today,
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to table indefinitely any further discussion on the
Housing Task Force recommendations of a Rental Certificate Program or Presale
Inspection Program or an Occupancy Inspection Ordinance. Councilman Roth
seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay stated his reasons for offering the
motion were (1) he did not believe that any of the three recommendations were
the solution; (12) he did no't think that a ~ajority of the people .in the City,
if ali. three issues were on the ballot~ would vote for any one of them and,
(3) his motion, if passed, would enable the full Council to work on solutions
to the problem.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was going to support the motion because she
wanted to see a solution to the problem today,
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion, Councilman Seymour was temporarily
absent. Councilman Overholt .abstained. MOTION CARRIED,
RECESS: By genera], consent of the Council MemBers present, the Council recessed
for ten minutes (4:08 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present (4:17 p.m.).
Mayor Seymour then asked that they continue with Part Two of the discussion with
regard to th~ "R~commendation~ a~ Possible Solutions to Housing Pr0hlems
Identified" (on file in the City Clerk's office)~, which sheet listed fifteen
items. He asked Mr. Hughes to address each of those items separately.
Mr. Hughes then read each of the fifteen items, and after doing so, indicated
those with which the minority report concurred (.see sheet--Housing Task Force--
Minority Report--showing that the minority opinion concurred with twelve of the
fifteen recommendations).
142
City Hall, Anaheim~ California -- COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1982, 1:30 P.M.
The following motions were then offered, after extensive discussion and questioning
took place between the Council and Staff for purposes of clarification as well as,
in some instances, comments from Mr. Hughes and other Task Force Committee members:
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 1 - Councilwoman Kaywood moved to direct the
City Attorney to draw language to amend the existing ordinance or to create
a new ordinance that would provide landlords with the authority to control
occupancy of their units, making it a violation of that ordinance to have a
tenant violate a rental occupancy agreement relative to the number of occupants.
Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Relative to the foregoing motion, the City Attorney explained that the recommenda-
tion referred to a "Palm Springs Ordinance," but, in fact, it was a Sacramento
ordinance. Further, Anaheim presently had a nuisance ordinance that was now in
effect.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 2 ~ Councilwoman Kaywood moved to direct the
City Attorney to draft an ordinance relative to the graffiti issue~ making the
owner responsible for the removal of unsightly and unnecessary markings, drawings,
decorations and graffiti on exterior walls of his property. Councilman
Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED,
Councilman Roth also asked that with regard to the foregoing motio~that the City
Attorney include his opinion relative to the legality of enforcement.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 3 - Councilman Overholt moved to direct the City
Attorney to prepare a report, advising how abandoned and illegally parked vehicles
were being dealt with at the present time. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation Nos. 4, 5 and 12 - Councilman Seymour moved that
relative to those three recommendations, that prior to the implementation of
any amended ordinances or code enforcement programs as a result of the Task
Force report and subsequent Council action, that the City Manager make a
recommendation as to what personnel requirements there might be as well as the
cost of those requirements based upon the level of service the Council wishes
to offer. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recomendation Nos. 6 and 7 - Councilman 0verh01t moved that the
City Manager indicate what the cost would be to formulate a program to keep
the public advised as to the Nuisance Ordinance. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 8 - Councilman Bay moved that the City Manager
report back with recommendations and data on areas with a high rate
of broken street lights and the Best and most economical method to mitigate the
problem. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
143
City Hall, Anaheim, California -~ COUNCIL MINUTES - Fehr~uary 9~ 19B2~ 1;30
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 9 - Councilwoman Kaywood moved to direct the
City Attorney to research the recommendation on changing the requirement for
bulk trash bins from five to four units, and advise the Council accordingly.
Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No~ 10 ~ Councilman Seymour moved to direct the
City Manager to provide a report as to how these recommendations, if implemented,
would be followed up by staff. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 11 ~ Councilman Seymour moved to direct staff
to provide a feasi§ility study relative to parking on poss£hle condominium
conversions on Arlington, Brewster and Marlboro streets and~ further, that
staff consider the possibility of using some of the park land areas northeast
of the Robin, Wren, Blue Jay area for additional parking on a pilot project
basis; encouraging existing Housing Task Force Members to work with City staff
on the~atter. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 13 ~. Councilman Roth moved to direct City staff
to inform citizens that whenever they complain, that their names will be kept in
the strictest confidence unless the information is required by a court order.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 14 - Councilman Overholt moved that Chapter
6.80.050 of the Anaheim Municipal Code entitled, Abandoned, Wrecked, and In-
operative Vehicles, be actively enforced By the Chief of Police. Councilwoman
Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Re: Recommendation No. 15 - Councilman Roth m~ved to direct the City
Attorney to prepare a report on limitation of occupancy~ Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motiom. MOTION ~CAP, RIED.
