1998/09/01ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
MAYOR: Tom Daly
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Shirley McCracken, Tom Tait, Bob Zemel, Lou Lopez
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT:
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER: Tom Wood
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
ASST. CITY CLERK: Ann Sauvageau
FINANCE DIRECTOR: Bill Sweeney
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
ZONING MANAGER: Greg Hastings
POLICE INVESTIGATOR: Tom Engle
PRINCIPAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNER: Alfred Yalda
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 3:00 p.m. on
August 28, 1998 at the City Hall Bulletin Board, (both inside and outside the entrance to City Hall)
containing all items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the worksop portion of the Council meeting of September 1, 1998 to order, all Council
Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance (3:25 p.m.)
City Manager, James Ruth. This is the appointed time for a workshop with the Budget Advisory
Commission (BAC) requested by the City Council. It is a pleasure to introduce the Chairman of the
Commission, Mr. Dan Van Dorpe.
WORKSHOP WITH BUDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION:
105:
Chairman, BAC, Dan Van Dorpe first
introduced the members of the Commission who were present -- David Stoll, Bill O’Connell, Jeff Roberts
and Stan Sewell. (Absent were Phil Knypstra and Cindy Floriani). Mr. Van Dorpe gave the background
relative to the Commission, when it was originally brought into existence by the Council,
economic/budgetary circumstances at that time, and the issues which they undertook. The Commission
began during a period of fiscal crisis and in its early years, a great deal of attention was paid to that crisis
including the bankruptcy problems in the County. During the 1997 fiscal year, the Commission was
heavily involved in reviewing various City functions to determine the feasibility of privatization upon
which he elaborated. During the current FY, the Commission has focused its attention on keeping
abreast of the developments related to deregulation of the electric utility, have provided a continual look
at salary matters and last month sent to the Council their recommendation regarding the matter of
binding arbitration as well as several salary analyses prepared by Mr. Knypstra who intended to be
present today. He (Knypstra) is the current Dean of the Business Department of Cal State Dominguez
Hills and sends his apologies for being unable to attend today. Commission Member, Cindy Floriani is
also General Manager of Facilities Engineeing and she may be present before the workshop is
concluded.
Basically, their purpose is outlined in the ordinance but the Commission is here to serve the Council and
has placed before them a tentative schedule for the coming year (see Budget Advisory Commission
Workplan - FY1998/99 - issues listed - Employee Compensation and Benefits, Deregulation (Electric
Utility), Economic Development/Redevelopment, Anaheim Resort, Privatization, Long-Range Financial
Forecasting and Budget Review - made a part of the record). They want to do what the Council wants
them to do.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Mayor Daly. He remembers when the Commission was created in approximately 1991. Since then,
finances have improved dramatically. Nevertheless the challenge is complicated and time consuming.
Some of the items on the work plan have already been handled but most have not yet been handled in
detail. He asked for Council comments relative to the plan or any other issues.
Council Member Lopez. Noting first that he was pro-airport, he asked if the BAC had interfaced with any
of the groups regarding the El Toro Airport -- has there been any analysis on what the impact will be on
the City and its future growth dependent on what happens.
Dan Van Dorpe. That issue has not been addressed to date. He has attended some of the presentations
made by ETAP and the County. There is now a new County plan. With that new plan, perhaps if the
Council is interested, that is an issue the Commission could address.
Council Member Zemel. He is more concerned about things in the budget right now. They would like to
be able to look to the Commission for advice on issues that are long term -- what might be privatized,
what might work, how can they make cuts, where can they be proactive, i.e., those things they or staff
might not see, etc. An “age-old” issue that he has broached in the past, where are City salaries in
comparison to the private sector. They constantly hear that civil servants do not make as much as those
in the private sector and the private sector says things are out of control. He would like to settle the
matter once and for all but they have been told it cannot be done (a like comparison). If the present
Commission makeup tells him that it cannot be done, perhaps he would believe it. What he is interested
in, for example, a salary comparison of a City Utility Lineman compared to an SCE Lineman, all the way
down the line.
Dan Van Dorpe. A Subcommittee is working on the issue and the Chair is Phil Knypstra. He added, in
addition to just comparing salaries, it is necessary to look at benefits. He then elaborated on some of the
benefit issues that should be analyzed.
Council Member Tait. He would like some ideas or a proactive look from the Budget Commission, if they
are not getting direction from the Council and there is something the Commission would like to study on
its own that might make sense to privatize, to give them some ideas.
Mayor Daly. He noted that the issue of privatization is part of the 1998/99 workplan. He asked some of
the possible new areas that have been discussed between staff and the Commission; Mr. Bill Sweeney,
Finance Director answered that privatization is a work-in-progress. They have discussed a number of
areas, one is maintenance.
Mr. Van Dorpe stated there may be other reasons to look at privatization other than cost savings, one
being insurance ratings in the City. He gave an example in the City where insurance ratings could have
an impact.
Council Member Tait. Instead of any one area, he would welcome the Commission’s direction or advice
as to what the Council should be looking at. He asked if there was a consensus.
Mayor Daly answered, yes and urged the Commission to feel free to initiate suggestions or ideas as long
as it is in the parameters of the budget; Commissioner Stoll stated if they find they have an area of
concern, the Commission will let the Council know and at that time the Council can determine if they
want the Commission to pursue it further.
Council Member Tait. Another area of interest to him is long-range financial forecasting. He would like
the Commission to give a five-year forecast although he is aware it is somewhat speculative in the out
years. A lot of the City’s forecasting depends on TOT and they make certain assumptions relative to that
tax. He would like a check of that by the Commission.
2
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Council Member McCracken. Relative to employee compensation and benefits, they might also
examine some of the studies that have been done in Orange County comparing government employees
to employees in the private sector. Some are being done on an annual basis. Even if Anaheim in itself
cannot be broken down, they could see where Anaheim employees fit in to a County-wide study. The last
study she saw showed a wide range -- some employees in government are way underpaid and some way
overpaid.
Council Member McCracken continued that, for her, deregulation in the electric utility is a very major
issue and what it is going to mean for the businesses and residents of Anaheim. She does not know if
anyone really knows where this is going and believes Commission input would be valuable to the
Council. Relative to economic development and Redevelopment, part is financial and part is land use.
It is changing the whole face of the City and is important if they are going to be competitive in the next
century. The estimate is a population of 400,000 by 2020. It is necessary to determine all of the
infrastructure and support systems that will be needed. The Commission’s advice on these issues is
going to be vital.
Council Member Zemel. He wants to see if there is consensus relative to employee compensation and
benefits. He noted that, although it is listed in the workplan, they do not talk about comparing position by
position to the private sector. If there is no opposition by the Council, he would like to go forward with
that; Mayor Daly. He wanted to know if it is going to be a formal or an informal study and if the data is
available.
David Stoll. They could start on an informal study basis. If at that time the Council feels they need to
delve further into the issue, they could do a formal study; Dan Van Dorpe. He is sure the Human
Resources Department (HRD) has a lot of studies available. They need to look at what those are, what
they have done, and subsequently give the Council their input.
Council Member Zemel. He would like the Commission to give the Council an idea of what the
comparison is from their perspective. If they use staff material, that would be fine.
Council Member Tait. He would be interested in the Commission’s personal experience relative to the
issue since a few members run their own companies, perhaps an informal type survey.
Mayor Daly. Regarding economic development and Redevelopment, it is fair to say they do not look to
the BAC for primary advice in those areas. Nevertheless, he believes it is helpful for the Commission to
know what the economic development activities are, where the money is being spent, and where the
priorities are. He for one would like to hear from the Commission on that subject. It is part of the budget
proecss and it is legitimate. It may end up crossing over into land use in other areas, but he still feels
they need to have their opinions.
Dan Van Dorpe. The Commission is looking forward to getting an update on Sportstown activities;
Mayor Daly stated that is one example and the Disney expansion as well.
Council Member Zemel asked if they had any suggestions or ideas to increase the level of
communication between the Commission and the Council. He has heard there is a feeling the Council
does not even know they are there. He would like to rely on their opinions more often.
David Stoll. A lot of times they are addressing issues that have already been decided. He feels the
communication “freeway” would be a lot more clear if the Commission could give its input prior to
decisions being made. He would then feel what he is saying would have more impact. If they are
involved in the loop, they will be involved in the process prior to that decision being made.
Jeff Roberts. He feels that is the direction that has been missing at least for him. They have been
waiting for direction from the Council and not taking the initiative to bring issues up. Now he believes
3
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
from this workshop they will be able to go back to their subcommittees and look for areas to bring to the
Council as opposed to the Council bringing something to them.
Council Member Zemel. Traditionally the Council takes a look at the budget in January. Perhaps there
is another opportunity for another Budget Commission-Council workshop and/or take part in the actual
retreat. He asked the City Manager if he can help on some of those opportunities in setting up more
communication.
City Manager Ruth answered, absolutely. They encourage it. Council has given good direction today.
The BAC has always been invited to budget workshops. The more they get involved, the better they are
informed and they can pick and choose what they want to get involved in.
Mayor Daly. Some BAC members, or at least one (Mr. Knypstra) comes to speak to the Council
regularly at Council Meetings. A couple of members have come to the budget workshops prior to
adoption of the City budget. The Commission has only been in existence for seven years whereas
Anaheim operated 130 years without such a Commission. He believes they are also the only City in
Orange County that has a Budget Advisory Commission. They are learning as they go as to how best to
use the BAC. If there are suggestions or improvements, they need to hear those. It is also very helpful
to have the meeting minutes as well as their recommendations.
City Manager Ruth. Staff has been involved for about seven years. On behalf of staff he would like to
express his appreciation not only to the current members, but past members who have worked with staff
closely on some difficult budget issues.
David Stoll. He then recapped the issues/concerns Council Members would like to see:
Council Member Zemel -- His concern is where does the City stand salary wise as compared to other
cities and the private sector.
Council Member Tait -- He is looking for a more proactive point of view from the Commission; Council
Member Tait interjected and stated particularly privatization and also financial forecasting.
