Loading...
1998/01/13ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: MAYOR: Tom Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Shirley McCracken, Tom Tait, Bob Zemel, Lou Lopez COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Dave Morgan CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER GENERAL MANAGER: Greg Smith CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John Poole ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 3:55 p.m. on January 9, 1998 at the City Hall Kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there were no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Agency negotiator: Dave Hill Employee organization: Anaheim Fire Association, IBEW, AMEA, and non represented employees. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case: Delmonico, et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al. (and 18 related cases) Orange County Superior Court Case No. 70-80-71. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case: Hutchison v. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 76-82-79. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9: one potential case. By general consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session. AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:15 p.m.) INVOCATION: Reverend Adam McCoy, St. Michael's Episcopal Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Shirley McCracken led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PRESENTATION - JAMES C. HOWLAND AWARD: Presentation of the James C. Howland award that was recently given to the City at the National League of Cities Conference for "Paint Your Heart Out Anaheim." John Poole, the City's Code Enforcement Manager explained that he, along with Carolyn Griebe, Coordinator of Paint Your Heart Out (PYHO) and Tom Hollywood, Volunteer Chairman had the privilege of attending the National League of Cities Conference in Philadelphia last month. Anaheim had entered the competition for the James C. Howland Award along with many other cities. Anaheim won the award in the category of urban enrichment in cities of 150,000 to 500,000. Anaheim started the Paint Your Heart Out program with government funding but it has been self-sufficient now for several years and it gets better every year. Carolyn Griebe thanked the City for the opportunity to accept the award. It was an honor to receive Anaheim's award particularly for urban enrichment. The PYHO program has been in existence for eight years and 277 homes have been painted during that time for low income seniors and disabled homeowners. They are currently in the process of soliciting applications from those eligible as well as recruiting volunteers to assist in 1998. Tom Hollywood, Volunteer Chairman (PYHO). He urged participation by those able to assist this year. The event always takes place the first Saturday in May with preparations beginning in April. Mayor Daly and the Council accepted the award on behalf of the City and the Paint Your Heart Out Program. Out of all the cities in the U.S., Anaheim was singled out by the League of Cities for having this "fantastic" program. He thanked all those involved for the time and dedication they devote to making this very worthwhile program such a success. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 PRESENTATION - CHECK FROM SPECTRANET INTERNATIONAL FOR USE OF CITY'S FIBER OPTIC INFRASTRUCTURE: Presentation of a $1,000,000 check to the City from SpectraNet as a result of the Universal Telecommunications System Project Agreements of February 25, 1997. Mr. Ed Aghjayan, Public Utilities General Manager. Since February of last year, SpectraNet's contract with the City requires they proceed with building out of the infrastructure to tie into the City's loop and, most importantly, to submit a check for doing so. Mr. Bob Cerasoli, Senior Vice President and Chief Strategic Officer of SpectraNet is in attendance to present a "ceremonial" check which marks $1 million in total payments to the City since February, 1997. Mr. Bob Cerasoli was accompanied by two principals from SpectraNet. Since the Council unanimously approved the participation agreement between SpectraNet and the City last year, he is pleased to announce they have made payments to the City in excess of $1 million through fiber optic loop lease payments and various other cost reimbursements and expect that number to increase significantly in the months ahead. He then briefed the status and progress of the program. They have been successful in signing up Anaheim businesses large and small to the network and at the same time providing constituents with advanced infrastructure so that they can compete successfully. He thereupon presented the "facsimile" check to the City. The check was accepted by the Mayor, Council Members and Mr. Aghjayan. Mayor Daly stated he understands in the coming fiscal years, the minimum contribution will be $1 million a year each and every year. He appreciates the great work of the Utilities Department staff in bringing forth this partnership to improve the quality of service available to Anaheim businesses and residents and for bringing additional revenue to the City. DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was unanimously adopted by the City Council to be presented to Rilda Jamieson recognizing her 15 years of (voluntary) service as a Santiago Cooperative Library System Advisory Board Member. Mr. Chris Jarvi, Director of Community Services explained that the Cooperative Library System consists of a group of eight City, County and Special District organizations to coordinate library services throughout the County. Rilda was appointed by the Council on April 5, 1983 and has been an active advocate on the City's behalf on the local, state and national level. Ms. Jamieson thanked the City and especially Audrey Lujan, Library Administrative Services Manager, who had been of great assistance in enabling her to represent the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Public Library. It has been one of her greatest pleasures being a resident and being part of the City's vision. She is leaving the position with deep regrets but is very encouraged with the visions she sees projected for the City at this time. Mayor Daly and Council Members commended Ms. Jamieson on her very long, dedicated and exemplary service to the City and for helping to promote and improve library service. The Mayor read portions of the Declaration which listed her accomplishments as the City's representative on the Cooperative Library System Board. RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME: PROCLAMATION recognizing January 19 - 23, 1998, as Anaheim Evening Optimist Club Appreciation Week in Anaheim. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,543,555.44 for the period ending January 9, 1998, in accordance with the 1997-98 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency meeting. (5:36 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting ( 5:58 p.m.) ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to agenda items. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: No items of public interest were addressed. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no public comments on City Council Agenda items. MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of January 13, 1998. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Lopez, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 98R-6, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A1. 118: Rejecting and denying certain claims filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management. The following claims were filed against the City and actions taken as recommended: a. Claim submitted by May Ellen Rojas for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 19, 1997. b. Claim submitted by Ruben Sanchez Coyt for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 22, 1997. c. Claim submitted by Pilaf T. Roybal for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 10, 1997. d. Claim submitted by Victoria Tupu for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 13, 1997. e. Claim submitted by Rafeal Gonzalez for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 26, 1997. 4 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 A2. A3. A4. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. A10. All. e. Claim submitted by Jesus W. Caloretti for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about November 23, 1997. 159: Receiving and filing the Status of Developer Fee Accounts as submitted by the Public Works Department. 140: Receiving and filing the Status of Developer Fee Accounts as submitted by the Library Division. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by the Finance Director for five months ended November 30, 1997. 107: Approving withdrawal of the bids of Vision Environmental Services and Aman Environmental Construction due to bid errors; awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, C.R. Gann Demo, Inc., in the amount of $132,200 for Building Demolition and Removal of Improvements Katella Avenue (various locations), and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders; and authorizing the City Engineer to approve up to 25% of the construction contract for change orders during construction. 164: Approving an increase to the Public Works Department Capital Improvement Budget, in the amount of $311,700; and awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Matthew & Stewart Company, Inc., in the amount of $391,716.80 for Bali-Lemon Sewer Improvement; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders. 160: Accepting the bid of Western Data Group, in the amount of $19,566.48 for two fiber optic hub assemblies, in accordance with Bid #5734. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Episcopal Service Alliance, in the amount of $2,840. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim and The Young Women's Christian Association of North Orange County, in the amount of $5,000. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Museum, Inc., in the amount of $5,000. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Lutheran Social Services of Southern California, in the amount of $10,000. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim and The Young Men's Christian Association of Anaheim, in the amount of $10,000. 123: Approving the federally funded FY 1997/98 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subrecipient Agreement between the City of Anaheim Feedback Foundation, Inc., in the amount of $21,205. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 A12. 123: Approving a Cooperative Agreement with the Chancellor's Office of the California Community Colleges, in the amount of $39,707 for the period of July 1, 1997 through June 30, 1998; and authorizing the JTP Manager to execute any necessary subcontract agreements and modifications thereto. A13. 144: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-6: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM WAIVING NOTICE OF LEASED SPACE AGREEMENT BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (WAIVING THE 60-DAY NOTICE REQUESTED BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, HEALTH CARE AGENCY, FOR 4,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE AT 1125 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE, TO OPERATE A PERINATAL PROGRAM.) A14. 123: Approving an Agreement with Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Company for advertising on selected panels within the Anaheim Convention Center. A15. 123: Approving the Sponsorship Agreement with Freedom Communications, Inc., (The Orange County Register) for advertising within the Anaheim Convention Center, and use of the Arena and/or Exhibition Halls, subject to availability, each year at no additional rental cost. Council Member McCracken. She asked for clarification relative to several aspects of the proposed agreements under items A14. and A15. Greg Smith, Convention Center Manager. He briefed the specifics of the agreements and the revenues involved. In concluding he stated he is pleased with the agreement as it not only generates new revenues for the Convention Center, but also new public events, local events that the community can enjoy. It meets both of his goals for the current year. Mayor Daly. He understands that both Item A14. and A15. involve advertising that will exist inside the Convention Center; Greg Smith. He answered that was correct, inside the facility itself. Mr. Smith then answered additional questions posed by Council Member McCracken regarding the option of LA Cellular to either install a communication cell site within the Convention Center building or the ability to install a screened cellular sit on the roof of one of the exhibit halls. A16. 185: Determining that on the basis of the evidence submitted by Dave Bedillion, Vice President of New Millennium Homes, that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 88-03 for the period under review (The Summit of Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP88-2) development). Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-6 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-6 duly passed and adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 A17. 102: APPOINTMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL: To consider the list of applicants, and appointing one citizen to represent the City on the Vector Control Board of Trustees. City Clerk Sohl. She noted that at this time, the Council has a list of nine candidates to select from. Mayor Daly asked if the Council would like to make the appointment tonight or hold off for a couple of weeks. MOTION. Council member Zemel moved that the subject appointment be continued for two weeks to give a further opportunity to review the list of applicants. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. A18./A19. 105: APPOINTMENTS TO THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION: (a) Ratifying the selection of the Anaheim Union High School District, and appointing L.E. "Slim" Terrell to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission. (b) Ratifying the selection of the Anaheim City School District, and appointing Christopher B. Whorton to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to ratify the selection of the Anaheim Union High School District appointing L.E. "Slim" Terrell to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission and to ratify the selection of the Anaheim City School District appointing Christopher B. Whodon to serve on the Park and Recreation Commission. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ITEMS B1 - B7 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 22, 1997: INFORMATION ONLY -APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JANUARY 13, 1998: B1. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3985, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Mary F. Buckingham, Mary Margaret Grant, Steven Park Grant, c/o Grant Tucker Properties, One Corporate Plaza, 2nd Floor, Newport Beach, CA 92658 AGENT: In-N-Out Burger, Attn: Raymund Villanueva, 13502 Hamburger Lane, Baldwin Park, CA 91706-5885 LOCATION: 5646 East La Palma Avenue - Anaheim Hills Villa.cle. Property is 0.55 acre located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, located 257 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway. To demolish an existing 6,000 square foot building and construct a 2,912 square foot drive- through fast food restaurant (In-N-Out) with outdoor seating and roof-mounted equipment with waivers of (a) permitted freestanding signs - DENIED, (b) permitted wall signs - APPROVED, (c) minimum number of parking spaces - APPROVED, (d) minimum drive-through lane requirements - APPROVED, and (e) required improvement of setbacks - APPROVED. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3985, GRANTED, IN PART, (PC97-177) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). APPROVED, IN PART, waiver of Code Requirement as follows: : Denied Waiver (a) on the basis that it was deleted following public notification; and, approved Waivers (b), (c), (d) and (e). Approved Negative Declaration. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 B2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1594 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3421 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Andrew Y. Lui, 500 North Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 500 North Brookhurst - La Estrella Restaurant. Property is 2.1 acres located at the northeast corner of Alameda Avenue and Brookhurst Street. To amend or delete conditions of approval pertaining to a time limitation to retain an existing restaurant/bar and public dance hall. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 1594 continued to Planning Commission meeting of 3/16/98. CUP NO. 3421 TERMINATED (PC97-178) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Negative Declaration previously approved. Council Member Zemel noted that there was a previous hearing on this business before a Hearing Officer held April 22, 1997 and if this is the time when the Council should make that determination again; Mayor Daly asked if staff had a recommendation. City Attorney White. He does not have a recommendation tonight relative to this matter but, as Council Member Zemel noted, the Council can make a determination tonight to refer the matter to a Hearing Officer under Council rules and City ordinances. Mayor Daly asked to hear from Planning staff as to how far and wide the debate was and how much evidence was introduced at the Planning Commission hearing. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. This matter has had extensive investigation and hearings. For that reason, he would like to work with the City Attorney's Office to utilize a Hearing Officer. These matters lend themselves better to being resolved through a Hearing Officer because of the lengthy process involved. He does recommend that process in this case. MOTION: Mayor Daly moved that a Hearing Officer be appointed by the City Attorney to hear the subject appeal with the recommendation of the Hearing Officer to come before the Council for a final decision. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. B3. 179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-08, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Carl Karcher, 1200 North Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: RHL Design Group, Inc., Attn: Tom Riggle, 2001 Beach Boulevard #207, La Habra, CA 90631 LOCATION: 1244 North Harbor Boulevard. Property is 1.0 acre located east of Harbor Boulevard, 240 feet north of the centerline of Romneya Drive. To reclassify subject property from CG to CL. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: IReclassification No. 97-98-08 GRANTED, unconditionally, (PC97-179) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. B4. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3991, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: The Salvation Army, 1300 South Lewis Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1300 South Lewis Street. Property is 14.51 acres located on the east side of Lewis Street, 820 feet north of the centerline of Cerritos Avenue. To construct a women's rehabilitation center in conjunction with the existing Salvation Army men's rehabilitation center and work therapy unit with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3991 GRANTED (PC97-180) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement. Approved Negative Declaration. Mayor Daly. He wanted to point out that this is a model program developed by the Salvation Army in Anaheim for men. After 15 years of success, they are asking the City's permission to build a similar facility for women in the same neighborhood, the industrial area of Lewis Street. They have been a great neighbor even though it was a difficult project to get started when it was proposed 15 years ago. B5. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1225, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Courtline, Inc. 2130 West Crescent Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 AGENT: Schuller Bussett, c/o Tara Hills Apartments, 2130 West Crescent Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 2130 West Crescent Avenue - Tara Hill Apartments. Property is 12.16 acres located on the south side of Crescent Avenue, 380 feet east of the centerline of Brookhurst Street. To modify or delete a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation to retain a child-care facility within an apartment complex. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved modification to conditions of approval for CUP NO. 1225 (PC97-181) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. B6. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3990 CEQA GENERAL RULE EXEMPTION 15061(b)(3): OWNER: First Security Bank, Attn: William Wade, 3100 West Big Beaver Road, Troy, Michigan 48084 AGENT: Jeff Rawitch, 2531 Agua Santra, Tustin, CA 92782 LOCATION: 1095 Pullman Street. Property is 18.69 acres located south and west of the southwest corner of Old Canal Road and Weir Canyon Road. To retain an arcade within an existing "Super K-Mart" store. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3990 GRANTED (PC97-182) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3464, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Community Christian Church, 5100 East La Palma Avenue, Suites 111 and 112, Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: 5100 East La Palma Avenue, Suites 111 and 112 - Community Christian Church. Property is 6.3 acres located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, 3,560 feet east of the centerline of Lakeview Avenue. To modify or delete a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation to retain a 3,900 square foot church within a 138,350 square foot industrial complex. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved modification to conditions of approval for CUP NO. 3464, to expire 10/31/01 (PC97- 183) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Negative Declaration previously approved. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FROM 12/22/97. 9 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 ITEM B8 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 1998: INFORMATION ONLY -APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JANUARY 15, 1998: B8. 155: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 311 (Prev.-Certified) THE DISNEYLAND RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 - FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 98-01 FOR THE THEME PARK/HOTEL DISTRICT SETBACK AREAS ADJACENT TO WEST STREET/DISNEYLAND DRIVE (SEGMENT 1): The Wait Disney Company requests review and approval of the Final Site Plan setting forth the width and design of landscaping for the Theme Park and Hotel District setback areas adjacent to West Street/Disneyland Drive. The setback areas are located between Katella Avenue and the Southwest Parking Lot intersection on the west side of the street and between Katella Avenue and the Grand California Hotel service entry on the east side of the street. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: APPROVED Final Site Plan Review No. 98-01 of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 for the Theme park/hotel district setback areas adjacent to West Street/Disneyland Drive (Segment 1). EIR NO. 311 previously certified. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. D1. 134: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 351 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-06 WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3974 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Choco Realty Corp., P.O. Box 5700, Orange, CA 92863 AGENT: Craig Clausen, 2795 W. Lincoln Ave., #F, Anaheim, CA 92801 LOCATION: 7777 East Santa Aria Canyon Road. Property is 3.06 acres located at the terminus of Camino Tampico, 390 feet northeast of the centerline of Eucalyptus Drive. General Plan Amendment No. 351: To amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan, to redesignate this subject property from the Commercial Professional land use designation to the General Commercial land use designation. Reclassification No. 97-98-06: To reclassify this property from the existing CO (SC) (Commercial Office and Professional (Scenic Corridor Overlay)) Zone to the CL (SC) (Commercial, Limited (Scenic Corridor Overlay)) Zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 3974: To permit a self-storage facility with waivers of permitted freestanding sign, minimum number of parking spaces, maximum structural height and minimum structural setback requirements adjacent to a freeway and a scenic expressway. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended adoption of GPA NO. 351, Exhibit A (PC97-159) (6 yes votes, 1 absent). Reclassification No. 97-98-06 GRANTED (PC97-160). Approved waiver of code requirement. CUP NO. 3974 GRANTED (PC97-161). Approved Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: Public Hearing due to General Plan Amendment. Informational item at the meeting of December 2, 1997, Item B2. Public hearing continued from the meeting of December 16, 1997, Item D1 to this date (see minutes of December 16, 1997). 