Mayor Seymour stated that what he was voting on today was to see something refined
to writing, more specific, with costs where appropriate, for consideration. He
did not want people to believe it was his intent to "rubber stamp" the items. He
wanted to see the City Council be as tough as they could relative to solving the
problems as they existed, in his opinion, in approximately ten percent of the
City. He was not interested in Burdening the other ninety percent of the City
to solve that ten percent problem. A vote today might not mean carte blanche
approval tomorrow; Councilman 0verholt stated that he (.Seymour). was speaking
for the entire Council. They wanted to see something to look at preliminarily;
Councilman Bay stated if he pictured these as broad, sweeping ordinances across
the City, he would be opposing most of them, but if they could be worked into a
nuisance ordinance where they were set up on a complaint basis and/or nuisance
ordinance hearings where there was a known tangible problem, they would then
want the "teeth" to do so.
144
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1982, 1:30 P.M.
On behalf of the Council, Mayor Seymour thanked Mrs. Pignone and the entire Task
Force for the work they had accomplished.
The Mayor asked staff a reasonable time fHr them to respond to the actions just
taken by the Council; both the City A~torney and Planning Director agreed that
thirty days would be necessary.
The Mayor requested that when prepared, that the drafts, reports, etc., also be
submitted to the Task Force within that thirty-day period, as well as the Council,
and subsequently, the Council could set another meeting time.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 81-82-11, VARIANCE
NO. 3249, (TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11463) AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Application
by Terra Firma Properties, Inc., for a change in zone from CG to RM-3000, to
establish a one-lot, 14-unit condominium subdivision on property located on
the south side of Wilken Way, east of HarBor Boulevard, with Code waivers of
minimum lot area per dwelling unit and minimum recreational/leisure area per
dwelling unit. (Continued from the meeting of February 2, 1982.)
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC81-258 declared
that the subject project be exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental
impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act since there would 5e no significant individual or cumulative adverse
environmental impact due to this project, and further, approved Reclassification
No. 81~82-11, subject to the following conditions:
1. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans
on file with the Office of the Executive Director of Public Works.
2. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined
to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of
structural framing.
3. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
4. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satis-
factory to the City Engineer.
5. That the owner of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate
by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is
issued.
6. That all private streets shall be developed in accordance with the City of
Anaheim's Standard Detail No. 122 for private streets, including installation of
street name signs. Plans for the private street lighting, as required by the
standard detail, shall be submitted to the Building Division for approval and
inclusion with the building plans prior to the issuance of building permits.
(Private streets are those which provide primary access and/or circulation
within the project.)
145
City Hall, Anaheim~ California -COUNCILMINUTES - February
7. That an ordinance rezoning the subject property shall in no event become
effective except upon or following the recordation of Final Tract Map No. 11463
within the time specified in Government Code Section 66463~5 or suc~ further
time as the advisory agency or City Council may grant,
8. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay th~ traffic signal
assessment fee (Ordinance No. 3896) in an amount as determined by the
City Council, for each new dwelling unit prior to the issuance of a Building
permit.
9. That a perpetual easement agreement with the owner of the property to the
west, providing for circulation of vehicles and trash trucks from one parcel
to the other, shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office for review and
approval; then be filed and recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder.
10. That all proposed driveway locations on subject property shall be subject to
approval of the City Traffic Engineer prior to issuance of building permits.
11. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall present evidence
satisfactory to the Chief Building inspector that the proposed project is in.
conformance with Council Policy Number 542, Sound Attenuation in Residential
Projects.
12. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall present evidence
satisfactory to the Chief Building Inspector that the units will be in conformance
with Noise Insulation Standards specified in the California Administrative Code,
Title 25.
13. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Revision No. 1
of Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
14. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property,
Condition No. 9r, above-mentioned, shall he completed. The provisions or
rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of
the Planning Commission unless said conditions are complied with within one
year from the date hereof, or such further time as the Planning Commission
may grant.
15. That Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, and 13, above mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC81-259, granted
Variance No. 3249, subject to the following conditions:
146
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES ~ February 9~ 1982, 1:30 P.M.
1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification
No. 81-82-11, now pending.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Revision No. 1
of Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2.
