Loading...
1974/07/29.~.i~Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 29, 1974~ 7:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular Session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Farano, Herbst, Gauer, Johnson, Morley King and Tolar CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: Frank A. Lowry, Jr. CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Hougard DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Alan G. Orsborn PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton E. Piersall CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER: William G. Devitt ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts PLANNING SUPERVISOR: Don McDaniel ASSISTANT PLANNER: Bill Young ASSISTANT PLANNER: Annika Santalahti Mayor Thom called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., and advised that the purpose of this meeting was to conduct an informal work session with the City Planning Commission primarily to review progress on the projects outlined at the previous City Council-City Planning Commission Work Session, May 15, 1974. Co~nissioner Herbst called the Planning Commission meeting to order. PROC. RESS REPORT ON PROJECTS OUTLINED AT THE MAY 15~ 1974 CITY COUNCIL-CITY PLANNING CO~flSSION WORK SESSION: Mr. Don McDaniel reported on the status of each of these projects as follow: SHORT RAN~ PROJECTS (PRIORITY GROUP NO. 1): 1. 'Hillside Grading Ordinance - the finaldraft is in stages of completion and has been set for public hearing by the City Council on August 27, 1974. 2. R-3 Zone parking standards - the revised standards for parking in the Multiple-Family Residential Zone were adopted by the City Council on July 23, 1974. 3. Service Station Ordinance - this is scheduled for public hearing before the City Council on July 30, 1974. 4. Condominium Ordinance (RM-4000) - this has been adopted by the Council and will be effective on August 2, 1974. 5. Flood Plain Insurance Plan - this matter is still being pursued by staff with the intent of becoming involved in the Program. Preliminary stan- dards have been drafted to implement the Program, however, the City has not yet received notification of the boundaries of that area to be designated as the flood plain and entrance into the Program is not possible until this information is forthcoming. MEDIUM RANGE PROJECTS (PRIORITY GROUP NO. 1): 1. The four required elements of the General Plan (Conservation - Open Space; Seismic; Safety and Noise Elements) - the Seismic and Safety Element, · which have been combined into one element, will have public hearing before the Planning Commission on August 5, 1974. The remaining two elements, Noise and Conserva tion - Open Space, have been placed on the August 5, 1974 Planing Commission Agenda under Reports and Recommendations, and hopefully will be scheduled for public hearing on August 19, 1974 before the Planning Commission. It is anticipated that these elements would be ready for recommendation to the City Council by mid-September. 2. Hillside Zone - reports and other associated material on the Hill- side Zone have been prepared and iV is hoped that these can be discussed this evening. 74-751 City Hall, Anahet~ Ca.l.i.f. orn~a - coIn~CIL MIItUTES Jul~ 29 ~ 19.74 ~. ?: 30 P.M. LONG RANGE, I~OJECTB (PR,IORITY GROUP NO. 1): 1. Santa Aha Canyon General Plan Revision - this has been reviewed by staff and co~pared with the County's 1983 Land Use Element, and with the County growth policy and SCAG growth forecasts and there appears to be 'so~e conflict between the City of Anaheim Canyon General Plan and these other studies, primarily related to growth and population projections. 2. Cost/Benefit Study in the Santa Aha Canyon - theCity of Yorb~ Linda has pulled out of this Study but the Cities of Orange, Anaheim and the County of Orange are in the process of compiling information for Phase No. Nr. McDaniel concluded that the above were the items of major concern to the Council on Nay 15, 1974. He offered to answer any questions or provide additional information as Council might desire. ESTABLISHNglqT OF TASK FORCE: Councilman Seymour stated he feels revisions to the Santa Ann Canyon General Plan and the Cost/Benefit Study are cr{tical to the development of the Canyon, and suggested that a better approach might be the establishment of a Task Force, which would provide not only the technical capa- bilities of the City staff, but also input from the public (i.e., homeowners' group representatives) with representation from the City Council and City Planning Com~ission as well. He remarked that this Task Force, ~orking in concert in these areas would do two things: 1. It would keep attention focused on that particular area of the City. 2. It would assure that the Council is receiving input from all con cerned segmentsof the population. He thereupon recommended that such a Task Force be set up. Hayor Thom felt that this would be a valid approach and would acceler- ate review of the Hill and Canyon General Plan as ~ell as the implementation of the findings of the Cost/Benefit Study. Upon ascertaining opinions from the Council, Planning Commission, staff, developers and homeowners present as to the implementation of the Task Force approach, and receiving favorable comments in ieneral, the City Council determined that such Task Force would be established, comprised of the follow- ing representative members: two Council Members; three Planning Coemtssion Members; five representatives from homeowner groups; five representatives from developers; City staff as necessary. Some specific connents made regarding this approach were from Co~!s- sioner Farano who vas concerned .that the ~e~nbers of this Cora~tttee remain objective; further he felt one of the first goals of this Task Force should be to define what the City's problem in the hill and canyon area really is. Commissioner Johnson questioned whether the Task Force approach might not be inclined