10 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - December 4, 1997 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 4, 1997 Posting of property - December 5, 1997 STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 10, 1997. Mayor Daly. This is a continuation of the Public Hearing held December 16, 1997 ( see minutes that date where extensive input was received) wherein staff was asked to work out some of the questions regarding signage, landscaping and roof treatment. Greg Hasting, Zoning Division Manager. He highlighted the revised plans submitted by the applicant regarding the three issues briefing the material contained in the supplemental 4-page staff report dated January 13, 1998 from the Planning Department (specifically pages three and four where the issues of signage, landscaping and roof treatment were addressed). He then clarified questions posed by the Mayor that staff's recommendation is that overall signage be limited to one wall sign only facing Santa Ana Canyon Road (SACR) not to exceed 80 square feet and that all roofs be pitched roofs with mission- style tiles. Mayor Daly reopened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Mr. Jeff Farano, Attorney, 2300 E. Katella, Anaheim. He deferred to the owner and architect to describe the details of the changes. Craig Clausen, 2795 W. Lincoln, Anaheim. He introduced the principals who were present tonight. Mr. Oriel Valley will brief the revisions and changes. Mr. Oriel Valley, 19700 Fairchild, Irvine. He first submitted a color board for Council perusal and also a brochure entitled, Madison Squares Self Stor - Summary of Design Enhancements, which addressed the roofs and freeway building walls. Included was a color rendering of the project, drawing of the preliminary landscape plan, site plan, first floor storage building floor plans, elevation drawings, and the roof plan. He then briefed the proposed changes/redesigns and giving specific details especially relative to the facility's physical structure and features. After Mr. Valley's presentation, Mayor Daly asked staff if they were comfortable with the landscape plan. Joel Fick, Planning Director. Before the Council tonight is an enhancement from the original writing of the staff report both in terms of tower elements as well as landscaping. Staff is comfortable with the landscaping. The staff recommendation was, without the wall sign, the landscaping just be continuous. The applicant said that was the proposal relative to landscaping in any case. Craig Clausen. He understands staff is uncomfortable with the orientation of the monument sign as it is perpendicular instead of parallel to Santa Ana Canyon Road. They can live with the wall sign on the south facing side parallel to Santa Ana Canyon Road. It is quite livable at 80 sq. ft. Relative to the freeway sign, he has handouts showing there will be no landscape gap at the freeway sign. The photo of the Anaheim Memorial Medical Plaza indicates what their signage would be. It would be very simple and complies with the zoning code. It is revised in size and occupies only 1% of the freeway elevation. It is also revised in shape, revised in message, the phone number is eliminated, and it is revised in character. It does not make a precedent or violate a precedent for signage that exists in the Santa Ana Canyon or the corridor. The signage is for identification. It does not advertise, direct anybody and will not create any traffic issues. This project has gone to public hearing three times and when he spoke to the City Clerk last evening, he was informed there has been little or no public comment. There have been neighborhood meetings, local press, the blessing of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, as well as the contiguous neighbors. Along with staff, their team created a project that reflects the ambiance of Anaheim Hills. It is a project that is professional, elegant and dignified. He asked that they be able to 11 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 continue with it with a wall sign facing Santa Ana Canyon Road and a wall sign facing the Santa Ana Freeway. Mr. Clausen then answered questions posed by the Mayor relative to specifics of the signage proposed, (i.e., how lit, letter style, etc.). Mr. Farano clarified what the interior roofing would look like -- it is sheet metal and ribbed every 16" with a 1:12 pitch. Combined with the ribbing of the metal, there will be detail up close but across Santa Ana Canyon Road from where one might see it, it will be extremely far away or the length of one and one-half football fields. There will not be much difference visually between the tile roof on the frontage and the roofs in the interior. Though it says flat roof, this has slope and detail. It is something he wanted to clarify. Also, relative to the sign facing the freeway, looking at the Anaheim Memorial sign, one thing the proposed sign is going to add that the Anaheim Memorial sign does not have is substantial landscaping around the sign. There being no further persons who wished to speak either in favor or in opposition, Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Council Member Lopez posed questions regarding the look of and lighting of the proposed sign facing the freeway which were answered by both Mr. Farano and Clausen. Council Member Lopez also expressed his concern that the name storage does not fit into that area; Mr. Farano stated that storage might create a negative impression but looking at this project overall, it has been elevated more to what people consider self storage and is something that looks more appropriate to the Anaheim Hills area. Lighting only the name Madison Square at night, in his opinion, would look nice. Council Member McCracken. She is willing to support the General Plan Amendment and even willing to support the new roof plan and a pedestal sign on Santa Ana Canyon Road, but she is adamant about signage facing the freeway. Anaheim Memorial Medical Plaza is within 1/4 of a mile of the off ramp. The storage unit would be almost two miles or more of the off ramp. She reiterated, she has a real concern with a sign off the freeway along the scenic corridor. Council Member Zemel. To give up that pedestal sign on the front is a big thing. As far as representing residential close to the project, he feels if they go along with a well designed freeway sign, the people driving to Riverside County would have to live with that and the residents would have to live with it less as far as going from a pedestal sign to a wall sign. He would offer a compromise -- to have wall signs both front and back which he would be willing to support. Council Member Lopez. As he has stated previously, there is no need to have a sign along the freeway. It is the only storage facility in that area for miles and it will be used by the residents of the area. There are so many homes in the area that the storage space will be filled plus hundreds of thousands of vehicles travel up and down Santa Ana Canyon Road, some bypassing the freeway. He will not approve the project with a sign along the 91 freeway. The sign along Santa Ana Canyon Road will be sufficient advertisement for this business. Joel Fick, Planning Director then clarified for Council Member Tait that the sign along the freeway is not needed and would be freeway advertising as opposed to wayfinding or identification. Relative to the roof treatment, there have been enhancements both from Santa Ana Canyon Road and adjacent to the residential to the west. Tonight they also saw the proposal for some additional tower treatments along the freeway. Even the interior of the project would be visible from homes south of the project. Staff continues to recommend that all roofs be treated. He also believes that it was the Planning Commission's viewpoint that the roofs should be treated if visible from the residential properties to the south as well. Council Member Tait. He is concerned about the roof treatment particularly the two-story portion along the freeway. 12 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 Mr. Clausen referenced Page 3 of the brochure submitted (Santa Ana Canyon Road Elevation drawing). A line-of-sight study has been drawn so that passers by driving either way simply cannot see over the structures on the roof treatments paralleling the canyon. It is not a question that anybody from south of SACR will see the tops of the roofs. Mayor Daly. Council Member Tait is talking about the northern orientation from the freeway; Council Member Tail He clarified for Mr. Clausen what he is speaking about is on the back side, the north side. His concern is that it looks like a large box along the back side, along the freeway, with a flat roof. Mr. Clausen. He can only say what they did was traverse the area of the hills for many hours and "plagiarized" from the Festival Shopping Center. Mayor Daly. He would like to take a straw poll on the signage since he is sensing there is a majority who do not favor a freeway sign at all. He asked if that was correct. Council Member Zemel. He has been working on signage issues and other issues since the formation of the Anaheim Hills Citizens Coalition. Even with that background and being part of the hills, he does not have a problem with the freeway sign or the front wall signage. There was no additional support for a freeway sign. Mayor Daly. He asked if the applicant was in agreement with staff on the monument sign (on SACR). If there is no freeway sign, what