Loading...
1982/04/06City Hall, Anaheim, California - COONCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: AB SENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: 3:56 p.m.) COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts CITY ENGINEER: William Devitt ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR--ZONING: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour (Mayor Seymour entered the Council Chambers at Annika Santalahti Mayor Pro Tem Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: A Moment of Silence was observed in lieu of the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ben Bay led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Pro Tem Roth and authorized by the City Council: "Angel Day" - April 13, 1982. "Victims Rights Week" - April 18-24, 1982. "Keep America and Anaheim Beautiful Week" - April 18-24, 1982. Mrs. Eleanor Bay accepted the Keep America and Anaheim Beautiful Week proclamation. 119: PRESENTATION - GIFT OF A ROSE GARDEN FOR PEARSON PARK: Mrs. Eleanor Bay, representing Anaheim Beautiful, explained that their organization had coordinated an effort to create a rose garden at Pearson Park in front of the open air theater. They appealed to various service organizations in Anaheim and had an excellent response, and through donations, they were able to purchase thirty rose bushes which had been planted by the Parks Department. The bushes were a gift on behalf of the service organizations involved, which she then named. Formal dedication was to take place on May 22, 1982, at 10:00 a.m., and a plaque would be set in place inscribed - Sarah Fay Pearson Rose Garden Dedicated To Anaheim Service Groups, May 22, 1982. Anaheim Beautiful was presenting the garden as a gift to the City on behalf of the service groups involved. Mayor Pro Tem Roth thanked Mrs. Bay and the organizations involved. The City was most happy to accept the gift and felt the garden was appropriately named. 312 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Mrs. Sarah Fay Pearson stated she would not be present today if the garden were not dedicated to volunteers who had played a very important part in the history of Anaheim. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held July 7 and July 21, 1981, and March 2, 1982. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion and abstained on the minutes of March 2, 1982, since he was not present at that meeting. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of ali 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. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of ~2,004,208.03, in accordance with the 1981-82 Budget, were approved. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL MOTION CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the following items were approved as recommended: a. 139/182: Opposing AB-2804 (Waters) which would extend relocation requirements to private property owners undertaking activities in a Redevelopment Project Area, and communicating this opposition to members of the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development and the City's legislative representatives. b. 123: Authorizing a Subgrant Agreement with the Orange County Manpower Commission in the amount of $81,475, to provide funds for work experience and classroom training to youth under Title IV-YETP of CETA, authorizing the City to incur costs and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and modifications thereto, for the period covering October 1, 1981, through September 30, 1982. c. 123: Approving the assignment of Criterion Development, Inc.'s rights in the special water facilities reimbursement agreement relating to Tract No. 8713 to Lighthouse Equities, Inc., and Rangeview Investments, Inc. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 129/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4321: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4321 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4321: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4.95, SECTION 4.95.080 (b) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO FALSE ALARMS PREVENTION PAYMENT. (Increasing the false alarm prevention fee to $50 for each false alarm in excess of three in a 12-month period.) 313 City Hall~ Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMeNTAL RESOLUTION CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilman Bay offered Resolution Nos. 82R-176 through 82R-180, both inclusive, for adoption, as recommended. Refer to Resolution Book. 167: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-176: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED UP TO THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 1982, FOR A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: ANAHEIM STADIUM TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 24-795-6325-E5260 AND 49-795-6325-E5260. 