to slow the process down even further, to which Councilman Seymour remarked that it would be possible to protect against this by requiring that this Task Force report back to the Council or Planning Coumission in total on a regular basis such as monthly, and further that it would be hoped within a reasonable length of time, between 60 to 120 days, the Task Force, having defined the problem would have set forth at least their approach to same. COST/BENEFIT STUDY: Councilman Sneegas remarked that the Cost/Benefit Study has taken a ~uch longer time to compile than originally anticipated and requested what tnforamtion has been derived 8o far from this effort. Hr. McDaniel replied that there ts not yet anything conclusive forth- coming from the Study, but that most of those involved in it at staff level feel it will prove a worthwhile project and it would be inappropriate to pull out of it at this time when so much time and effort has been given. He advised that this type of study may even gain National significance. Hr. Hurdoch pointed out that the Cost/Benefit Study has taken a con- siderably longer time than anticipated primarily because it is a very large task. He noted that it takes a lot of staff time in all operating departments as well 74-752 City ~'al!~ Aa_abeim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 29~ 1974~ 7:30 P.M. as the University of California at Irvine students involved, to look into the non-monetary operations and come up with a method for providing a value scale. In order to complete Phase No. II of the Study, he estimated that an additional six months time would be required, and unless Yorba Linda comes back into the Joint Study, it will cost an additional $8,000 from each Jurisdiction involved, which is not budgeted. He reported that all of the criteria have now been estab- lished and therefore, the ability to complete the Study is present. He noted that although the proposed Task Force would not be of help in completing this Study, certainly they would have an active role in utilizing its'findings. REVIEW OF HILL AND CANYON AREA GENERAL PLAN: Discussion centered about a review of the Hill and Canyon General Plan which was generally felt to'be indicated since, as Commissioner Farano pointed out, there has been nothing but problems since development started in the area, as evidenced by the fact that neither homeowners nor developers are happy with the current situation. Mr. McDaniel related that it is difficult for staff to know'what kind of changes Council desires in the General Plan and emphasized the very general nature of the Plan itself. He read a portion from the current General Plan indi- catin$ the intent and'objective for the hill and canyon area to be low density residential development. He questioned how Council would change this to reflect their attitude. Councilman Seymour voiced the opinion that a part of the problem lies in the fact that the General Plan is not specific enough, that it sets parameters within which there is a wide margin. He cited, as an example, that an area desig- nated for medium density may range from 6 to 18 units to the acre, which in his opinion allows too broad a margin. He felt that the General Plan should desig- nate densities which would more closely equate with the Council's objectives for the area. Councilwoman Kaywood was of the opinion that the densities as set forth in the General Plan originally were too high. She cited as examples, areas such as Villa Park, in which density has remained very low and developers still find a ready market for the homes constructed. Mr. Murdoch remarked that Council can, if it so desires, narrow the categories for density ranges in the General Plan, but that the General Plan must by definition be general and non-specific inn acute. To go any further is tanta- mount to preparing a zoning plan whereby Council would be prezoning all properties in the hill and canyon area ahead of time. He further stated that the means of implementing density are through zoning and, therefore, a change in the makeup of the zones would be the effective method to achieve the goals of the General Plan. He noted that the language of the General Plan as it exists does in fact reflect what everyone feels should be done. The differences appear when it comes down to a definition of how the General Plan is applied, and in this area opinions differ from individual to individual. Mr. Roberts pointed out another approach which Council might take, which would be to do precise planning for the area such as has been done already with the Anaheim Hills PC Zone. In this manner Council would place properties in specific zones consistent with Council's current thinking. Mr. LeRoy Rose, offered the observation that there is not so much a zon- ing problem as it is the implementing of building codes and standards. He stated that these have always created problems for developers, and as long as there are rules and regulations based on a numbered system there will be variances. He Was of the opinion a project should be left free to be approved or disapproved on its own merits, as by inculcating various rules, this creates an impetus for the developer to try to push to the limits. Further, he felt that City Building Codes should not be developed around the theory of solving a prospective buyer's problem, but rather he should be made aware of what is entailed in the home he seeks to purchase. For instance, if an individual elects to live in a hillside area, then he also must accept the attendant dangers and inconveniences such as snakes, fires, limited parking, etc., because he wishes to live in a nature terrain. Councilwoman Kaywood remarked, in answer to Mr. Rose's comments, that she might agree with him if the builder or deVeloper were to describe adequately 74-753 City Hall~ .A~a.h.eim., Ca$ifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES '- July 29, 1974~ .7:30 P.M. and completely the situation