Council Member McCracken. She feels the current plan is extensive but there have been some analyses
of City to private sector salaries and her concern is benefits as well; Council Member McCracken added,
also electric restructuring.
Council Member Lopez -- His interest is the fiscal impact on the City as to what will happen relative to
the El Toro Base reuse.
Mayor Daly -- He is interested in economic development, redevelopment, evaluate the job the
Commission is currently doing, are there any missed opportunities that they might be able to take action
on, and that the Commission should not hesitate to bring those issues forward they feel are of concern to
the table.
Mayor Daly thanked the Commission for the time they devote to the City as volunteers in this very
important position.
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.
4
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
1.
Employee organization:
Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, IBEW and Anaheim Fire
Association.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
2.
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.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION:
3.
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9:
20 or more potential cases. (Anaheim Resort Area condemnation actions).
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR:
4.
(Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property:
Public rights-of-way in Anaheim
Negotia
ting parties:
Southern California Edison Company and City of Anaheim.
Under negotiation:
Terms and franchise.
RECESS:
Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member McCracken seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:05 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS:
Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of September 1, 1998 to order at 5:32 P.M. and
welcomed those in attendance.
INVOCATION:
Reverend Penny Tucker of the Anaheim First Nazarene Church gave the invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Council Memb
er
Shirley McCracken led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
DECLARATIONS OF RECOGNITION:
119:
Declarations of Recognition were unanimously adopted
by the City Council to be presented to Anthony Hernandez and Ismael Rosas for their participation in the
recently held National Junior Olympics and the National Junior Golden Gloves Tournament.
Moses Menchaca, Community Services Supervisor, introduced both Anthony and Ismael. Anthony
Hernandez (15 yrs. old and California State Junior Olympics Champion) was a Bronze Medalist in the
Heavyweight Class at the National Junior Olympics tournament in Marquette, Michigan. He is a student
at Polaris High School. Ismael Rosas (also 15 yrs. old and California State Junior Golden Gloves
Champion) was the National Junior Golden Gloves Champion in the 158-lb. weight division. The
tournament was held in Ohio. He is a student at Loara High School. Anthony was trained by Richard
Icenhour and Ismael by Evon Jurado.
Mayor Daly and Council Members commended both young men for their accomplishments in the recent
tournaments.
5
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Council Member Lopez stated what is really important about the Anaheim Boxing Club is that it provides
a place for youngsters to go and gives them direction as was the case when he was a young man.
Anthony and Ismael are not only doing well in boxing, but also their education process. He expressed his
great pride in these young men especially becoming national champions. He also commended the City
Manager for continuing City support of the Boxing Club.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY
in the amount of $6,883,777.77 for the period ending
August 23, 1998 and $3,113,782.07 for the period ending August 31, 1998, in accordance with the 1998-
99 Budget, were approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority
and the Public Financing Authority meetings. (5:41 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting ( 6:02 p.m.)
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Debbie O’Neill, 5959 Avenida Arbol, Anaheim - President of Concerned Citizens of the Canyon. She is
present to speak on a major issue in the hills, the Eli Home located at Canyon Crest and Santa Ana
Canyon Road. She feels it is time to put the issue to rest. It has not only caused this Council to be
divided, but residents themselves. The Eli Home is to provide a safe shelter for the abused but with the
CUP pulled, it cannot operate as it was intended. At this time, it is forced to operate without a permit or
State license. She feels it is necessary to provide a safe home for the abused. Eli Home must help in
resolving these issues. She will be asking Eli Home and Lori Galloway to provide the Council, any
resident or organization, a complete copy of their financial records including all bank statements, checks
and all grant applications for the past four years. She will ask that they be delivered to Lee Sohl, the City
Clerk, no later than September 9, 1998. Sonja Grewal has contacted her to allow her to review the Eli
Home’s books. It is more important for a full, open, public disclosure. Citizens deserve better and only a
full open disclosure will accomplish that. No one has asked her to request these records and she deeply
resents accusations to the contrary, i.e. that the residents of Canyon Crest have had an influence on her
to request the records. She is a person who makes up her own mind. As a community, they need to
heal. When people accept community money, the public should be allowed to review the records of
those who have received that money. By releasing these records, it will give Eli Home the opportunity to
prove or disprove all the accusations that have been either rumor or fact.
Gene Secrest, 121 S. Canyon Crest, Anaheim. He reported on a featured OCN TV program on August
24, 1998 wherein Council Member Zemel made serious accusations against the community (Canyon
Crest area surrounding the Eli Hime) as well as leaders of the City, specifically, the Mayor. He relayed
the content of the program, what Council Member Zemel said relative to campaign contributions
received by the Mayor trying to connect those with Canyon Crest residents (which Mr. Secrest refuted),
accusing the residents of banding together in hatred, etc. He has come across Mr. Zemel’s lies in the
past claiming he (Secrest) perjured himself in a case in Superior Court when he was sued concerning the
Eli Home. He also reported on other issues broached by Mr. Zemel on the TV program stated as fact but
uncorroborated by official records. He feels Council Member Zemel must be censured from any further
discussion or vote concerning the Eli Home.
Dr. Arthur Charap, 7551 E. Martella Lane, Anaheim, the street adjacent to Canyon Crest, the community,
that by Council Member Zemel’s innuendo, is discriminating. It is difficult when someone accuses
another of discrimination and racist behavior to defend oneself especially when the accused does not
have access to a public forum. He takes umbrage in that accusation. The issue involving the Eli Home
is about fraud and charity and nothing else. Their community was accused of contributing campaign
6
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
funds and none have done that as far as he can tell. He believes it is within his right (today) having no
other public forum, having been slandered by a member of the Council and statements having been
made unequivocally as to the character of the people in the community, Mr. Zemel needs to, line by line
and issue by issue review the tape and document his accusations or action be taken against him. He
(Charap) feels he has no other recourse other than personal legal action. He is begging the Council to
also review the tape, look at each individual accusation, examine it, find the facts underneath it, and
determine whether there is any grain of truth in any of the statements made and, if not, take appropriate
action against Mr. Zemel.
Jean Avril, Canyon Crest Drive. She also watched the OCN Prime Story feature. She was amazed at
the ease with which both Lori Galloway and Mr. Zemel lied. She called the Station Manager and OCN
owes Mayor Daly 1/2 hour of time for rebuttal. She believes Council Member Zemel is the Councilman
who has been “bought off.” In the last election, the Galloways were Mr. Zemel’s largest campaign
contributors donating $1,635. As a member of the Council he (Zemel) has an obligation to the citizens of
Anaheim to uphold an eithical code of conduct and promote public safety. Some of his actions over the
last few months have been very irresponsible and clearly intended to provoke a dangerous environment
of racial and class tension towards Mayor Daly, Council Member McCracken, Council Member Lopez
and Anaheim citizens who happen to oppose Galloway’s charity abuse in her Eli Home. Bob Zemel, Lori
Galloway and Richard Chavez invented the discrimination accusations. The accusations against Eli
Home opponents were invented to deflect the real issue of the Eli Home and their defiant actions and
refusal of any oversight or compliance with the CUP. After further comments regarding the issue she
closed by stating that Council Member Zemel’s attempt to make Anaheim’s elections partisan is an
embarassment. The issue is, honesty and character still counts. Mr. Zemel should do Anaheim and the
Republican party a favor and withdraw from politics.
Ray Currie, 7550 Martella, Anaheim and also on behalf of his extended family at 7560, 7570 and 7580
Martella. He is present to express his concern about the ongoing debate about the Eli Home operation.
The proponents have a hard time recognizing the truth. In the recent Council meeting where the CUP
was denied, Mayor Daly and Council Members McCracken and Lopez finally recognized the truth of the
matter. They recognized that the Code Enforcement Officers did not want to be the bad guys who cited
the home nor the Police Officers who showed up at the home where many City officials had been
photographed. They know that the area surrounding the Eli Home is racially diverse so to say that this
land use issue is racially motivated is ridiculous. Their history with the City is one of promises, violations
and lies. The supporters of the business have every right to march, express their views and to speak to
the press. This expression does not change the facts that the Council recognized and acted upon.
Learning and acting upon the facts is what makes you (Council) members and leaders of the community.
Manipulating the facts to fit their agenda is for the politicians.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
Public input was received on Item A20 (see discussion under that item).
MOTION:
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for
the Council meeting of September 1
, 1998. Council Member Zemel
seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A30:
On motion by Mayor Daly,
seconded by Council Member Zemel
, 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 Resolutions Nos. 98R-173
through 98R-178
, both inclusive, for adoption.
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance Nos. 5646 for adoption and 5647 through 5648
for introduction. Refer to
Resolution/Ordinance Book.
A1.
118: Rejecting and denying certain claim
s filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management.
7
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
The following claims were filed against the City and actions taken as recommended:
a. Claim submitted by
Elizabeth H. Barton
for
bodily injury
sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about
April 4, 1998
.
b. Claim submitted by
Jose Felix Ramirez
for
property damage
sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about
July 7, 1998
.
c. Claim submitted by
Farmers Insurance Group
, Insured: Barry and Michele Fullman for
property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
March 25, 1998
.
d. Claim submitted by
Jojos California Family Restaurants, Inc.
for
alleged claims
as set forth in
their claim of June 3, 1998 as respects any alleged incidents which occurred on or after
December 3, 1997.
A2.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Utilities Board meeting held June 4,
1998.
156: Receiving and filing the Anaheim Polic Department Crime and Clearance Analysis for the
month of July, 1998.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Budget Advisory Committee meeting held July 15,
1998.
175: Receiving and filing a Notice of Extension of Time filed before the United States of
America Fede
ral Energy Regulatory Commission by California Independent System Operator
Corporation.
A3.
167: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Building Energy Consultants, in the
amount of $19,292.50 for Santa Ana Canyon Road Traffic Signal Interconnect; 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.
A4.
167: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Pro Tech Engineering Corporation, in
the amount of $68,650 for Imperial Highway Traffic Signal Interconnect; 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.