A review of the Planning Commission'~s decision was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood at the meeting of January 5, 1982, and public hearing scheduled
February 2, 1982, and continued to this date~
Councilwoman Kaywood stated under the new RM-300O ordinance~ the maximum number
of units that would be permitted on the property was thirteen, and fourteen were
being requested. There was also a variance from the minimum recreational leisure
area. W~.en the new RM-3000 ordinance was adopted, it was her understanding there
were not to be any waivers to the Code.
The Mayor asked the applicant to come forward and be prepared to answer
questions. He stated, as he understood, the reason the variance was being
requested was due to the fact a hardship existed Because of the irregular
shape of the property and that the requests were minimal, amounting to less
than a seven percent and eighteen percent deviance from Code.
Mr. Jack Davis~ developer, 1345 North Grand, Santa Ana, stated that they were
one-half of one unit shy of fourteen. He then gave the background of his
project wherein they originally requested fifteen units. In concluding, he
stated that the project was marginal at fourteen units and it was not economically
feasible to proceed with thirteen units.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak in favor or opposition.
Mrs. Alice LeVecke, resident of West Winds Mobile Home Park, explained that they
were not opposed to the project being built since t~ey would like to have the
whole area remodeled. Their concern was relative to the. traffic that would he
generated on Wilken Way since access was only on Wilken Way via two driveways.
Mr. Jim Martin, Terra Firma Properties, representing t~e owners of the adjacent
properties, stated they were in support of the proposed condominium project which
was the final segment of their plan. To address Mrs. LeVe~ke's concern, had the
land been developed as commercial, more traffic would have been generated.
Mr. Bob Napoles~ 1437 Apollo Avenue, stated he was in favor of the condominium
project and concurred with the Planning Commission. He also represented the
Carpenters Union No. 2203 in Anaheim, comprised of 1,620 members.
There being no further persons wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the public
hearing.
147
City Ha!l~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES ~ February ~ 1982~ 1:30 P.M.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVEDECLARATION: On motion hy Councilman Roth,
seconded by Councilman Overholt, the City Council"finds that this project would
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 medium density residential land use as
commensurate with the proposal; tfiat no sensitive environmental impacts are
involved in the proposal, and that the initial study submitted by the petitioner
indicated no significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts
and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report. MOTION CARRIED,
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 82R-69 for adoption, approving Reclassifi-
cation No. 81-82-1]. in accordance with City Planning Commission recommendations~
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOI~TION NO. 82R-69: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF TfIE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN
ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED, (81-82-11)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 82R~69 duly passed and adopted~
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 82R-70 for adoption, granting Variance
No. 3249, in accordance with City Planning Commission recommendations, Refer
to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 82R-70: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO, 3249,
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood referred to the staff report to
the Planning Commission Gage five-a)~ Item No. 5~ wherein it indicated that
a 142-unit condominium project was approved by the Planning Commission (Variance
No. 3].25) located on the property to the east of the subject property, That
proposal permitted a density twenty-eight percent greater than allowed by Code;
however~ with subsequent amendments to the RM-3000 Code standards~ the project
currently met Code. This was something they d~scussed in great detail~ If the
new Code permitting the higher density was to be adopted, there would be no
variances from it other than something of a technical nature, If they started
to say that t.his was only seven percent~ and this eighteen percent~ the whole
thing was a "farce" and they were just allowing higher density.
148
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9~, 1982~ 1:30 P~M~
Councilman Bay stated this was not RMv3000, but RM--2800. When the new
ordinance went into effect on RM-3000, he made his position clear, that he
would not request public hearing to review projects in RM-3000 which met the
new code. However, the proposed project was at variance to the RM-3000 and
he would not support it.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Roth and Seymour
Kaywood and Bay
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 82R-70 duly passed and adopted.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Bay,
the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and
recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar Agenda:
1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and
referred to the City's Risk Manager or Bayly, Martin and Fay/San Antonio, or
payment allowed:
Denied and referred to Risk Manager:
a. Claim submitted by Firemans Fund Insurance, Cecelia R. McKinzie, Insured,
for injuries purportedly sustained due to an accident caused by a defective
traffic signal at the intersection of Haster and Freedman Way, on or about
October 8, 1981.
Denied and referred to Bayly, Martin & Fay/San Antonio:
b. Claim submitted by Raymond Thomas Harrell for damages purportedly sustained
due to false arrest and incarceration, at the 91 Freeway at the Imperial Highway
on-ramp at 0020 hours, on or about November 1, 1981.