does staff advise on the SACR sign. Joel Fick. Staff still believes the wall sign is adequate. Typically businesses within the scenic corridor do not have individual business signs along Santa Ana Canyon Road. The wall sign would be adequate but in any case, only one sign is being proposed on SACR -- a monument sign and staff recommendation was a smaller wall sign than along the freeway. The only other issue is the roof, whether all the roof lines will be treated or just the ones visible from SACR, the residential to the west and the tower treatments as proposed tonight along the freeway. Staff recommendation is based upon field surveys that because the roof lines are visible from residents to the south that all roofs be treated in a similar fashion. Council Member McCracken. She is ready to act on the matter approving General Plan Amendment, approving the Reclassification and granting the CUP but allowing roofs with both mission style tiles and ribbed metal and only one wall sign facing Santa Canyon Road. Council Member Zemel. To clarify, Council Member McCracken is accepting the current design by the applicant on the roof line, but is following staff's recommendation for a wall sign; Mayor Daly. He clarified that was correct -- to allow the roof design as the applicant suggested but follow staff's recommendation on signage. Council Member Tait commented that he favors staff's recommendation (on both roofs and signage) otherwise he will have trouble voting. Council Member McCracken offered Resolution 98R-7 and 98R-8 for adoption approving General Plan Amendment No. 351, Exhibit "A", and approving Reclassification No. 97-98-06. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 98R-7: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 351, EXHIBIT "A". 13 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 RESOLUTION NO. 98R-8: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGE (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98- 06) Council Member McCracken offered Resolution 98R-9 for adoption granting CUP 3974 except that there be only one wall sign facing Santa Ana Canyon Road and no freeway sign as recommended by staff but allowing construction of roof lines as proposed by the applicant with the two forms of tiles and ribbed metal. RESOLUTION NO. 98R-9: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3974. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Zemel stated something they had previously discussed and it may not be included, was a deed restriction. The GPA would bring a variety of other opportunities for construction; Mayor Daly. The goal is to limit this GPA to this particular use. Jeff Farano. The issue of a deed restriction and convenant to be recorded with the City was covered in the resolution by the Planning Commission. City Attorney White. In reviewing the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission, he assumes that the GPA was approved by the Council subject to those conditions which included two conditions that relate to the use of the property. Specifically, if the use is not commenced for this self-storage operation by April 10, that staff would initiate a rezoning to revert the property back to a more appropriate zoning to CL, Scenic Corridor zone. In response to Council Member Zemel, the Planning Commission imposed a condition that the owner would execute and record an unsubordinated covenant limiting the use of the property when zoned CL to a self-storage facility. If the Council imposes the same condition, that would be sufficient to limit the use of the property. The intention, as he understands it, was to, in all of the resolutions, impose the same conditions that the Planning Commission approved with those exceptions in the most recent staff report and as modified orally tonight. Joel Fick, Planning Director. The only thing to add to the comments by the City Attorney, the staff report update provided to the Council for tonight's hearing contains several additional conditions as a result of several issues raised by the applicant the last time. One addresses the time and changes the dated to July 6, 1998. Mayor Daly. The additional conditions contained in the staff report of January 13, 1998 are incorporated as part of the action. Jeff Farano. He notes that the freeway sign has been deleted and asked if it would be appropriate to recommend as suggested by the owner that perhaps the sign could be allowed for a year or two years and then come down once the storage facility was occupied; Council Member Zemel. It is probably a good suggestion and incumbent upon them for the business to be successful. He would be willing to support a 12-month signage program. Mr. Farano clarified for the Mayor that it would be the exact same sign as in the rendering -- same size and same location. There was no additional support for the request by the owner made by Mr. Farano. 14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution approving CUP 3974 with the amendments stated by Council Member McCracken relative to signage and roof treatment and incorporating the additional conditions by staff in their report of January 13, 1998 including the amendment to Condition No. 4 of the Reclassification changing the date from April 10, 1998 to July 6, 1998. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R-7 and 98R-8, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 98R-7 and 98R-8, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.ne Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-9 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-9 duly passed and adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member McCracken, seconded by Council Member Zemel, the City Council does hereby approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration on the subject project and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code on the basis that the Planning Commission/City Council has considered the proposal with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Monitoring Program, together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. D2. 179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3984 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Ming International Group, c/o Partners Realty Group, 5406 Alton Pkwy., Suite 631, Irvine, CA 92714 AGENT: T.C. Crownover and Wendy Wild-Myers, 5405 Alton Pkwy., Suite 631, Irvine, CA 92714 LOCATION: 5247 East Oran.qethorpe Avenue. Property is 1.47 acres located at the northeast corner of Orangethorpe Avenue and Post Lane. To retain a 6,876 square foot private school within a 19,858 square foot commercial retail center with waivers of (a) minimum setbacks for institutional uses adjacent to a residential zone boundary (DENIED), and (b) minimum number of parking spaces (APPROVED). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3984 DENIED (PC97-169) (4 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 2 absent). Waiver of code requirement APPROVED, IN PART, waiver (a) DENIED on the basis that the play area would eliminate the existing and required 20-foot landscaped buffer between the commercial use and single-family residences; waiver (b) APPROVED on the basis that the total number of parking spaces required by this particular use is less than the number of spaces which would be required for a retail or service business occupying the same floor area. Approved Negative Declaration. 15 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 HEARING SET ON: A letter of appeal of the Planning Commission was submitted by the Agent, T. C. Crownover (Crown Private School) 5247 East Orangethorpe, Anaheim Hills, Ca. 92807. Informational item at the meeting of December 16, 1997, Item B4. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News - January 1, 1998. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - December 23, 1997. Posting of property - December 30, 1997. STAFF INPUT: See staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 1997. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission dated November 24, 1997 noting that the unpermitted private school currently occupies four units of the subject 14-unit commercial retail center with a maximum of 150 students, K-6. After Mr. Hasting's presentation, Mayor Daly noted that Planning staff recommended against the permit and he asked for a summary of the rationale; Mr. Hastings explained there were two reasons -- staff did not feel this use would be a compatible one in a strictly commercial center particularly with liquor sales at the convenience market in the center and, secondly, the use by the school of the required buffer area between the building and residential properties to the north and east. That area was initially developed as a landscaped area. A small preschool was previously approved in March of 1997 but it is no longer there. They had requested a small portion of the area be utilized for a preschool. It was approved for 40 children. City Attorney White then clarified for Council Member Lopez that if there is a pre-existing licensed premises (for liquor), the fact that a school comes later in close proximity to the alcoholic establishment, that does not preclude the licensed premises in the future from transferring their license. Council Member Lopez. Under ordinary conditions, it is not allowable to sell liquor that close to a school in the same shopping center; Mr. Hastings confirmed that was correct. Council Member Lopez. He knows for a fact when he worked in patrol, there were numerous calls on that corner relating to juvenile disturbances in that liquor store. He would like to know what the crime rate is on that corner. He is concerned about having a school right where there have been problems. Mr. Hastings. To his knowledge, the Police Department did not provide any information regarding crime rates at the Planning Commission. Staff would have to research the issue; Council Member Lopez stated he would like to have that information. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing, described the process, and then asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Dr. T. Crownover, Founder of Crown Private Schools. She holds a valid license (for the school) issued and renewed by Anaheim. The school is presently in operation and has been for 5 1/2 months and they have been co-existing with their neighbors. The property was approved as a preschool for 45 children and the same play area only hers is bigger. The previous school was approved for one large room and a tiny office and Crown has five of the suites with an inside play area. She referred to a letter previously given to the Council addressing some of the questions regarding Police issues (see letter January 7, 1998 with attachments and addendum). There were only four or five reports from the Police for 1997, some for only minor calls such as a car alarm going off. The school does have a security system. As far as being close to a liquor store, there is nothing in any report given to her that said this is being denied over any problems with that convenience store. She then gave specifics relative to square footage being utilized for the school both inside and out, ratio of students to teacher, etc., also noting that in her 16 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 Addendum to the Council, she is reducing the number of students to 125 from the original request of 145. She subsequently briefed all of the things the private school has to offer students. She emphasized the support for the school received from all of the neighbors, both residential and commercial, and also from those sharing the same wall. She noted the many letters that were already submitted and tonight she is submitting 200 more letters signed by residents of Anaheim Hills from which she read some comments (letters made a part of the record). (The majority of the letters submitted, mostly form letters signed individually by residents/businesses, stated the following: "Crown Private School is a service to the community and we believe its location at the above address including the play area is an appropriate usage of the property and urge that it be approved for operation on a continual basis." Other individual and more extensive letters were also submitted expressing support for the school at that location including the play area.) Dr. Crownover then had a number of students address the Council all telling the Council how much they love their school and that they do not want the Council to close the school down. After the presentations, Mayor Daly clarified that the issue is not about the education or what happens inside the school. It is the Council's obligation to make land-use decisions. They have a legal responsibility to do so. They appreciate the turnout and the kids are fun to listen to but the decision before them is a land-use planning decision only and what happens inside is not pertinent. Dr. Crownover. She believes this is proper land use for the property. The City's General Plan allows schools in residential or commercial areas and if the neighbors do not mind them being next door, there should be no problem. They did not respond negatively before or this time either. Douglas Emley, 544 Vista Del Plaza, Orange. He has two boys who attend the school. He is addressing the issues of the liquor store and the probability of crime. When the school opened in July, the place had been vacant for several years other than the few years that the "Green and Yellow" preschool was there. It was a "wreck". The parents cleaned the place up. The immediate adjacent neighbors were concerned that the whole side play area in question was open and their back yards could be vandalized. That no longer happens. Youths used to hang out at the location but now, he takes his children to the liquor/convenience store as a reward. They are no longer afraid to go there. It is a great idea to check into the Police records but they will find that crime, especially in the last three months, has dropped mainly because there is now a security patrol and they "kick the kids out" which the liquor store was not willing to do. Relative to the side yard issue, it was approved in April on a limited basis for a limited number of students during certain hours. The neighbors say they have no problem at all with it being there. Further, traffic and parking have never been a problem because parents are scheduled throughout the afternoon. He has never seen more than two cars at a time. Jay Shade, Principal, Crown Private School, 5761 E. LaPalma Avenue, Anaheim (business address). They were very fortunate to find this location. The "Green and Yellow" school had the City's approval for a limited amount of kids and also the play area for a limited amount of time. They can accept that. They will also go door-to-door again if the Council would like them to do so. They feel they have every right to be there. There is a uniformed security officer walking the area and there are no problems. They also installed a 6' wrought iron fence. He also addressed the use of the buffer area as a play area which he calls the "garden of joy." There are schools in the area that bump up right to the residential areas. It is necessary to address the side-yard issue which was approved in March. There is no opposition to it. He urged their support. Gail Copeland Goldstein. She has a Doctorate in Education and is also a school nurse. At Crown, class time is interspersed with play time. It is a very well run organized school. She emphasized that Dr. Crownover has addressed the issue of the area between the school and the houses behind it. She has signatures from all the residents saying they are happy to have the school there. She does not know if the Council is concerned with the physical well being of the children. She also asked if she is wrong in thinking this solely has to do with the boundary issue. Mayor Daly. There are planning issues that need to be dealt with just as in her neighborhood and that is what this hearing is about. 17 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 There being no further persons who wished to speak in favor or in opposition, the Mayor asked for a summation by the applicant. Summation by Applicant: Dr. Crownover. The school has been co-existing with their neighbors beautifully. There is no school activity on weekends or in the evenings. For group meetings, they rent places like churches. They are not intrusive and do not intrude into the neighborhood. If the Council is representing the citizens and the citizens in the area want it, the Council should vote yes. They do not want 3/4's of that center vacant. The convenience store is not a problem and the youths are no longer a problem. They have answered the safety issues as well. The only issue is the play area and she believes that has been resolved. Since they have reduced down to 120, they are going to have 8,000 sq. ft. for the kids to play in. She believes they have approved like situations and if not theirs it would be discrimination. She urged a yes vote. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Council Member McCracken. Dr. Crownover says she has made some changes, i.e., less play area, more indoor area. She asked staff if they knew of any changes that have been made. Greg Hastings. Since the meeting before the Planning Commission, staff has not dealt with the issues pertaining to the changes that have been made with the school itself. They are not aware of any changes that have been made. Dr. Crownover. There are no physical changes other than the wrought iron fence, new carpet and cleaning up. They are not changing the square footage, just allocating it differently. Council Member McCracken asked if she was still intending to use all of the 20' buffer area; Dr. Crownover answered they would like to do so if the Council approves it. If not, they have sufficient inside play area. Council Member McCracken. What they do inside the school is under the school's auspices and their responsibility. There are City land-use ordinances regarding setbacks in commercial areas. The school chose a commercial area and that commercial area is built with the required distance between commercial and residential. The school has chosen to use that buffer area. The code provides that commercial areas have to set land aside between themselves and residential areas and that is the conflict. They have no problem with the school, but the use of that area and that is what was denied by the Planning Commission. They allowed the parking waiver but not the setback waiver and she does not believe they have worked with staff to resolve that issue. Dr. Crownover. It is because she does not know the proper protocol. She noted, however, that a Montessori School just approved in the vicinity is in a commercial area with commercial properties and they do not have a setback from the residents. She questioned why the exception; Council Member McCracken stated it was not built as a commercial facility but as a school. Council Member Zemel. Private schools have a place in the community. He believes that regulation of those schools is determined by the marketplace. If the parents do not like the fact that they are in a commercial center near a liquor store and a residential area, the school is not going to survive. It is an issue of what parents want to do with their kids. The business opened with the understanding that there was an existing CUP for a preschool. He asked staff for clarification that the previous school was approved last year for a period of two years. Joel Fick, Planning Director. It was approved for two years for 40 children with a smaller outdoor play area. Council Member Zemel. He sees no problem allowing the school for two years to see how it goes and then move on from there. He would support letting the school operate for the term the former preschool was given and subsequently let the parents decide. 18 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 City Attorney White. The Council may want to consider making the expiration date at the end of what would be a normal school year so it does not expire in the middle of a school term. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member Zemel, seconded by Council Member Tait, the City Council does hereby approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration on the subject project and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code on the basis that the Planning Commission/City Council has considered the proposal with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and accompanying Monitoring Program, together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Zemel offered Resolution No. 98R-10 for adoption granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3984 including approval of waiver (a) pertaining to the 20' buffer zone for use as a play area and that the CUP is valid until July 1, 1999 at which time it would expire. RESOLUTION NO. 98R-10: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3984. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-10 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-10 duly passed and adopted. Mayor Daly. He recommended in the meantime that the operators of the school acquaint themselves with the City Planning Code and City Planning staff. Mayor Daly suggested a five-minute recess before addressing Item C1. By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting was recessed. After recess, the Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present (8:17). C1. 108: REQUEST OF SOUTH COAST CAB COMPANY TO OPERATE A TAXI SERVICE: To consider the application submitted by South Coast Cab Company for a taxicab permit to operate a taxi service within the City of Anaheim. Submitted was report dated January 13, 1998 from the Planning Department/Code Enforcement Division recommending that the application be denied, without prejudice, pursuant to Section 4.72.040 of the Anaheim Municipal Code upon finding that the public convenience or necessity does not currently require the operation of any additional taxicabs in the City. On October 28, 1997 (see minutes that date), the City Council denied a previous request by the applicant to operate a taxi service in the City. Mayor Daly. A number of documents were submitted to the Council just today. of what came in and if staff and the City Attorney have received those. 19 He asked for a summary ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He believes that they have everything. Council Member Lopez. They have received three documents which appear to be legal in nature. He believes the City Attorney is not aware of them and has not reviewed the documents. City Attorney White. He has received some information but believes in talking to Council Member Lopez during the recess, it is likely information submitted and received by some or all of the Council has not been received by him and he does not know if other staff members have received it either. Council Member Lopez. He wants this matter continued until the City Attorney has had an opportunity to review the documents. City Attorney White. What he received today, and the only thing, was correspondence from Yellow Cab Company dated January 12, 1998 which was one document, multiple pages with photographs attached. If there is other information, he has not reviewed that. Council Member Zemel. He asked if the purpose today was to determine public convenience and necessity in order to permit the cab service. City Attorney White. This is a hearing on the reftled application of South Coast Cab Company. All of the issues that were discussed at the prior hearing last October came down to two and the staff at that time was satisfied that all the criteria for issuance of a permit had been met with the exception of the number of cabs being proposed sufficient to serve the entire City and the other whether public convenience and necessity required the issuance of a permit. Council Member Zemel. Since those are the two bottom-line issues, he does not know what bearing the documents would have. A lot of people are present in the Chamber audience who have been waiting since 5:00 P.M. for this issue to be heard. Council Member Lopez emphasized he was not going to be able to make a decision tonight until the City Attorney reviewed what he has and gives feedback but he does not think the information should be discussed publicly since legal matters may be involved. City Attorney White. If the Council is receiving information which is in the nature of evidentiary matters upon which the Council would rely in making a decision, he believes that material would be public certainly to the extent of providing a copy to the other party. He does not know if that has happened either, and that should also happen. Mayor Daly. One of the documents is a letter from Yellow Cab of Anaheim; City Attorney White reiterated that he received only one document today from Mr. Larry Slagle (Yellow Cab) dated January 12, 1998, multiple pages with photographs and an investigatory report attached. Mayor Daly. He shares Council Member Lopez' s concern that there are details that probably should be reviewed first by City staff. The question is whether it can all be done this evening. John Poole. He believes there are only two pieces of information -- notices from the Franchise Tax Board and the other a letter from Larry Slagle. Mayor Daly. There is a report by a Private Investigator. He asked the City Attorney if he had a chance to review it; City Attorney White answered yes. It was an attachment to the January 12th Yellow Cab correspondence. Mr. Poole also answered yes. Mayor Daly asked if Mr. White was comfortable commenting publicly on the details of the Private Investigator's report. 