A5.
123: Approving the assignment of the Katella Avenue Smart
Street Consultant Contract from
UMA Engineering, Inc., to KFM Engineering, Inc.
A6.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1761 Harbor Boulevard
(R/W 5180-18) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project and the Anaheim Resort
AreaImprovement Project; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and
authorizing the acquisition payment of $266,550 to Boon Hoo Yee, Ah Tai Yap, Ah Sang Te,
Heng Fatt Wong, Kwee Bee Yap, Seet Hua Ooi, and Pauleen Phou
ng Lieu.
A7.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1600 South Harbor
Boulevard (R/W 5210-5) - Anaheim Resort Area Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $9,800 to
Shirish H. Patel.
8
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
A8.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1050 West Ball Road
(R/W 5240-2) - Anaheim Resort Area Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk
to execute sai
d Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $24,792 to Ruben
Rodriguez and Martha Rodriguez.
A9.
113: RESOLUTION NO.
98R-173
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM authorizing the destruction of certain city records more than two years old. (Public
Works Department.)
A10.
123: Approving Program Supplement Agreement Nos. 013 and 014 to State-Local Entity Master
Agreement No. TSM/FCR-5055 with Caltrans regarding Transportation System Management
Projects.
A11.
123
: Approving the First Amendment to Agreements with Merit Civil Engineering, Inc., and
Dewan, Lundin & Associates, in an amount not to exceed $100,000 each for miscellaneous
engineering design services for public works improvement projects; and authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreements.
A12.
158: RESOLUTION NO.
98R-174
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying certain real properties or interests therein to
the City. (R/W 5
210-5)
A13.
160: Accepting the low bid of Excel Environmental, in an amount not-to-exceed $25,070 for the
removal of one underground fuel tank, and the installation of one above ground fuel tank, in
accordance with Bid #5839.
A14.
160: Accepting the low bid, and authorizing the execution of an Agreement with L. Barrios and
Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $105,600 for landscape maintenance for a two year
period beginning September 14, 1998, with two one year optional extensions, in accor
dance with
Bid #5831.
A15.
160: Accepting the low bid of Utility Products Supply, in the amount of $110,160 for thirty 15KV
loadbreak subsurface switches, in accordance with Bid #5835.
A16.
160: Accepting the low bid of Canada Power Products Corporation, c/o Matzinger-Keegan, in
the amount of $170,950 for twenty-five 600 amp SF-6 subsurface switches, in accordance with
Bid #5832.
A17.
160: Accepting the low bid of the Okonite Company, in an amount not-to-exceed $641,085 for
140,000 feet of variou
s 15KV underground distribution cable, in accordance with Bid #5837.
A18.
160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue purchase orders, in an amount not to exceed
$4,699,900 for the purchase of various vehicles and equipment for City departments for Fiscal
Year 1998/1999.
A19.
171: ORDINANCE NO.
5647
(URGENCY) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
fixing and levying a property tax on full cash value of all property within the corporate limits of
the City of Anaheim for the fiscal year 1998/9
9, declaring the urgency thereof, and declaring that
this ordinance shall take immediate effect as an emergency measure. (Ad velorem tax
percentage of full cash value for redemption of general obligation bonds.)
A copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance is available for public review in the City Clerk’s
Office.
9
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
A20.
108: ORDINANCE NO.
5646
(ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending various Sections of Chapter 18.89 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code relating to
Sex-Oriented Businesses. (Introduced at the meeting of August 18, 1998, Item
A16.)
Roger Diamond, 2115 Main Street, Santa Monica 90405. He is present to speak on the subject. The
clients he represents, including the Imperial Theater, oppose the amendment for a number of reasons.
From a legal viewpoint, they believe the proposal is invalid. Assemblyman,Scott Baugh recently got
through the State Assembly and approved by Governor Wilson, AB726 to give cities the authority to
regulate certain businesses but that statute does not become effective until January 1, 1999. It
specifically exempts existing theaters from the provision of the statute -- theaters existing as of July 1,
1998. This does not appear to recognize that distinction. They believe, therefore, there is a fatal flaw.
Beyond that, the authority for these ordinances is being litigated in the appellate court in Orange County.
Based upon prior ordinances the City has adopted, it would be premature to pile on additional regulations
before the first ones can be sorted out. The proposed changes would severely limit the way the
businesses can operate and he believes with unintended consequences. The theory behind adult zoning
ordinances is that adult businesses cause adverse secondary effects in the surrounding area and,
therefore, must be zoned to be operated only in certain parts of the City. If they so tightly regulate the
businesses, he believes they are transformed into non-adult business which means there is no longer any
rationale for restricting their location. They, in effect, become regular businesses. There is a great risk
by regulating the businesses that they may lose the zoning power they have right now. His clients prefer
the restrictions now because they are zoned correctly. This ordinance would allow other businesses to
come in and operate anywhere in the City because under the regulations they would not be creating
secondary effects. Mr. Diamond then addressed other issues wherein the Mayor noted the three-minute
time limit for speakers. He (Diamond) then closed urging the Council not to adopt the amendments and
wait to see what happens to the appellate proceedings in the other case that is already pending.
Hal Mayer, resident and employee in the City, 2285 W. Broadway, Anaheim. He is against the proposed
ordinance. With the amount of money the Police Department has spent on the three legitimate
businesses, he believes that money needs to be returned and put into the Anaheim Police Department
for gang-related activities or narcotics. They employee a lot of people and the businesses are kept clean
inside and out. He is the Operations Manager for Imperial Theater. He is hoping the City uses funds
more wisely in the future. Everybody seems to be concerned about the secondary effects. All reports
were done in the 70’s; no one has done any in the 90’s. In the area of 2640 Woodland, all the property
values have actually gone up.
A21.
105: ORDINANCE NO.
5648
(INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM a
mending Section 1.04.540 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to the amount of
compensation payable to the Commissioners of the Anaheim Redevelopment and Housing
Commission.
A22.
123: Approving an Agreement with the Digital Equipment Corporation for services on computer
equipment, at a cost of $1,238.80 per month for the period of August 1, 1998 through July 31,
1999; and authorizing the City Librarian to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of
Anaheim.
A23.
149: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-175 A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM establishing a “No Parking” area in that area generally referred to as the Jeffrey-
Lynne Neighborhood for a period of one year. (Continued from the meetings of July 28, 1998,
Item A16 and August 11, 1998, Item A16.)
10
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
149: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-176 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM authorizing angle parking on the south side of Audre Drive between Ninth Street
and the east side of Michelle Drive; and from the west side of Je
ffrey Drive to the west side of
Walnut Street. (Continued from the meetings of July 28, 1998, Item A16 and August 11, 1998,
Item A16.)
See Staff updated staff report dated August 25, 1998 from the Code Enforcement Manager
recommending, “Based upon input recently received from the tenants and the potential developer, . . .
that the original parking plan be modified to allow 60 days for implementation of Phase I.”
Mayor Daly.The Code forcement Manager and City management staff continue to recommend the
proposed new parking program at Jeffrey-Lynne but recommending the first phase be slowed down
slightly to allow a 60-day phase in of the initial phase of the parking ban. He asked to hear from the
Code Enforcement Manager.
John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. They tried to address the different concerns that the tenants,
landlords, the Unitarian Church and Los Amigos had. By extending the time period an extra 60 days in
each phase will give staff the opportunity to look into any concerns and make the program more
successful. During the first 60 days, there will be no parking removed at all and staff will be working with
the single-family residents to the west. They have met with them and if there are any other parking
requirements that need to take place, staff will work with them further. He believes the current proposed
plan is a better plan than they started with. He also clarified for the Mayor that there will actually be a
slight net gain in available parking. Staff identified the number of garages which, if cleaned out and
used, there will actually be more parking than now.
Mayor Daly. For all the reasons articulated and as outlined in the report, he believes it is important for
the Council to act on the proposed program which he strongly supports.
Council Member McCracken. She stated that she and Council Member Lopez met with representatives
of the neighborhood as well and hoped they came up with an agreement that will enable the proposal to
go forward. It is only a year trial. They assured the residents that during this time if it was failing and not
meeting the needs of the community, they would bring it back to the Council to re-examine it. They
believe it will be very effective and create a positive atmosphere as has been the experience in the other
two areas where a similar program was implemented.
The following people spoke to the proposal (also see minutes of August 11, 1998 where extensive input
was received) and their comments summarized:
Dave Cordero, Apartment Association of Orange County. It appears to him and the Association that
there has been a good faith effort to insure the program is implemented fairly. The Apartment
Association had initial concerns when the proposal was first presented. After meeting with City staff,
their members and others in the Jeffrey-Lynne area, have withdrawn their opposition to the proposal and
want to go on record voicing their support. He thanked them (Council/staff) for the delicate handling of
the situation and making sure the best interests of the owners and residents are taken into consideration.
Maurice Abrams, 2549 Runyon, Anaheim. He has attended meetings with three Council Members
present and each said they did not want to make the quality of life more difficult for the tenants. He
believes they are sincere; however, he does not know how that can be done if tenants are required to
walk long distances to their cars to get to their (low-paying) jobs. He urged the Council not to pass the
no-parking proposal until adequate, convenient parking is located to serve the needs of the Jeffrey-Lynne
community.
Francisco Ceja, 1303 W. Lynne, Anaheim. The agreement was to wait 60 days and to use those 60 days
to find some additional parking spaces. In 60 days they will be waiting to hear where those additional
11
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
spaces are going to be. He then read letter from United Neighborhoods - LULAC #3016 signed by
Jessica Castro (LULAC #3016) and himself for the Jeffrey/Lynne Neighbors (subsequently submitted and
made a part of the record). The letter basically opposed the no-parking program which in part stated,
“Your arguments in favor of a parking ban are not credible to the communtiy, your claims of decreased
crime in a no parking area are unsubstantiated.”