2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and
filed:
a. 105:
b. 105:
c. 105:
Golf Course Advisory Commission--Minutes of January 21, 1982.
Community Services Board--Minutes of December 10, 1981.
Senior Citizens Commission--Minutes of December 10, 1981.
MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 82R-71 through
82R-78, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommenda-
tions and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the
Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book.
149
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 9.~ 1982~ 1:30
158: RESOLUTION NO, 82R-71: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEFDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION, (Duralith
Corporation; Anaheim Motel, Ltd.; E. O~ Rodeffer, et ux.)
169: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-72: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AbL~HEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: STREET
LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1981-5, TRACT NO. 209D, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS, 24-676-6329-12090~37300 AND 25-676-6329~12090-37300~
APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION THEREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.: AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CII"f CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF, (Bids to be opened on March 4, 1982, at 2:00 p.m.)
150: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-73; 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:
JOHN MARSHALL PARK BUILDING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 16-812-710.5,
APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION T~EREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PJ~NS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.: AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF, (Bids to be opened on March 11, 1982, at 2:00 p.m.)
150: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-74: 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:
EUCAL%~PTUS PARK ~UILDING, IN THE CITer OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO, 16-802-7105,
APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION THEREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC,: AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened on March 11~ 1982, at 2:00 p.m,~
169: RESOLUTION NO, 82R-75: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE CO~[PLETION 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 CON~TRUCT AND COMPLETE T~E FOLLOWINC PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: CARBON
CREEK BIKEWAY - PHASE I - CRESCENT TO GILBERT, IN T~E CITY OF ANAIiEIM,
ACCOI/NT NO. 17-798-6325-E8010. (Dwigb: Porter Construction Company, Inc,)~
176: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-76: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND
SERVICE EASEMENTS. (81-15A, public hearing to be held March 2~ 1982, 3:00 p:m.)
150
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES -February 9~ 19.82, 1:30 P.M.
176: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-77: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIlM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND
SERVICE EASEMENTS. (81-20A, public hearing to be held March 2, 1982, 3:00 p,m.)
RESOLUTION NO. 82R-78: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 1520 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 75R-188 ,_NULL AND VOID.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos, 82R~71 through 82R~78~ both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1923 - AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 81R-493,
NUNC PRO TUNC: Assistant Director for Zoning~ Annika Santalahti, first answered
questions posed by Councilwoman Kaywood relative to the snbject.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No~ 82R~79 for adoption, authorizing an
amendment to Resolution No. 81R-49~3, nunc pro tunc~ amending the conditions
for approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 1923~ Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 82R-79: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AN ~MENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO~ 81R-493~ NUNC PRO TUNC.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES :.
NOES:
AB. SENT:
COUNCIL MEM2LERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 82R-79. duly passed and adopted~
PUBLIC HEARING DATE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.~ 2288 AND EIR NO. 251 -
CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL: On motion hy Councilwoman Kaywood~ seconded by Councilman
Overholt, the date and time for a public ~earing to review the City Planning
Commission's action concerning tRe ._~ubject to permit a 1600-room hotel on PR
zoned property located at tha Anaheim Convention Center, with a Code waiver
of minimum number, size and design of off~street parking spaces was set for
Tuesday, February 16, 1982, at 3:00 p.m. MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 4307: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4307 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
151
City Hall, Anaheim, California ? COt~CIL MINUTES - February 9~ 1982
ORDINANCE NO. 4307: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAW~IMMUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING, (80-81-44, CL)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood~ Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No, 4307 duly passed and adopted,
179/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4308: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 4308
for First Reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4308: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTIONS
18.86.010 AND 18.86.020 OF CHAPTER 18.86, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM I~UNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO ZONING, (Types of property included in PR zone)
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to discuss
personnel matters and pending litigation,
Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:00 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present. (6:14 p.m.~
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn to Tuesday, February 16, 1982,
at 11:30 a.m. in the seventh floor conference room for the purpose of a Closed
Session. Councilman Overholt seconded the ~otion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:15 p.m.)
Mayor Seymour called the adjourned regular session to order on Tuesday,
February 16, 1982, at 11:30 a.m., in the seventh floor Conference Room.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By general consent the City Council recessed into
Closed Session. (11:30 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present (1:31 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood,
the Council Meeting of February 9, 1982, was adjourned. MOTION CARRIED.
(1:31 p.m.)
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK
BY
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
152