to the prospective buyer. She felt there is a tend~cy towards lower standards when developers are left to their own devices and ~inimum standards very often become the maximum. She cited as an example' the RS-5000 Zone, which was intended to act as a buffer between apartments and R-1 properties and is now completely taken for granted as a residential zone on its ow~. Councilman Seymour left the meeting. (8:50 P.M.) HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA: Mr. Don McDaniel related that the packets of material distributed to Council and Planning Commission Members prior to this meeting, inclmded copies of the zoning regulations for those zones which are specifi- cally used for hillside development, namely, the R-E, R-H-22,000, R-H-10,000 and C-H zones. Also included were copies of Council policies related to Hillside Development such as the Peralta Hills and Mohler Drive Roadway Standards; City participation in hillside arterial highways; street tree requirements; and special hillside street standards. In addition, two new zones Were submitted - a residential single-family hillside zone with no particular density outlined, and a hillside zone (RS-H) which suggests the elimination of typical zoning site development standards and relies almost totally on the Uniform Building Code. The only zoning aspects included in this proposed zone relate to the kinds of uses permitted, which is limited to single- and multiple-family residen- tial, and the amount of coverage on a particular property. All other areas would be governed strictly by the Building Code. Mr. McDaniel commented that this is a unique approach for the City of Anaheim and would be a step in the direction of providing maximum flexibility for the developer. Mr. Bill Young related that the objective of this RS-H Zone is to re- duce the number of variances and Code waivers currently seen im a typical hill- side subdivision. This concept was developed by first reviewing the present zones used to implement hillside development and, in particular, the development standards incorporated therein. Next, a survey was done on the number of successful variances in hill- side subdivisions. The result was the RS-H Zone (Residential Single-Family Hill- side) which permits single-family residential uses in either detached, semi- attached or attached structures. This proposal would place several regulations on attached dwelling units similar to the RM-4000 standards. Another regulation which appears to be necessary is to require some form of homeowners' associations. Mr. Young briefly reviewed the various proposed sections of this ordinance and pointed out the various standards or requirements or lack thereof which this zone would contain. He stressed that this proposal is in preliminary draft form and would warrant further careful consideration of each section prior to adoption. The basic difference between this proposed zone and other residential zones, is that the RS-H Zone would rely mainly on Building Code require~ents and eliminate the side yard end.front setback requirements, permit- ting the developer the flexibility necessary to develop on hillside terrain, and to encourage such development to be in keeping with the natural amenities of the areas to preserve their unique scenic resources. Following Mr. Young's sum-mry, Commissioner Gauer inquired what kind of density the Council might expect with this proposed RS-H Zone. Mr. Young replied that the density would be at the discretion of Council. He further noted that it is expected the major utilization of this zone would be by developers with lots under 10,000-square feet. Councilwoman Kaywood introduced the subject of providing off-street storage for recreational vehicles and felt that developers should be encouraged to provide some facilities for these in new subdivisions because of the many families who now own them. Mrs. Jean Morris, private homeowner, and Mr. John Millick, representa- tive of Anaheim Hills, Inc., contributed ideas and suggestions for storage of recreational vehicles based on solutions used in other areas. Mrs. Morris advis- ed that in some subdivisions, garages have been constructed to accommodate the extra height of a recreational vehicle and Mr. Milleck advised that some devel- opers have provided special parking lots for these vehicles, for which the C__i.~y Ha.ll~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 29, 1974~ 7:30 p.M. homeowner pays a rental fee. Mr. Milleck conceded that the problem could be solved design wise, but this would provide no assurance that the homeowner would not use the extra space in the garage for purposes other than recreational vehicle storage and still keep his camper or boat in the driveway or on the street. In comparison to the zone under discussion, Councilman Thom noted that the RS-5000 Zone originally was intended as a step-down zone from R-3 and to be used as a buffer between apartments and single-family residential zones, but what has in effect happened is the creation of an additional single-family zone. Councilwoman Kaywood also observed that it was expected, pursuant to the adoption of this RS-5000 Zone, that a smaller home on a Smaller lot could be constructed which would provide lower cost housing, however this never occurred. Commissioner Herbst expressed concern that this proposed RS-H Zone, if adopted, include adequate provision for parking both off- and on-site, because giving certain building contractors latitude such as this would mean 'that they would build without such considerations and the result would be an extremely cramped, overcrowded area which would be difficult to sell. He further, pointed out that he felt it is necessary, because of the few developers who will build to the absolute limit if allowed, that the City have standards and regulations of some sort. He pointed out that if all developers were conscientious these might not be necessary. He stated he would be in