Maurice Ogden, Minister, Unitarian Church/Orange County, 511 S. Harbor Blvd., Anaheim. The removal
of street parking in this area is going to work a severe hardship and inconvenience for the people of the
area. He hopes it is possible this community can remove the street parking and still wind up with more
parking than now. The most serious shortcoming that remains with this proposal is a clear, lack of a
definite program of alternative parking that will be available to the people of the community. (He
thereupon submitted his letter dated September 1, 1998 expressing his concerns - made a part of the
record).
Jim Benson, 905 S.(?) Parkway, Anaheim. His concerns are the number of garages (in the Jeffrey-
Lynne area) rented to non-residents and why the permit parking system was rejected. Before proceeding
he feels those questions need to be answered in a public forum.
Mr. Poole, answering Council Member Tait, then explained as he had in previous meetings that a
landlord is not allowed to rent out a garage to someone other than the tenant. They have been working
with the tenants because they have information on which landlords are doing so. One of the things they
are going to do in the first 60 days is to work with the tenants and notify the owners renting out garages is
now allowed.
Lila Jaegers, 2046 S. Mountain View, #14, Anaheim. She has resided in Haster-Orangewood for at least
30 years. She has been involved in every program tried in the neighborhood in an effort to improve
quality of life. Nothing worked. The only program that succeeded was the no-parking ban. She
thereupon gave specifics of how their neighborhood had improved. She would again like to say thank
you for giving her back her neighborhood.
William Moynihan, 1507 W. Cerritos, Anaheim. He is accompanied by several of his neighbors who live
in the 1500 block of West Cerritos representing over 100 years of residency and that is only four
neighbors. The Council/staff has addressed the fact that this was going to be phased in on a 60-day
basis and alluded to the fact that there would be permit parking. They have applied for permit parking.
All but one owner signed the petition. That owner could not be found at this time. The residents would
like the assurance that permit parking would be instituted before the ordinance is enacted.
Mayor Daly. He will ask staff to schedule availability of permit parking and tell them how it will work so it
is available before any possible impacts.
John Poole. He has been talking with Traffic Engineering staff and working closely with them. Permit
parking will be in place before any parking is removed in Jeffrey-Lynne. Permit parking comes to the
Council at the October 13, 1998 meeting. Further, he talked to other residents and if there is any need,
permit parking can be expanded. Staff wants to make sure there are no negative impacts.
Phil Iati, (President of Jeffrey-Lynne Owners Association), 317 Second Street, Huntington Beach. He
thanked those Council members who attended the August 22, 1998 Resident Appreciation Day at
Balsam. They were able to see the second neighborhood where they had carefully considered and
implemented no parking (Haster-Orangewood being the first). He then thanked Police Chief Gaston for
attending the Cleanup Day and Picnic at Haster-Orangewood on August 29. Relative to the current
proposal which he supports (also see input from Mr. Iati at the Council meeting of August 11, 1998). He
knows the Council will make the right decision and help save Jeffrey-Lynne from its own short
sightedness.
12
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Bob Ball, 1500 block of Laster. He would like to “ditto” the comments of Mr. Moynihan. He urged the
Council to proceed with vigor in implementing this somewhat delayed program. Mr. Poole and his staff
have done a good job in putting a new plan together and have given assurance there will be more
parking available.
Mr. Poole then answered questions posed by Council Member Zemel wherein he (Poole) reported that
out of the 753 total garages and carports, there are 183 spaces that tenants reported to staff either they
could not use the garage because the landlord would not let them or they would have to pay, or used for
storage, tenant storage or storage of inoperable vehicles.
Council Member Zemel surmised if they are successful in turning that around, there will be +69 parking
spaces; Mr. Poole agreed if they count the ones on Audrey Drive. As he explained, they are going to use
part of the underutilized portion of the Audrey Drive street closure for 23 spaces and about 30 spaces on
Cerritos where there had been no parking due to construction for the last 1 1/2 years.
City Attorney White then explained for Council Member Zemel that since the Municipal Code prohibits
leasing out spaces to non-residents, there is authority in the law that would allow those leases to be
found non-enforceable and would allow the parties to walk away from the agreement. Under the zoning
code, property owners are to provide a certain number of off street parking spaces available for use in
conjunction with apartment projects for the tenants on the property. If they are not doing so, they are in
violation of the zoning code.
Council Member Zemel. He initially had some problems with the proposal but now will not have any
problem supporting it. It is a program that will be brought back in a year for renewal or continuance.
Mayor Daly commended staff for all their hard work and to all those involved. He thereupon offered
Resolution No. 98R-175 and 98R-176 for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO
. 175
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING A “NO PARKING” AREA IN THAT AREA GENERALLY REFERRED
TO AS THE JEFFREY-LYNNE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR.
RESOLUTION NO.
176
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING ANGLE
PARKING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AUDRE DRIVE
BETWEEN NINTH STREET AND THE EAST SIDE OF MICHELLE DRIVE; AND FROM THE
WEST SIDE OF JEFFREY DRIVE TO THE WEST SIDE OF WALNUT STREET.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Tait asked the crime statistics in the Haster-Orangewood
neighborhood before they implemented a no-parking program; John Poole relayed the statistics which
reflected a dramatic reduction in crime including Part I crimes and public disorder.
Council Member Tait. He went through the neighborhood before they instituted the ban. It is now a
different place. He is not sure how it works, but it works. Relative to the testimony of Lila Jaegers, it is a
very rewarding feeling hearing that type of testimony. If it does not work in Jeffrey-Lynne, it will stop, but
with the experience gained in the other areas, it is worth a try and he believes it will be very successful.
A24.
153: RESOLUTION NO.
98R-177
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 98R-1
2, nunc pro tunc, adopting the
Memorandum of Understanding between the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association,
General Unit, and the City of Anaheim. (Community Services Outreach Worker.)
A25.
153: Approving the 1999 Health and Welfare plan rates, and authorizing the Human Resources
Director to sign all required renewal documents on behalf of the City.
13
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
A26.
127: Receiving and filing the Financial Impact of Binding Interest Arbitration report prepared by
Public Financial Management, Inc., concernin
g the potential associated costs.
A27.
171: RESOLUTION NO.
98R-178
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM adopting an Agreement to redistribute property taxes between the County of
Orange and the City of Anaheim for the subject territory referred to as the County of Orange
Katella Yard.
A28.
152: Approving the City of Anaheim’s participation in the United States Environmental
Protection Agency Energy Star Homes Program; and authorizing the Public Utilities General
Manager, o
n behalf of the City, to execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and take
actions as are necessary to implement the MOU.
A29.
123: Approving an Agreement between the California Manufacturing Technology Center, and
the City of Anaheim to provide Anaheim manufacturing customers a series of electric efficiency
seminars and on-site technical services for a total funding amount not-to-exceed $60,000.
A30.
114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held August 11, 1998.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R-
173
through 98R-
178
, 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 Resolution Nos. 98R-
173
through 98R-
178
, both inclusive, duly passed and
adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance Nos.
5646
and
5647
, 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.
5646
and
5647
, duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
CONDEMNATION HEARINGS - BALL ROAD AND WEST STREET IMPROVEMENT
A31. 121:
PROJECT AND ANAHEIM RESORT AREA IMPROVEMENT AND BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM:
To
consider the adoption of resolutions finding and determining the public interest and necessity for
acquiring and authorizing the condemnation of a portion of certain real properties as listed in the
following resolutions, in connection with the subject project/program and authorizing the law firm of
Rutan and Tucker, special counsel to the City, to proceed with said condemnation actions.
Submitted was report dated August 19, 1998 from the Public Works Department recommending adoption
of the subject resolutions for certain real properties at various locations as listed in the report.
City Manager Ruth reported that signed documents were received just this afternoon on the proposed
condemnation at 1055 and 1057 West Ball Road (Stardust Motel R/W 5240-5). Therefore, it is not
necessary to conduct a Public Hearing on Item No. 3 as listed on the printed agenda.
Mayor Daly. This is the time and place for the hearing on four separate proposed acquisitions of
property by eminent domain (Item No. 3 having been deleted) in connection with the Katella Avenue
14
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Smart Street and the Anaheim Resort Area Improvement and Beautification Program. The properties
involved are identified as items 1) through 5) (with item 3 now deleted) under Agenda Item A31 on pages
10 and 11 of today’s Agenda and the property interests proposed to be acquired for each property are
legally described in the four resolutions attached to the staff report dated August 19, 1998.
Mayor Daly asked for a staff presentation.
Natalie Armas, Civil Engineer, Project Manager, Public Works. The resolutions are for acquisition of the
property necessary for right of way for the above-named projects. Staff is recommending adoption of the
resolutions to move the acquisitions forward but will continue to work with the property owners in order to
reach a settlement. (See Discussion portion of the August 19, 1998 staff report).
Mayor Daly. In conducting the hearing(s), testimony will be taken separately from the owner of record or
a designated representative for each property on the four proposed acquisitions listed on the agenda.
Testimony should be limited to the following issues only: (1) Whether the public interest and necessity
require the project; (2) Whether the project is planned and located in a manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (3) Whether the property sought to be
acquired is necessary for the project; (4) Whether the offer required by Government Code Section
7267.2 has been made to the owner or owners of record and (5) Whether the City has met all other
prerequisites to the exercise of emeinent domain in connection with the property.
(1) Property located at 1212 South West Street (Flamingo Hotel - R/W 5240-1):
The Mayor opened
the hearing and invited thw owner or representative for the property describe to address the City Council.
Mr. Mark Lamm, owner, 1212 South West Street. In principle, he is agreeable and willing to cooperate.
He would like to clarify, of the offers made, how many property owners have agreed to be acquired.
Natalie Armas. She does not have the list in front of her but there have been a great number of
acquisitions in the entire area and the City has settled with a majority of the owners; Mr. Lamm asked
specifically the property at 1010 W. Ball Road.
A representative of Special Counsel stated that acquisition had previously been approved; Mayor Daly
clarified there has been a settlement and agreement with the property owner.
Mr. Lamm asked about the Budget Inn property; Ms. Armas answered they have not signed their
documents as yet. It is being considered tonight (see item 2).