167: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-177: 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: ANAHEIM STADIUM TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 24-795-6325-E5260 & 49-795-6325-E5260; 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 May 6, 1982, at 2:00 p.m.) 175: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-178: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE FAIRMONT SUBSTATION, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 55-665-6329-75800-36200. (Grissom & Johnson, Inc., ~456,048.14) 153: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-179: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT KENT S. WHEELER IS DISABLED WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT LAW FOR THE POSITION OF FIRE FIGHTER I. (Effective April 7, 1982) 156: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-180: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING FOR IMPLEMENTING THE ANAHEIM CAREER CRIMINAL APPREHENSION PROGRAM, AGREEING TO PROVIDE REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS,~ AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARtY DOCLrMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH SAID GRANT. (Appropriating funds into Program No. 17-195 in the amount of $100,000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay and Roth None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 82R-176 through 82R-180, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 123: AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH THE VISTA DEL RIO RANCHO WATER COMPANY: Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 82R-181 for adoption, authorizing a letter agreement clarifying and modifying certain statements contained in the 314 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. subject agreement, as recommended in memorandum dated April 6, 1982, from the Assistant City Manager, William T. Hopkins. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 82R-181: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING A LETTER AGREEMENT CLARIFYING AND MODIFYING CERTAIN STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN VISTA DEL RIO RANCHO WATER CObfPANY AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay and Roth None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 82R-181 duly passed and adopted. 123: SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CARL WARREN & COMPANY: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, a Second Amendment to the agreement with Carl Warren & Company was authorized, decreasing their monthly fee to ~500 for claims administrative services provided to the City, effective April 1, 1982, as recommended in memorandum dated April 1, 1982, from the City Attorney's office. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 162: REQUEST BY THE YMCA FOR WAIVER OF PARADE PERMIT FEE: Request by Mr. Kevin Whitley, Interim General Director, Anaheim Family YMCA, 1515 West North Street, in letter dated March 15, 1982, for a waiver of the ~25 parade permit fee for the 5th Annual YMCA Orange County Marathon to be held Saturday, April 17, 1982. Memorandum dated April 6, 1982, from the City Attorney's office, recommended denial of the request, since there was no provision in the Anaheim Municipal Code to waive the fee. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to deny the request for waiver of the parade permit fee. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Councilman Overholt abstained since he was a member of the YMCA Board. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Pro Tem Roth offered to pay the $25 fee personally; it was finally determined, a£ter a brie~ discussion, that each Council Member would contribute ~5 to pay for the cost of the fee. VARIANCE NO. 3041 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Request by Dr. Andrew W. Klein for an extension of time to Variance No. 3041, to construct accessory living quarters, garage and fence on RS-HS-22,000(SC) zoned property located at 191 South Starlight Drive, was submitted. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the requested extension of time was approved, to expire September 19, 1982, as recommended in memorandum dated March 29, 1982, from the Assistant Planning Director--Zoning, Annika Santalahti. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 315 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6~ 1982, 1:30 P.M. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-40 AND VARIANCE NO. 2918 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Request by Boulevard Development for extensions of time to Reclassification No. 76-77-40 and Variance No. 2918, to establish a 30-lot, RS-HS-22,000(SC) zoned subdivision on property located at the northeast corner of Canyon Rim Road and Fairmont Boulevard. On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the requested extensions of time were approved, to expire April 19, 1983, as recommended in memorandum dated March 26, 1982, from the Assistant Planning Director--Zoning. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, 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 filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claim denied and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Allstate Insurance for Aurelio and Carmen Leon, Insured, for reimbursement of monies paid to their insureds for personal property damages purportedly sustained due to a fire caused by a fallen electric wire at 1741 Sallie Lane, on or about January 10, 1982. Claims denied and referred to Bayly, Martin and Fay/San Antonio: b. Claim submitted by Rasoul Shambazi Dastjerdi for personal injuries purportedly sustained due to actions of Anaheim Police Officers in the area of 2021 South Harbor Boulevard, on or about December 19, 1981. c. Claim submitted by Peter Rojas for personal injuries purportedly sustained due to actions of an Anaheim Police Officer on or about February 20, 1982. d. Claim submitted by Miguel Sosa for personal property damages purportedly sustained due to actions of the Anaheim Police Department at the Police Auction, on or about February 20, 1982. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim denied and referred to Bayly, Martin and Fay/San Antonio: e. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim submitted by Stephen Bruce Dennis for personal injuries purportedly sustained due to actions of Anaheim Police Officer at 311 East Clifton, Apartment 1, on or about September 17, 1981. 2. 108: DINNER-DANCING PLACE PERMIT APPLICATION: Application by Yueng-Yi Tsai, Mugsy Malone's, 1731 South Harbor Boulevard, for dancing seven nights a week, 7:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., was approved in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Police. 316 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6~ 1982, 1:30 P.M. 3. 123: HASKETT BRANCH LIBRARY HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING~ CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1: Authorization for Contract Change Order No. 1, in the amount of $3,614.06, bringing the original contract amount to $53,977.06, was approved in accordance with the recommendation of the City Engineer; Account No. 75-252-7121, Air Conditioning Systems, Inc., contractor. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 82R-182 through 82R-185, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. Roll Call Vote: 158: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-182: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Carl P. Lawson, et ux.; Richard B. Sadler, et ux.; Victor F. Guerreo, et ux.; Clarence Espinoza, et ux.; Thomas William Atkinson, et ux.; Guzman S. Juarez, et ux.; Ellen Lafler) 164: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-183: 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: PATRICK HENRY NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 25-791-6325-E1230; 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 May 6, 1982, at 2:00 p.m.) 169: RESOLUTION NO. 82R-184: 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: LEWIS STREET STREET IMPROVEMENT, 469' S/0 TO 1171' S/O 0RANGEW00D AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 13-792-6325-E2730 AND 24-676-6329-1205-37300. (R. J. Noble Company) RESOLUTION NO. 82R-185: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 291 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 62R-886 NULL AND VOID. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay and Roth None Seymour 317 Cit~ Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 82R-182 through 82R-185, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 129/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4272: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4272 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4272: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING CHAPTER 16.08 OF TITLE 16 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING NEW CHAPTER 16.08 IN ITS PLACE AND STEAD ADOPTING THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1979 EDITION WITH AMENDMENTS THERETO. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay stated he could not support the ordinance and would have to vote "no" since he was opposed to mandatory smoke detectors in single-family residences. He voiced that opinion months ago when the Fire Code Amendment was first discussed and his opinion had not changed. Otherwise, he could support most of the proposed Uniform Fire Code. A vote was then taken on the foregoing Ordinance. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood and Roth NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 4272 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 4319: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4319 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4319: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (81-82-9, CO, northwest corner of State College Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABgENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay and Roth None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 4319 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 4320: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4320 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4320: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (80-81-32, CL, 823 South Beach Boulevard) 318 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay and Roth None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 4320 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NOS. 4322 AND 4323: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance Nos. 4322 and 4323 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4322: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (80-81-31, RS-7200, 1524 and 1532 West Orangewood Avenue, Tract No. 11482) ORDINANCE NO. 4323: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (61-62-69(96) ML, southwest corner of Jefferson and Coronado Streets) ORDINANCE NO. 4324: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4324 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 4324: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-36(4) RM-2400, north side of Falmouth Avenue, west of Romneya Drive, Tract No. 9684) REPAIR OF ROADWAY AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS: Councilman Overholt stated that he was pleased to see that letters were going forward to the Railroad Company to try to have the railroad crossings in the City improved. He was especially concerned with regard to the crossings on Broadway Street and Lincoln Avenue, since they involved the two main arteries into the City, and they were in such a state of disrepair as to be a hazard to the safety of those using the crossings. Discussion followed between Council and staff relative to the matter, during which City Engineer William Devitt stated that the City had expressed to the Railroad that the Council and the community was desirous of having the work completed. Councilman Overholt asked that staff continue to follow-up on the matter with th~ Railroad and that if nothin~ po~itiw occurred in 90 day~, ~trong~r action would be taken by the Council at that time. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Attorney requested a Closed Session to discuss litigation with action anticipated. Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (2:15 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor Pro Tem called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, with the exception of Councilman Seymour. (3:08 p.m.) 319 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. SHELLY SLACK VS. CITY OF ANAHEIM: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Bay, the City Attorney was authorized to settle Orange County Superior Court Case No. 32-82-85, Shelly Slack vs. City of Anaheim, for a sum not to exceed $12,000. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 134: PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 175 AND RECLASSIFICAION NO. 73-74-36 (READVERTISED): City of Anaheim, (1) amendment to the Land Use Element, to reconsider the approved density for a land area of approximately 17.8 acres of land between Coronet and Falmouth Avenues, approximately 650 feet west of Romneya Drive, and (2) to consider an amendment to the Land Use Element of Anaheim Shores Planned Community Zone and to review Resolution No. 74R-235 for approximately 137 acres of land bounded on the north by the Riverside Freeway, south by La Palma Avenue and on the east by Euclid Street. Relative to the General Plan Amendment, the City Planning Commission, in their Resolution No. PC82-56, recommended approval of Exhibit "A", retaining the existing land use designation of Low-Medium Density Residential; however, the subject exhibit specifically reflected the density of the existing approved Tentative Tract Nos. 11347 (Revision No. 1) and 11464, with a maximum number of 125 approved residential lots on 17.8 gross acres, 7.02 dwelling units per gross acre, excluding public streets. Relative to Reclassificaton No. 73-74-36, the City Planning Commission, in their Resolution No. PC82-57, recommended an amendment to City Council Resolution No. 74R-235, to reflect proposed Revision No. 2 of Exhibit No. 5, and amendment to Condition No. 13, pertaining to exhibits and density. Environmental Impact Report No. 113 was previously certified by the Council in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 130 and Reclassification No. 73-74-36 (Anaheim Shores Planned Community), and no further action was necessary. Mayor Pro Tem Roth asked to hear from the property owner. Mr. Mike Conlon, representing M. J. Brock & Sons, 1698 Greenbriar Lane, Brea, owner of the subject property, stated that they were opposed to General Plan Amendment No. 175 as written for the following reasons: A great deal of time and planning was spent on the original plan and that same amount of time had not been spent on the proposed amendment; they could support an amendment that would limit the density in a range of 7 to 12 units or 8 to 11 units, something that would allow flexibility in planning; they had prepared a plan based on 11.3 units per acre, a figure that appeared throughout all the data, and still mitigate the impact on the surrounding neighborhood; with the current market and economic conditions, if nothing changed, they would not be able to break ground on the project until mid-1985, with sales in mid-1986; if there were a higher-density yield, they could move into a different market and could start this year and be open for sales in early 1983. He then asked to have their consultants present an example of a plan at 11.3 units density. 320 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Gil Martinez, Florian/Martinez Associates, Landscape Architecture and Planning, 13132 Newport Avenue, Suite 110, Tustin, then narrated a slide presentation which first covered some background data on the property, going back to 1974. (Also, see letter dated March 5, 1982, from M. J. Brock & Sons, as well as exhibits summarizing the various interpretations of the densities and numbers of units allowed under the Planned Community zone as they related to M. J. Brock & Sons' western parcel of Anaheim Shores, previously made a part of the record. The latter was also included in the slide presentation.) The slides included site plans, renderings showing views from various areas in their proposed plan, slides of actual developments of similar projects, etc. The proposed plan submitted by M. J. Brock on March 4, 1982, was calculated for 15.79 net acres, or 11.3 dwelling units per acre, allowing 178 units, or, if calculated for 17.8 gross acres, 10.0 dwelling units per acre, also allowing for 178 units. Their plan proposed a mix of single-story homes along the perimeter with two-story homes in the center, single-family attached homes, not condominiums. The plan proposed 178 homes with two-and-one-half times more open space than was being required, and they were within all the other requirements currently imposed on the