favor of giving the developer latitude within certain guidelines provided that other property owners are adequately protected. Commissioner Farano stated that he believed more than 50% of the pro- Jects built in the hills with variances were considered on their own merits and not as hardship situations. Mr. LeRoy Rose felt that the terrain in hillside areas provide suffi- cient restriction over what can be done without grading. Further, he noted that all cluster-type development will, of necessity, have homeowners' associations, so that when an individual elects to purchase in'these areas he will know exactly what the rules are and what his protection is. Commissioner Farano pointed Out Chat the covenants, conditions and restrictions of a homeowners' association are not legally enforceable by the City, but only by the individual Citizens themselves under restrictive rules laid down by court precedents. He stated that these have proven to be extremely difficult to enforce, and both he and Mayor Thom related incidents from personal experience illustrating that the homeowners' association has little recourse against a viola- tor of its covenants, conditions and restrictions. Mr. Rose related that he felt zoning restrictions unnecessary as the land itself governs what can be done with it if it is developed naturally in keep- ing with the terrain. Commissioner Farano statedthat there is'nothing in the current ordin- ances which forces a developer to grade in the manner which has been done; that property could have been developed in the manner to which Mr. Rose referred, with respect for the integrity of the natural terrain. Both Mr. Millick and Mr. Rose disagreed with Commissioner Farano on this point, indicating that Just the one requirement that lot pads drain back towards the street alone would force the developer to grade. At the conclusion of this discussion, Mayor Thom noted the late hour and suggested that this work session be brought to a close. Councilwoman Kaywood interjected one comment requesting that the Council and Commission Members look at the aerial map of the flood plain which contained, in her opinion, far too many 5,000-foot lots. Mayor Thom stated that he felt some progress has been made on the prior- ities as set forth at the May 15, 1974 Work Session. He commended both staff and Planning Commission for the tremendous Job they had performed over the last few months in realizing the progress achieved. 74-755 City Hall,. Anaheimt California - COt~qCIL MINUTES - July 29~ 1974~ ~7:30 ADJ~ - CITY ~IlqG CO~MISSION: Commissioner C, auer moved to adjourn. Commissioner Farano seconded the motion- }t0TION CARRIED. (9: 50 P .M. ) ABJO~ - CITY COUNCIL: Councilwoman Kayvood moved to adjourn, Councilman Snee~as seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 9:50 P.M. City Clerk~ ' City Hallm... Anaheim} California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 30m 1974} 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRBS~IqT: COUNCIL MI~IBERS: Kay~ood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom ABSENT: COUNCIL M~HBERS: None PRBS~T: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis .- CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Hougard PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ~MINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: John Harding ZONING'SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts PLANNING SUPERVISOR: Don McDaniel ASSISTANT PLANN~: Robert Kelley The Mayor called the meeting to order. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Calvin L. Pebley led the Assembly in the Pledge of 'Allegiance to the Flag. RESOLUTION OF W~LCOM~: Resolution of Welcome for the Ancient Order of Hibernians in America, on the occasion of their selecting Anaheim as the site for their International Convention, Jttty 29 through August 1, 1974, was unanimously adopted by the City Council. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Fleeting held june 11, 1974, were approved on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilwoman Kayvood. MOTION CARRIED .... WAIVER OF ~_.~.DING - ORDIliAlqCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Sneelas mOved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the vaiver of reading 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 ordinance or resolution. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - F~IAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $1,511,698.90, in accordance with the 1974-75 Budget, ~ere approved. PUBLIC H~RI.~G - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-63: Initated by the City Plannin$ Co~mis- sion for a change in zone from County of Orange A-1 to City of Anaheim R-A, on the ~orth side of Santa Ana. Canyon Road, between Nobler Drive and Outntana Drive (Santa Ana Canyon No. 4 Annexation) and submitted together with request for cate- gorical exemption from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. The City PlanninICommission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-130, advised that the Director of Development Services has determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class No. 1 of the City of Anaheim Guidelines for the requirement for an environmental impact report 'and is therefore categorically exempt. It further recomended unconditional approval of Reclassification No. 73-74-63. Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that subject reclassification~rlll provide R-A zoning on the property within Santa Aha Canyon No. 4 A~nexation. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council, either in favor or in opposition to the proposed reclassification; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. ENVI.~ONi~NTAL IMPACT R~PORT - CATEGORICAL ~X~MPTION: On motion by Councilw~man Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council ratified the determin- ation of the Director of Development Services that the proposed activity falls