Mr. Lamm then asked the disposition of Day’s Inn and Best Western; Ms. Armas answered they are still
negotiating with the property owners; Mr. Lamm, having received answers to his questions stated he is in
agreement with the proposed action.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Public Hearing was closed.
(2) Property located at 1042 West Ball Road (Jack’N Jill/Budget Inn - R/W 5240-3):
The
Mayor opened the hearing and invited the owner or representative for the property described to address
the City Council. There being no one present to speak, the Public Hearing was closed.
(3) Property located at 1055 and 1057 West Ball Road (Stardust Motel R/W 5240-5):
This was the
item settled late this afternoon. Action is no longer necessary.
(4) Property located at 1037 West Ball Road (Arco Gas Service Station - R/W 5240-6):
The Mayor
opened the hearing and invited the owner or representative for the property described to address the City
Council.
Council Member Tait declared a conflict and will abstain from any discussion or decision on this item.
15
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
There being no one present to speak, the Public Hearing was closed.
(5) Property located at 888 South West Street (Pacific Inland Bank - R/W 5240-7):
The Mayor
opened the hearing and invited the owner or representative for the property described to address the City
Council. There being no one present to speak, the Public Hearing was closed.
Since there were no questions or discussion by Council Members, Mayor Daly offered Resolution 98R-
179 through 98R-182, both inclusive, for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO.
179
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAEHIM DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND
NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION OF PORTIONS OF PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1212 SOUTH WEST STREET FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT. (R/W 5240-1)
RESOLUTION NO.
180
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND
NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION OF PORTIONS OF PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1042 WEST BALL ROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT (R/W 5240-3)
RESOLUTION NO.
181
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND
NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION OF PORTIONS OF PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1037 WEST BALL ROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT. (R/W 5240-6)
RESOLUTION NO.
182
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND
NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION OF PORTIONS OF PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 888 SOUTH WEST STREET FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT. (R/W 5240-7)
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R-
179
, 98R-180 and 98R-182, 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 Resolution Nos. 98R-
179
, 98R-180and 98R-182 both inclusive, duly passed and
adopted.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
181
for adoption:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Zemel, Lopez, Daly
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-
181
duly passed and adopted.
16
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
D1.
179:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4010, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Southern California Edison Company, 100 North Long Beach Blvd., #1004, Long
Beach, CA 90802
AGENT:
CGA Associates, Attn: Gavin Berry, 1525 Monrovia Avenue, Newport Beach, CA
92663
LOCATION: 1505 South State College Boulevard.
Property is 10 acres located at the southwest
corner of Cerritos Avenue and State College Boulevard.
To construct a 91,310 square foot self storage facility with waiver of minimum parking lot
landscaping
(deleted).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4010 GRANTED, IN PART, for ten years, to expire May 11, 2008
(PC98-78) (5 yes votes, 1 absent, and 1 vacancy).
Denied waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item at the meeting of June 2, 1998, Item B5. Letter of appeal submitted by Carl
Beckmann, President of Everest Storage.
Public Hearing continued from the meetings of July 21, 1998, Item D1, and August 11, 1998,
Item D1, to this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News - July 9, 1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 2, 1998
Posting of property - July 10, 1998
STAFF INPUT: See supplemental Staff Report dated August 11, 1998.
Mayor Daly. This is a proposed interim land use on SCE right-of-way which had been approved by the
Planning Commission for a period of ten years and the developer of the project had asked for a longer
period. He asked staff if there was any new information.
Annika Santalahti, Zoning Administrator. The Council received a staff report last week commenting on
some changes since the first hearing (see minutes of August 11, 1998). Staff has met several times to
discuss changes that would be aesthetically satisfactory and the developer has additionally submitted
new information. The two exhibits posted on the Chamber wall are new; the Planning Commission did
not have the exact same site plan which shows enhanced landscaping along the State College/Cerritos
intersection to include a block wall that wraps in a more circular way. The aerial photograph (also
posted) is new as well. She described what the other exhibits depicted. Staff continues to recommend
approval for a 10-year period as did the Planning Commission. Additionally, staff is recommending
modification, if the Council approves, to give further details on the types of drawings that will come back
to the Planning Commission prior to a Building Permit to assure compatibility with the upcoming design
components of the Master Land Use Plan. The applicant is aware of the additional conditions. She
reiterated that staff does not have difficulty with the project but with a 10-year time limitation. She
clarified that the developer is asking for 40 years. She also clarified for the Mayor that staff believes the
proposed plan is consistent with the forthcoming design and landscape guidelines for the area.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. He added that staff’s original recommendation was for five years and the
Commission recommended 10 years. With the added improvements and based upon the last hearing,
they agree with the Planning Commission’s recommendation on the 10 years.
Mayor Daly. As he stated previously, the proposal is an improvement for the property, the developer has
done a fine job and is doing the best under the circumstances with the project and the property. He
(Daly) remains uncomfortable going beyond the period of time the Planning Commission approved. He
could go a little beyond that but 25 or 30 years is simply not a wise long-term use since there will likely
17
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
be changes in this corridor in the future. He believes the developer has tried to propose something
workable; his only concern is the length of time.
Council Member Lopez. If Edison wants the property back, they can take it. Either way, Edison has that
property. The City cannot touch it unless Edison decides to do something with it and the developer
knows it. He needs 30 (40) years to finance the property and if Edison wants to take it back, they will
pick up the balance of the financing. He also believes that as part of the CUP they agreed to regular
maintenance on the property.
Council Member Zemel. The Council was presented with a program today with regard to the Edison
lines. He does not know if they need an update from the Deputy City Manager relative to the new
negotiation they entered into this week with the Edison Company.
City Attorney White. Because this is a land-use entitlement, he is concerned in getting the City’s ability
to obtain a financial benefit confused, or having that issue intertwined, with whether this is an appropriate
land use entitlement; Council Member Zemel. Perhaps they need a five-minute recess to discuss the
matter in Closed Session.
City Attorney White. The reason for a Closed Session would be to continue the discussion on the printed
agenda with regard to Real Property negotiations under way with SCE (see Item No. 4 - Closed Session
items).
Recess - Closed Session: Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Zemel
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (7:27 P.M.)
After Recess: Mayor Daly called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present (7:39 P.M.).
Mayor Daly asked to hear from the Planning Director.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. Responding to an earlier question relative to landscaping as related to
future resort standards, along Cerritos which technically is outside the boundary of the Anaheim Stadium
Area Study, because of the existing placement of the towers on the property, the applicant is proposing
that 12’ of landscaping presently be installed outside of the block wall and 10’ inside the block wall of the
property. If a permanent permit is granted and when Cerritos is widened, there would be no landscaping
with this plan along Cerritos Avenue. The landscaping would be inside the block wall. That gets to
staff’s recommendation that a time limitation should be imposed or some additional compliance of
landscaping along Cerritos should be installed in a more permanent situation.
Carl Beckmann, Everest Company. From his standpoint, it is not a concern, but the operations people at
Edison are concerned about the access around the towers. One thing discussed earlier, and he would be
happy to do this, in the event Cerritos is widened eventually, he would be willing to move the wall at that
point at their expense to meet the landscaping requirements along Cerritos.
Council Member Tait. If there is such a condition and Everest is unable to fulfill it, he surmises they will
be in violation of the permit.
Carl Beckmann. It is something he would have to work out with Edison at that point. It might involve a
completely different placement of the wall at that time.
Council Member Tait. He asked if they could craft a condition that there will be a 10’ offset on Cerritos
but if and when they widen Cerritos, that condition changes to an additional 10’ -- it is 12’ now and it
would be an additional 10’; Mr. Fick stated that could be done.
Council Member Tait. Currently the property is an eyesore which will be turned into a park-like setting
similar to that at Tustin Avenue and Taft (SCE property in Orange). He believes if they do not extend
18
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
this a longer term, the City will not get a project at all and it will stay the way it is. With a 40-year permit,
they will need substantial landscaping. It will be a much enhanced corner and it makes sense to him. He
confirmed for the Mayor that he is agreeable to 40 years partly because he does not see any other use
for the property. It is underneath Edison major power lines. There is also a condition if Edison does
underground those lines, the permit expires. Further, self storage is only allowed in otherwise
undevelopable pieces of property.
Council Member Zemel. Something needs to be done with that corner. He knows that financing is
everything and it is difficult to get on a short-term basis. He is going to support the request as described
by Council Member Tait.
Council Member McCracken. If these were buildings, it would be different, but the proposal is for
container units which the developer says have a life span of 40 years. Other cities that have put them in,
and she is being told they will not be seen from the street and they are not going to deteriorate, the ones
in Orange are eyesores. Her concern is with the length of time requested as well as container units that
will not even be sitting on permanent foundations.
Mayor Daly. He reiterated, he believes it is a reasonable proposal; however, the Planning staff rationale
for 10 years is sound and that should be the limit.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
On motion by Council Member
Zemel
, seconded by Council Member
Tait
, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration upon
finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the
public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Zemel offered a resolution of approval for adoption with the added condition articulated
by Council Member Tait with regard to Cerritos Avenue.
Before further action was taken, the Planning Director suggested/outlined four additional conditions
relating to line-of-sight plans, recordation of a document agreeing to certain conditions to be complied
with when Critical Intersection improvements are made, that the CUP shall terminate if SCE determines
to underground the overhead lines and that the storage units be regularly maintained as well as
amending other conditions including that approval shall expire 40 years (instead of 10) from the date of
the resolution.
Council Member Zemel stated he is offering the resolution with the conditions set forth by the Planning
Commission and the conditions (and amendments) articulated by the Planning Director.
A roll call vote was then taken on the resolution and failed to carry by the following vote:
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes:
Tait, Zemel
Noes:
McCracken, Lopez, Daly
Council Member Zemel then offered Resolution No. 98R-183 for adoption with the same
conditions/amendments as articulated today with the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission
changing only the length of time for the permit from 40 years to 20 years.