property. In terms of what was currently allowed in the zoning, they were proposing not more homes, but 50 percent less than what was actually allowed. Relative to density, it involved people per acre, rather than houses per acre. In that light, the plan would generate one-half person more per acre than the previous plan. In the area within 150 feet of the western perimeter, the plan currently proposed a density of 8.15 as compared with 8.56 in the previous plan. There were also no two-story homes within that 150 feet; the previous plan had two-story homes within 100 feet. After previewing additional data, Mr. Martinez concluded that the current plan was an improvement relative to the concerns of the City and the homeowners in the area. Mr. Bob Mueting, also of Florian/Martinez Associates, then explained how they arrived at certain figures that were presented in their statistics. Mayor Pro Tem Roth asked to hear from those who wished to speak, either in favor or in opposition to the proposed General Plan Amendment. Mr. Clifford Harper, 1975 West Bayshore Drive, speaking for the people and Board of Directors of the Anaheim Shores Homeowners Association, stated they were in support of the General Plan Amendment. The Brock representatives did come to them with their plan and the reception wa~ generally not unfavorable, the reason being, the development could be annexed into the Homeowners Association which was the main point as far as they were concerned. Anything that could not be annexed into the existing Homeowners Association was tearing at the heart of the Planned Community because of the necessity to control the lake and surrounding area. Approximately two and one-half months ago, The Fieldstone Company stated that their development could not be annexed. He reiterated, whatever development would be built must be annexable. They were asking that the development be protected and sheltered from deterioration and invasion from a non-complying development. 321 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6~ 1982, 1:30 P.M. Mrs. Eleanor Bay, 2148 West Grayson, then read excerpts from the minutes of the Council meeting of January 19, 1982, when action was taken regarding The Fieldstone Company development (see minutes that date). The Tentative Tract previously proposed by Brock and approved by the Planning Commission and the Council, called for 125 homes. The residents to the west, in the R-1 tracts, worked that out with Brock, but now Brock wanted 178 dwelling units, which would generate over 150 additional vehicles. The two tracts on the west side had to be protected. She urged the Council to approve General Plan Amendment No. 175, Exhibit "A", as recommended. Mr. Harry Chow, Jr., member of the Board of the Anaheim Shores Homeowners Association, stated he was speaking as a homeowner in the Planned Community, living at 1116 North Voyager Lane. The General Plan Amendment seemed fair, since out of the four projects he had seen in the community since 1979, if granted at 125 homes, they would not lose again as they did on the last three proposals. He urged approval of General Plan Amendment No. 175, Exhibit "A". Mrs. Elsie Reid, 914 Fairview, expressed her concern over the traffic situation in the area at present and thus, as many ways as the Council could help keep the density down, they should try to do so. Rudy Hutchinson, member of the Board of Directors of the Anaheim Shores Homeowners Association, 1866 West Surf, expressed his concern over the plan presented by Brock because of its high density. He felt they were "raped" when The Fieldstone Project was approved adjacent to houses that were approximately eight per acre, and The Fieldstone project was 19 per acre. They were now seeing the same thing happening again. Mayor Seymour entered the Council Chambers. (3:56 p.m.) Mr. Kevin Tomlinson, 1154 North Holly, first posed questions relative to the proposed plan which were answered by staff. In concluding, he expressed his concern relative to the type of traffic traveling through their community (Falmouth Street from Brookhurst into Romneya) which was used as a drag strip. If they added more homes in the area, the volume of the type of traffic they were getting would increase. He wanted some resolution made to protect the school area (John Marshall School), by either a stop sign or traffic light, to break up the flow of traffic that was bypassing the bottleneck at Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue and traveling through their community. Max Engle, 1181 North Catalpa, stated that it was an outrage and breach of trust when The Fieldstone development was approved by the Council, as was the present proposal by M. J. Brock, if approved. The Mayor then gave Mr. Conlon an opportunity to rebut. 