2O ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 City Attorney White. If the Council is going to use it as part of the evidence upon which the Council is making a decision, not only is he comfortable, but he thinks the applicant should be able to review it and comment on it as well; Mayor Daly. This is not a public hearing per land use operating procedures. City Attorney White. Technically, it is not even a hearing but under the Brown Act, any member of the audience including the applicant can comment on the item before the Council acts. They should proceed with the same process as last time hearing first from the applicant, any opponents, and then any rebuttal by the applicant. John Erskine, Nossman, Gunther, Knox and Elliott, 18101 Yon Karman, Irvine on behalf of South Coast Cab. They would be supportive of a brief two-week continuance on Council Member Lopez's request. During the recess, they heard about some late-arriving evidence that they have not had an opportunity to review. It is a technical procedural question. From a legal standpoint in choosing to submit a revised application, he called the City Attorney and discussed the fact that only the two findings were in play, i.e., public convenience or necessity and the ability to serve the entire City. To go to the issues in the other eight findings, financial, tax issues, etc., those were supposedly put to bed with the prior application. They repackaged that portion of the application and submitted new evidence with respect to the other two findings. It is a procedural difficulty for them. They are prepared to talk about it tonight but if Council persons have expressed an inability to vote, they do not want to be looking for three or four votes. Council Member Zemel. Only one has expressed that, but he is not sure about the other four. Mr. Erskine. He watched the video tapes and Council Member Lopez's discomfort based on lack of evidence by South Coast Cab Company relative to convenience and necessity. They have prepared that evidence. It is the new information that causes them concern. It is with great reluctance they are asking for a continuance because they do not want late-arriving evidence tainting the Council's decision-making process. Mayor Daly. There was a suggestion for a two-week continuance. He is supportive because they have new information that was provided to them that is of a pretty sensitive nature. Council Member Zemel. The issue was the public convenience and necessity and if the applicant has a sufficient amount of cabs. He does not think the documents have anything to do with those two issues. City Attorney White. The issues as far as staff has been concerned since the last hearing are the number of cabs and the public convenience and necessity. Staff in its last report last October indicated it was comfortable that all of the other criteria had been satisfied. If there is information that has gone to the Council on any of the other criteria, they cannot prohibit that from being given to the Council or being put into play by someone else. He believes staff is still comfortable in saying that the two issues are public convenience and necessity and the number of cabs. Mr. Larry Slagle, Yellow Cab Company. It was not their intent to spring any evidence that would cause confusion with respect to this application. There were merely some statements made at the last hearing relative to past history, things they thought to be contrary to what was really going on. They had somebody do the report that the Council has. They will notice the date showing it was recently completed. It was not intended to cause any delay in the hearings or any problems. It is their understanding that any information they uncovered with respect to the findings relating to the issuance of the new permit would be as relevant today as they were at the last hearing. The information has to do with the applicant's moral character and the type of operation they are going to allow in Anaheim. They (Yellow Cab) knew some comments were in error in their own mind and now those are substantiated. They think it is fairly explanatory on the face of the document. The other findings are public records they were informed of yesterday morning. They did some work and talked to their counsel and the final documents were not received until about 10:00 or 11:00 in the morning. The documents are public information and relate to the fact that the company operated on at least three occasions without insurance and owe certain back taxes to the State. He believe that is relevant when talking about the conduct and ability to operate relative to the Anaheim City Code and the criteria for issuance of a permit. 21 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, 1998 Mayor Daly asked if it is a hardship in any way on him (Slagle) and the persons with him to support a two-week continuance; Mr. Slagle answered, no. City Clerk Sohl interjected and noted that if continued, staff is asking that it be a three-week period since Mr. Poole will not be available in two weeks. Mr. Erskine, answering the Mayor, stated that three weeks is acceptable. He just wanted to convey the concern and outrage of their client. What they just heard is categorically untrue. Mayor Daly moved that consideration of the application submitted by South Coast Cab Company for a taxicab permit to operate in Anaheim be continued for three weeks to February 3, 1998. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. C2. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: City Attorney Jack White stated that there are no actions to report. C3. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Zemel. He would like the City Manager to look into the "utility user fee" tax hike of 2.85% approved by a decision of the Council, i.e., the State mandated utility fee tax hike, passed on to the customers of the City's Public Utilities -- the taxpayers and ratepayers. It is extremely disturbing to him when an issue like this goes down on a 3-2 vote by a vigorously split Council that the Utilities Department would then prepare at taxpayer's expense (utility bill) stuffers to inform the public that there is a 2.85% increase in their electric fee and say that the Anaheim City Council gave them approval to do so when it was a split vote. He received four calls today from people he knows asking why he voted for something like this. He emphasized, in his view, it is misinformation at taxpayer's expense. He does not want to micro-manage or edit what the Utilities Department does but he also does not want to get used in a "propaganda scheme" that this was a unanimous vote of the City Council. He would like to get some answers on how this happens, how to stop it and how they can give the correct message this was not a unanimous vote. He would like it reported back publicly and some sort of restriction on this. Mayor Daly. They will expect a response later; Assistant City Manager, Dave Morgan. There is no problem in doing so. Council Member Tait. At least when it is something like this, putting a positive spin on that public benefits fee, which he disagrees with, he would like to at least look at it before it goes out and comment on it. Council Member McCracken. She hopes the two Council Members will avail themselves of the opportunity to get some background material on restructuring in California. The have had opportunities over the past year with several workshops offered up and down the State on the legislation developed out of Sacramento which is imposing restructuring and the reasons behind it causing the City to do this. It is nothing anyone likes to do. If they are going to abide by restructuring of the City's Utilities, and this happens to be one of the mandated steps, they need to move forward in hopes that they can benefit from some of the other advantages of restructuring to make sure the City's utilities can be viable and able to be part of a partnership. 22 ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 13, t998 Council Member Zemel. It is not something they had to do. The Council voted 3-2 with two membem disagreeing (Zemel and Tait) with the statements just made. There is no penalty for not passing this on. There is already a 4% transfer from the Utilities fund into the General Fund. It was never explored that the Utilities could have 'eaten' that 2.85%. The fact that they are deregulating and being competitive and raising ratepayer fees is the reason he voted no. Being told they had to do it because staff said so without looking into other options, that is why he resents having it look like a unanimous City Council went along with it. Mayor Daly. The City Manager has the benefit of Council's comments and they will look fortyard to more information. ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consant, the City Council Meeting of January 13, 1998 was adjoumed to Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 8:30 a.m., City Hall West, 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, second floor, Gordon Hoyt Conference Center for a Budget Workshop (8:40 p.m.) LEONORA N. $OHL CITY CLERK 23