RESOLUTION NO.
183
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
4010.
19
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
183
for adoption:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Zemel, Lopez
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Daly
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-
183
duly passed and adopted.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
D2.
179:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4026, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
EMIF, 1026 South Wall Street, Los Angeles, CA 90015
AGENT:
Hani El Haj, 944 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804
LOCATION: 888 South Brookhurst Street.
Property is 1.78 acres located at the northeast corner
of Brookhurst Street and Brookmore Avenue.
To establish a 4,727 square foot convenience market within an existing 24,341 square foot
commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4026
GRANTED (PC98-101) (7 yes votes).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item at the meeting of July 14, 1998, Item B5. Review of the Planning
Commission’s decision requested by Mayor Daly and Council Member McCracken.
Public hearing continued from the meeting of August 11, 1998, Item D3, to this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News - July 30,1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 27, 1998
Posting of property - July 31, 1998
STAFF INPUT: See supplemental Staff Report dated September 1, 1998.
Mayor Daly. Since the last meeting, the Planning Department has received a new signage proposal from
the applicant. There is also a supplemental report from the Planning Department dated September 1,
1998 which discusses the signage as well as landscaping and Code Enforcement issues. It recommends
that the CUP be approved subject to City Planning Commission conditions and amending Conditions 13,
18 and 22 as outlined in the report. He asked to hear from the Planning Director on what has changed.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. Staff has been working with the applicant as has Community Development.
Their consultants have provided some assistance relative to the refurbishment of the existing site. They
have had discussions about changing out the sign to a monument type sign. That was difficult to
accomplish because of existing uses and the applicant is not interested in doing that. There was one
exhibit, exhibit #3, on the back side of the staff report that shows the proposed modification to the
existing sign. Staff has proposed an alternative 3A, the difference being that it moves the name of the
Center to the top (as depicted in the exhibit). The sign is more balanced aesthetically. At the request of
the Council, Code Enforcement also inspected other markets in the area. The September 1 report notes
violations that were found. There were two items of note believed to be significant, one being excessive
trash in the rear of some of the markets (also see photographs attached to the report showing this
condition.) Another related to excessive outdoor display. Staff is suggesting, therefore, if the application
is considered favorably, that two additional items be considered in terms of recommended conditions
relative to both of those items which he then read.
Bernadine Detweiler, 2146 W. Banbury Circle, Anaheim approached the podium to speak. She was told
by the first Vice President of their Homeowner’s Association (Brookmore Arms) not to come to the
meeting because it was a “done deal”. She feels it is discriminating because they have two convenience
20
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
supermarkets in the Brookmore area and a 24-hour supermarket across the street. The subject location
was formerly a Sizzler. They had worked out with the restaurant that their trucks would only back in to
make deliveries. She asked if the Council could imagine delivering produce, meat or anything else, into
the back of an establishment with a 15’ alley. When the trucks come out of the alley, they drive onto the
Brookmore property. Sizzler broke a main line and the parties went to court. Their streets were not
made to hold big trucks or heavy traffic. They would prefer to have anything except a convenience
market. There are too many markets in this tiny area.
Council Member Zemel. He asked if they would object to another restaurant with alcohol use or some
sort of use containing alcohol.
Bernadine Detweiler. She answered no. Sizzler had beer and wine and they had no trouble with them.
They would like anything but not another market. She again explained the truck issue for Council
Member Tait noting that Sizzler delivery trucks backed in to a certain point and then hand carted
everything in.
Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner. He explained for the Mayor that these types of markets
do not generate the type of traffic as do Ralphs or other supermarkets. It is a UPS type delivery.
Because they have fresh produce on a daily basis they do not use 40’ trucks but have to have a daily
delivery which is mostly a UPS size truck which could easily get in and out of the alley and without going
on the association property.
Betty Pessner, 2155 Banbury Circle, Anaheim. She referred to the previously submitted petition
containing 100 signatures in opposition. (The Mayor acknowledged receipt.) UPS size trucks cannot get
into the narrow alley and make their turn to get out without special consideration as they had (with
Sizzler) before.
Applicant’s Statement: Jacob Jaleil, representing the property owners. The width of the alley is 25’.
There are already restaurants and a pharmacy where trucks make deliveries to the back side of the
stores and there have never been any problems or complaints regarding any truck delivery or backing up
into the neighbor’s property. With respect to the residents’ request for a restaurant, they have not had
any kind of restaurant approaching them for the space. Sizzler is in Bankruptcy Court. They left
voluntarily. There was never another applicant for that size space except Mr. Haj. In the last few weeks,
they have been cooperating with staff regarding the sign and at the last minute, staff submitted their plan
of the two signs that this is what staff wants in that area. They agreed totally, and the other thing is the
landscaping plan that they completely agreed on. Further, relative to a restaurant, they would never get
one approved because of the shortage of parking. He concluded, they agreed to any sign and to the
landscaping design.
Mayor Daly. Much has been made if this were to be a restaurant, the developer is saying there would
not be enough parking available.
Joel Fick. In terms of replacing the land use on the site, staff believes a restaurant could go back in at
that location. The point Mr. Yalda was making, he feels it might be underparked based upon the need
but it would not be a land-use problem prohibiting a restaurant from coming back in.
After additional questions by Mayor Daly relative to parking, he surmised that a restaurant could be
opened in that space if they wished. He then closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member McCracken then posed a line of questions to Mr. Jaleil relative to deliveries
and utilization of the alley, how trucks were able to turn without causing problems to the neighbors, etc.
At the conclusion, Mr. Jaleil stated he will be happy to find out exactly how deliveries were accomplished
with Sizzler and tell the owners it should be done the same way. He noted that they already have two
restaurants on the property and he does not know how many one property can support. More important,
however, is the fact that they never had an applicant wanting a restaurant.
21
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Council Member Zemel asked the applicant if there was any other involvement in convenience markets
in the City.
Mr. Hani Haj. He owns a supermarket in Anaheim at 944 S. Brookhurst. He took this property to convert
his store from that location to this property. It is bigger and easier to get in and out; Council Member
Zemel noted from the pictures that Code Enforcement provided that the market at 944 S. Brookhurst had
the most trash strewn about.
Mr. Haj. If somebody wants to find something to object to, they could come out on any weekend and find
trash at Ralphs, Albertsons or Alpha Beta, but on Monday morning it is clean. He does not have any
violations. The last time he spoke to Code Enforcement, they told him he was doing much better than
the restaurant; Mr. Fick confirmed that the photos were taken since the last Council Meeting.
After further discussion and questioning between Mr. Haj and Council Member Zemel, Mr. Haj stated
eventually he is going to move from that place (944 S. Brookhurst) to the other location. He wants to go
to a bigger place where it will be easier to take care of his customers and it will be a cleaner property.
This supermarket will replace the old one.
Council Member Tait. Regarding the trash issues, he asked what conditions staff is recommending.
Mr. Fick again read the proposed/recommended condition relative to trash.
Council Member Tait. In the past, where there have been enforcement issues, the Council has imposed
a condition that there be periodic, unannounced inspections by Code Enforcement paid for by the
applicant to assure compliance. He asked if that is something staff would consider.
Joel Fick. That condition has been imposed in the past if the use is problematic. Code Enforcement
could inspect at any interval Council would like. There would merely be an hourly charge for the
inspection on site.
Council Member Zemel. He has a problem granting a permit to someone not following the health and
safety codes and the rules of Anaheim. The alley abuts the homeowners and the trash enclosure is in
the back; Mr. Fick clarified that it is actually to the side approximately 25-35’ away from the property line.
Council Member Zemel. He is finding it difficult to support granting a CUP for a bigger space where the
existing space is not following the rules of the City.
Mayor Daly. He believes the fundamental issue is the volume of convenience stores in the
neighborhood which are already a burden to Code Enforcement. Until the situation is cleaned up, they
should not be allowing any more to open especially in a space built for a restaurant. It is a mistake to
allow yet another convenience market into a neighborhood already burdened with some of the downside
impacts.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
Mayor
Daly
, moved to deny the
Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any
comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study
and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Zemel stated his intial feeling was this is an opportunity to get
rid of the alcohol use but he also does not want to impinge more on the neighbors by his desire to
eliminate such a use. He wishes there was a better answer.
22
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Mayor Daly. If any restaurant wants to reintroduce beer and wine, it will require an ABC permit and the
Police will have input on that; Tom Engle, Investigator. That is correct. They would have to reapply for a
new one.
Council Member Zemel. He asked, if they are able to move a license from another location, or buy one,
or get one from ABC, they could not stop it; Investigator Engle. That is correct. They are well past the
90-day rule.
Mayor Daly. His point is that the Police Department will be able to coordinate with the ABC.
Council Member Tait. He would support the request with strict trash conditions and perhaps a three or
five-year time limitation. He is more troubled by a vacant building especially since they are trying to
improve the conditions on Brookhurst. It is more of a grocery store than a convenience market. There
will be no sales of tobacco (see minutes of August 11, 1998 where Mr. Jaleil and Haj spoke to the issue),
no beer and wine/alcohol, no phones out front and also no displays. He will oppose the resolution of
denial.
A vote was then taken on the motion relative to the denial of CEQA finding. Council Member Tait voted
No. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 98R-184 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO.
184
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
4026.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
184
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-
184
duly passed and adopted.
Before concluding, Mayor Daly questioned the label of a convenience market that is applied by Planning
staff for this kind of proposal especially where no beer and wine is proposed. He asked the distinction.
Joel Fick. Staff is in agreement that a better working title would be a grocery store or grocery market.
There is a strict definition in the zoning code about what a convenience market is. Perhaps they should
revisit that definition.
PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
D3.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4043 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Byron A. Dahl, Luetta F. Dahl and Basil Dahl, P.O. Box 1546, Lake Havasu, AZ
96405
AGENT:
Khoda B. Ostowari, 6263 East Twin Peak Circle, Anaheim, CA 92807
LOCATION: 801 South Harbor Boulevard.