322 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Conlon first addressed the annexation question, stating there was a great deal of misunderstanding over whether an RM-3000 or condominium type ownership project could or could not be annexed into the Association. The attorneys of both Fieldstone and Brock had found that it was possible to annex condominium ownership into the existing Association, although that was probably not the way to do it. It would be much easier to draw up a master association and the existing and new association would then be a sub-association of a new association. It was not impossible, it could be done, but would require an amendment to the existing CC & R's, requiring a 75 percent vote of the homeowners. He further elaborated upon the issue of annexation, concluding that both Fieldstone and Brock were willing to cooperate. Mr. Conlon then referred to the 178-unit figure which was being discussed as though the plan was up for a public hearing. It was not. They were present to stop the General Plan Amendment because they felt it was being done in haste in answer to the previous hospital parking lot approval and The Fieldstone approval, whereas those two actions should not even be considered. A General Plan Amendment was being considered on 17.8 acres and had nothing to do with what happened in the past. Whether or nct the GPA passed, if the economy did not change, they would come back with their own GPA and attempt to get the plan approved at a later date. Before concluding, he attempted to answer some of the other concerns expressed. Before the public hearing was finally closed, Mr. Bob Lutes, 2015 Compass, clarified first that as far as the 178 homes, he did not hear anybody at the Association meeting say that they wanted 178 and secondly, the Association fully backed the proposed General Plan Amendment. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Mayor Seymour stated he had not heard any information today that would justify a movement from the position and direction to staff after the January 19, 1982, hearing. He could understand that the developer wanted greater density, but it was clear that what the developer bargained for was what he was getting. He was in support of the General Plan Amendment as recommended. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution Nos. 82R-186 and 82R-187 for adoption, the first approving General Plan Amendment No. 175, Exhibit "A", as recommended by the City Planning Commission, and the second approving an amendment of City Council Resolution No. 74R-235, to reflect proposed Revision No. 2 of Exhibit No. 5 and amendment to Condition No. 13 pertaining to exhibits and density recommended by the Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 82R-186: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 175, EXHIBIT "A." RESOLUTION NO. 82R-187: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 74R-235 BY APPROVING REVISION NO. 2 TO EXHIBIT NO. 5 AND A REVISION TO CONDITION NO. 13. 323 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Ap. ri! 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood recalled that at the January 19, 1982, meeting, it was not a unanimous vote on The Fieldstone project. She offered the resolution of denial which lost on a two to three vote and then subsequently passed on a three to two vote, she and Councilman Bay dissenting in both instances. A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolutions. 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-186 and 82R-187 duly passed and adopted. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to discuss several personnel matters with no action anticipated. Mayor Seymour requested a Closed Session to discuss a personnel matter with action anticipated. Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:29 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (6:12 p.m.) 116/153: ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY REGARDING MEDICAL LEAVES: City Manager William Talley clarified the Administration's policy relating to announcements of medical leaves to be as follows: If a senior City Official (City Manager, Assistant City Manager or Department Head) is going to be absent four weeks or longer for a medical reason, City administration will announce it to the media; however, if the senior City Official elects not to have the nature and extent of the medical problem revealed, the administration will respect the doctor-patient relationship. 153: THIRD LEVEL STEP~ GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE - MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE DIVISION: Mayor Seymour expressed his feeling that the grievance and arbitration process had been short-cutted by City Management as a result of two Mechanical Maintenance employees going to the press and subsequently denied the third level of the grievance procedure. In his opinion, the City has a responsibility to follow through on the process despite the employees' contact with the press. MOTION: Councilman Seymour thereupon moved to direct the City Manager's office to complete the hearing process, that is, the third level of the grievance procedure. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion for purposes of discussion. 324 City Hall, Anaheim California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 6, 1982, 1:30 P.M. Councilmen Overholt and Bay expressed the view that the two employees involved were informed that the City would furnish a hearing officer to hear their grievance at the third level of the procedure on the condition that they would not take the matter to the press during the hearing process to ensure an impartial decision could be rendered. The employees decided they did not want to proceed with the hearing with City Management if they could not go to the press, and elected their remedy through an independent arbitrator who would hear their grievance. In their opinion (Overholt and Bay), City Management had completed the process and to direct Management to hear the grievance now would be inappropriate. No further action was taken by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:19 p.m.) LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK 325