Property is 0.62 acre located at the southwest corner
of South Street and Harbor Boulevard.
To construct a new service station with a 3,103 square foot canopy, a 900 square foot car wash
and 270 square foot convenience market with waivers of (a) minimum structural and landscape
setback abutting a residential zone and (b) requi
red site screening adjacent to residential zones.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4043 GRANTED (PC98-108) (5 yes votes, 1 absent,
and 1 vacancy).
Approved waiver of code requirement
Approved Negative Declaration.
23
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Informational item at the meeting of July 28, 1998, Item B6. Review of the Planning
Commission’s decision requested by Mayor Daly and Council Member Lopez.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News - August 20, 1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - August 14, 1998
Posting of property - August 21, 1998
STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission date July 6, 1998.
Mayor Daly. He and Council Member Lopez asked that there be a hearing on this issue. Since the
hearing was scheduled, correspondence has been received from the adjacent church which they were
told previously was accepting of this proposal. The correspondence they now have from the Anaheim
First Christian immediately to the west, seems to feel strongly that they would not like to be adjacent to a
gas station. (See letter dated August 25, 1998 from Senior Minister, Bob Kuest - made a part of the
record). Also, St. Michael’s is just a block away to the east (see their letter dated August 26, 1998). The
letters from the two churches asking them not to approve the gas station in their neighborhood. There is
also other correspondence dated August 23, 1998 from the residents of nearby streets listing the reasons
for opposition to the proposal (some of which he read) and also a petition containing approximately 140
signaztures (previously made a part of the record). He asked to hear from Planning staff relative to the
project and what the staff recommendation was.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager described the project and the two waivers being requested
having to do with the use being adjacent to a church which property is zoned residential. He explained
the specifics of the requested waivers.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from those who wished to speak. Initially, no
one came forward. Subsequently, a Pastor of Anaheim First Christian Church came forward.
Paul Yu, Pastor of Anaheim First Christian Church. He opposes the project for two reasons. They will
have a lot of traffic and it will cause a problem to their church members and with kids from across the
street who come to church for services or food. They want to protect them from danger. The second
concern is the car wash which will be noisy and disturb the worship activities. He clarified for Council
Member McCracken that he did not send a letter but Bob Kuest did. He (Yu) is one of the five pastors of
the church.
Council Member McCracken. The letter explained some of the problems of the homeless and transients
who seem to be using the property. There was concern about the block wall fence and that it would be
another attraction for transients; Pastor Yu could not speak to that issue, noting again the two concerns
he brought forward.
Council Member Lopez then posed a line of questions to Pastor Yu who was not aware of the letter sent
by the church and had not talked to the applicant about the proposal. He (Lopez) pointed out that the
property needs to be developed in some way and was wondering if there was any way the church would
be able to work with the new service station owner. It seems that a well-intended service station would
provide a service and would probably beautify the area especially from what it is today.
The Mayor again asked if the applicant was present to speak.
Applicant’s Statement: Khoda B. Ostowari, Agent for the applicant. He talked to Bob Keust, Pastor of
the First Christian Church yesterday. They also own the other church on the south part of the property.
The main concern at the Planning Commission hearing was relative to the existing liquor store on the
corner of the property. They were concerned about what was going to happen to that property. Based
on the recommendation and encouragement at that meeting and his personal encouragement previous
to the meetings, he approached the owner, opened escrow and started doing financing for the liquor
24
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
store so he could include the whole thing in one project. He then explained the waivers requested and
why they are necessary specifically the waiver relating to the wall. He explained that the Pastor
personally told him a week ago that they preferred to be able to be seen from the street. In that meeting,
it was decided he would apply to put a 3’ high block wall and on top of that a 6’ high fence, the same
fence approved by the Planning Commission for the gas station on Orangewood and Harbor. If he put a
6’ high block wall, there will be a narrow space in between which will block the view and invite all kinds of
problems to occur behind it. The wall was a concern for both properties. He then spoke to the issue of
traffic, driveways, setbacks and landscaping. He also explained the improvements that will be made
which will enhance the property and the area, some being over and above code requirements. If there is
any problem for the church, they are willing to work with them.
Mayor Daly. Mr. Ostowari is basically summarizing the points of the proposal as covered in the staff
report. He noted that he (Ostowari) is in escrow to buy the liquor store. He asked if that happens, will he
change the design of the proposed service station; Mr. Ostowari answered yes, but he cannot do that
unless he gets the permit for the station.
After further clarification by staff, Mayor Daly stated Mr. Ostowari is telling them he would like the
Council to approve the proposed service station and for the first time tonight stated he was going to
submit another plan. He is going to revise and change it. If they approve the project tonight, in a few
months they will be seeing a different plan.
Extensive Council discussion and questioning of staff and Mr. Ostowari followed wherein Mr. Ostowari
was asked specifically about his plans for the liquor store and if he was incporating that property into his
plan. During the discussion he (Ostowari) stated his understanding is if he is able to take over the liquor
store and put the properties together, he would have a more favorable view from the Council.
Mayor Daly then asked if Mr. Ostowari was hoping to have a beer and wine license at the future gas
station if he closes down the liquor store; Mr. Ostowari answered, yes but he is going to put the whole
thing in a better package with better management.
Mayor Daly asked if he was proposing to tear down the liquor store; Mr. Ostowari answered, no. He was
going to remodel it.
The Public Hearing was closed.
Mayor Daly. There are single-family homes within just 100’ or so from the proposed operation. He
(Ostowari) is proposing a 24-hour a day gas station with hundreds of single-family homes nearby. They
also have a petition from many homeowners who are opposed.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - DENIAL OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
On motion by
Council Member
Daly
, seconded by Council Member
Lopez
, the City Council denied the Negative
Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments
received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any
comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on
the environment. Tait voted No. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 98R-185 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO.
98R-185
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
4043.
25
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
185
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-
185
duly passed and adopted.
Mayor Daly. The discussion of having the liquor store next door in escrow strikes him as moot because
the applicant stated he does not intend to remove the liquor store. He (Daly) is not sure what the
relevance of that was except to cloud the proposal.
Council Member Tait. He voted in favor. The Planning Commission voted unanimously in favor. Also,
it seems the applicant worked things out with the neighbors and one of the pastors of the church. He
feels the applicant was very concerned about the community in addressing their needs.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3124, AND NEGATIVE
D4.
179:
DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Sanderson J. Ray Development, 2699 White Road, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92614
AGENT:
Bart Rainone, 3364 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 3364 East La Palma Avenue - Concourse Bowling Center.
Property is 4.87 acres
located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, 250 feet west of the centerline of Miller Street.
To permit and retain an existing a
rcade with 35 video games (previously-approved for 25 games)
a day care center for up to 30 children (deleted), and an accessory public dance hall (deleted) in
conjunction with an existing bowling alley (with accessory and incidental sales of alcoholic
beverages for on-premises consumption and waiver of minimum number of parking spaces).
(627 required; 240 approved)).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3124 APPROVED for one year, to expire July 6, 1999 (PC98-104)
(5 yes
votes, 1 absent, and 1 vacancy).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
Informational item at the City Council meeting of July 28, 1998, Item B2. Review of the Planning
Commission’s decision requested by Council Members Zemel and McCracken.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News - August 20, 1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - August 14, 1998
Posting of property - August 21, 1998
STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 6, 1998.
Mayor Daly. He asked Planning staff to give a brief summary of the proposal and the Planning
Commission action along with staff’s recommendation.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission dated
July 6, 1998 which described the request; Mayor Daly asked staff to clarify the bottom-line changes to
the operation approved by the Planning Commission.
Greg Hastings answered the change in the number of video games from 25 to 35, with conditions, and
also that the applicant be allowed to have entertainment two nights a week with a cover charge to enter
the bowling alley. Relative to the entertainment, the license would be granted through the Licensing
Division giving the ability to have a DJ on the property, no live entertainment, for two nights provided
there is no dancing since dancing is not permitted. It would be regulated through Code Enforcement if
26
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
necessary; Joel Fick, Planning Director clarified for the Mayor that Code Enforcement would respond on
a complaint basis.
Council Member McCracken. She noted they have a previously approved day-care center for a
maximum of 30 children; Mr. Hastings clarified it is a nursery if someone is there bowling. There is no
limit as to the time nor the number of children. Staff is suggesting that a condition of approval be added
limiting the number to 30. The hours of operation are the same as for the entire facility.
Mayor Daly. The agenda reads the day care center was deleted; City Attorney White. There is a
distinction between nursery care for patrons and that is what they currently have -- a nursery for the
bowler’s children.
Council Member Zemel. He is not so sure the issue is about dancing. For some reason, there was a
settlement at the Planning Commission where dancing was eliminated from the opportunity for “nightclub
type entertainment”. If there is going to be a cover charge and provide DJ type entertainment, he
questioned if that doesn’t describe a nightclub with the exception of dancing.
Tom Engle, Investigator, Police Department. He believes it does to a point but it is not the primary
function of the business to provide dancing and music. This is an accessory to the main use which is
bowling which will not be happening every night of the week.
Council Member Zemel. He believes they call that a nightclub where there is a charge for admission and
dancing is included. Charging for admission to hear music would be a different use and that used to be
called a nightclub; Tom Engle. It will not be a live band or live entertainment but strictly recording.
Council Member Zemel. The issue he would like to focus on, there will be minors coming into a business
that has a bar that is not physically walled off but just a step up from the DJ with adult patrons going to
the bar and 18, 17, 16, 15 year olds coming to listen to music with adults openly using alcohol.
Tom Engle. This has been something that has been going on at this location for a number of years. He
clarified for Council Member Zemel that he believes there are no other like uses in the City.
Council Member Zemel. He believes the issue to focus on is under-age minors loitering and being in that
environment and what problems this might cause relating to an area where there have been problems
with the video entertainment over at Camelot.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing.
Bob Ranao, owner/operator of the Concourse Bowling Center since 1989. This is something he deals
with every day and every hour, i.e., kids and people in the facility from 5 to 95 mixed with alcohol.
Council Member Zemel interjected and stated he (Ranao) is asking for a permit to sell tickets to kids to
come to listen to music. That is different. It is a new use.
Bob Ranao. If he does not charge cover, it becomes uncontrollable. It is a place people can come and
they do not have to bowl. They can go to the arcade or have a sandwich, etc. He is trying to eliminate a
situation where people just come in because it is free and they can enjoy themselves and listen to music.
Council Member Zemel. He understands that minors come with their parents. He is not saying children
cannot be around alcohol. It is mixing underage kids with alcohol for the purpose of coming to hear
music which he feels is a bad mix.
Bob Ranao. Many kids come in without their parents and bowl and are around the alcohol. It is his job to
make sure those kids do not drink and he has been doing it for a lot of years. Continuing, he explained
that he opened up in Riverside in 1986 with 3,300 league bowlers and with 2,500 in Anaheim in 1990.
27
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
When league play starts again this week, he will be lucky to end up with 1,200. What they have tried is
to have creative venues mixed with bowling to get other traffic into the facility. Cosmic bowling has
become nationally known. Bowling is trying to attract a younger and diverse crowd back into the
enjoyment of bowling. He explained for Council Member Zemel that it is not a control issue but it is
trying to deal with the marketplace.
Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Zemel asked to hear from the Police Department relative to the concept being proposed
by Mr. Ranao.
Tom Engle, Investigator. The Police Department is not going to support an environment that is not
controlled. They have requested it be granted for one year to give the applicant a chance to prove how
Mr. Reno is going to keep this in line and not have it become a problem with Police and Code
Enforcement. The Police are not favorable unless it can be controlled.
Additional discussion followed wherein Council Member Zemel referred to the problems that have been
experienced in the Camelot (Family Fun Center) area. He sees this in direct correlation with the subject
business.
Council Member Tait. The CUP is for one year. He heard Council Member Zemel’s concerns but he has
been in the establishment with his family. It is well run and it is basically isolated. If the experience is
not good, they can do something about it.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
On motion by Council Member
Tait
, seconded by
Mayor Daly
, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration upon finding that it
has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review
process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Council Member
Zemel voted No. MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Tait offered a resolution to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 3124 for one year.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Zemel stated he knows it is a nice clean environment but the
proposal is a bad mix; Council Member Lopez agreed.
Council Member McCracken. She has also spent a lot of time there. Her children are adults now. She
does not know if this is the kind of thing she would want them to be participating in. Perhaps Mr. Ranao
needs to look at some other ways to enhance his business. She does not know if this is the answer.
A vote was then taken on the resolution to approve the CUP as offered by Council Member Tait and
failed to carry by the following vote: Ayes: Tait. Noes: McCracken, Zemel, Lopez, Daly.
Council Member Zemel offered Resolution 98R-186 for adoption denying Conditional Use Permit No.
3124
RESOLUTION NO
. 186
ARESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
3124.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
186
for adoption:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Zemel, Daly
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Lopez
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
28
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-
186
duly passed and adopted.
HOUSE MOVE ON SPECIAL PERMIT - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF RELOCATION
D5.
107:
OF ONE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE:
To consider the app
roval of a special permit to move one residential structure from 2890 East La
Palma Avenue to 1250 South Nutwood Street in Anaheim, subject to compliance with all City of
Anaheim Zoning, Building, Plumbing, Electrical and Mechanical Codes.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News - August 20, 1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - August 14, 1998
Posting of property - August 21, 1998
STAFF INPUT: See Staff Report to the Planning Commission date July 6, 1998.
Mayor Daly, after it was confirmed that a Public Hearing was necessary relative to the move-on, asked to
hear from those who wished to speak.
Mr. John Turanitza, 1873 W. Castle, Anaheim. They were in a meeting about two months ago (at the
Planning Commission meeting) regarding the property at Castle and Nutwood and the proposed split and
moving of the house. They are not opposed to change but to change without full disclosure and honesty.
The Planning Commission instructed the applicant to meet with the neighbors, but it was never done.
Mayor Daly interjected and stated some of the confusion, at least on his part, may be the way the item
came to the Council. This is simply a request for a permit to move a house from one place to another. It
is not a land use decision or zoning. He asked the City Attorney to clarify what it is and what it is not.
City Attorney White explained that under the code, a permit is required from the Council to move a
house from one location to another location in the City. Criteria for granting such a permit as set forth in
the code are that the permit will be approved only if the City Council finds (1) that the house proposed to
be moved is comparable in value, size, quality, design and appearance to houses in the area into which
it is to be moved, (2) that the house will not be detrimental to nor diminish the value of property in the
area and, (3) that the structure will conform to the provisions of Title 15, the Building Code and Title 18,
the Zoning Code.
Mr. Turanitza then continued with his extensive presentation revolving around the proposed split, the fact
that no plans were available to see what is going to be done as well as other issues concerning the house
itself which was built in the 1900’s. If the Council approves the split and house move as it is, he would
have no other choice than to come to the City after approval and submit plans on what he inetnds to do
with the existing house and lot including the driveways on Castle, possible walls, etc. There are many
questions that need to be answered/addressed before the split and the move. In concluding he asked
that the Council postpone approval until (1) the applicant shows the City and the residents of Castle true
and complete plans, that there be full disclosure and total honesty and tell them what he is doing. (2)
The City needs to inspect the garage for the gasoline tank that is underneath which needs to be removed
and the ground tested for contamination.
Joel Fick, Planning Director confirmed for the Mayor that much of what has been said staff has heard for
the first time. Staff does not have any knowledge of the gas tank issue.
Mayor Daly asked if a lot split has been approved; Mr. Fick answered, no and there would need to be a
lot split some time in the future. The house could be moved to an existing lot. The lot is larger than
others in the neighborhood so it could accommodate a lot split if proposed.
29
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
City Attorney White. If there is a lot split, it would require a parcel map which would go to either the
Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, requires a noticed hearing, all owners within 300’ would
be notified, and there would be a Public Hearing solely on the issue of the lot split.
Joel Fick. It has been to the Planning Commission but has not yet been recorded. It has gone through a
process for a split. He then clarified that it was submitted, granted unconditionally and then withdrawn.
The reclassification was granted unconditionally. The variance was withdrawn and the Tentative Parcel
Map was approved. They are going to check the resolution(s) to confirm the accuracy.
Bob Cedillo (sp), 404 N. Monterey, Alhambra, Agent for the property. There was a rezoning
classification change from RSA43,000 to RS7,200. At the same time they revoked an application to
have a parcel split into three parcels and the parcel split was approved for two. As of today, the final
parcel map has not been recorded. It was approved by the City by Melanie Adams (Public
Works/Engineering). It is to be signed tomorrow for the final lot split and signed by the Surveyor by
Friday and recorded. It has already been approved. The issue of the gas tank was brought up at the
Planning Commission, cleared by the Fire Inspector and Melanie Adams also received a letter from the
Fire Inspector. The tank was removed from the property and there was no contamination. These are all
things addressed at the Planning Commission in early January. It has been dormant for six months but it
was approved and accepted. Both the reclassification and Tentative Parcel Map has been accepted.
Everything has been complied with as far as Planning Commission approvals. The building permits have
also been pulled for the new garage and new approach for a driveway and all complied with. The
Planning Department and Building Department have inspected the house to be moved on the property
and everything is in compliance.
Mayor Daly. He feels they need more information before they can make an informed decision on this
issue.
Kevin Schaver, 289 E. LaPalma, Anaheim. He has been working on this project and was at the City on
Friday when Mr. Turanitza was there. His (Turanitza’s) major concern was a drive on to Castle Avenue.
Right across the street there is a drive. Kevin Bass in Planning stated he could have a drive on to that
street which is Mr. Turanitza’s major concern. The house being moved on to the property is slated for
demolition either on the 15th or the 30th and that is why Building and Planning scheduled the hearing
today in order to save the house. He was also previously working with Joan Burke and other people in
Redevelopment to try to save the house for East Street and Lincoln. The property was sold in August,
1997. It is hard to believe there would be a tank under the property because of real estate disclosure
laws. Everything is in accordance with RS7200 zoning. He then clarified for the Mayor that he owns the
house only until the end of the month. After the 30th, he no longer has any claim to it. He had been
renting it. After he moves it, he is going to reside in the house. It is vintage 1924.
Mayor Daly. He asked if it would be a hardship for him if a decision is held off for two weeks so the
Council can get more information; Council Member McCracken. The Council vote tonight is to allow a
house move on. If there is a gas tank, that would need to be addressed.
Mayor Daly noted their next meeting is on September 15. He asked Mr. Schaver if he could wait until
then.
Mr. Schaver answered, this could not wait. He is proposing to move the house before the 15th. If the
gas tank is under the existing garage, the house and garage he is moving on will be 12 to 15’ away. He
needs the movers to move it by the 15th. It has been signed off by the Fire Department on his plans.
Joel Fick. Regarding the Fire Department stamp of approval, that would have been given in terms of the
overall site plan and positioning. The agent for the applicant indicated there was discussion on the gas
tank at the Planning Commission but there is nothing in the Planning Commission minutes. He does not
want it to be construed that the Fire Department stamp means they have reviewed underground tanks of
other issues associated with that.
30
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Mayor Daly asked if staff was comfortable with the proposed site plan; Joel Fick. With the site plan, but
there is more information they would like relative to the underground tanks and also the neighbors
concerns regarding driveways, etc.
Mayor Daly asked if there was a device whereby they could provisionally approve the move pending staff
making sure all the details have been addressed and all public safety, health and welfare issues
addressed.
City Attorney White. They could conditionally approve it on the condition that staff specifically review the
issue of the tanks and anything else of concern, determine public safety and that there is no problem.
Joel Fick. Relative to the setback issues, the Zoning Division has reviewed on the site plan the setbacks
and they are in conformance.
Mr. Schaver stated he has a Tentative Parcel Map which shows the existing house and how many feet
away it is. He has seen tanks taken out and has never heard of any blowing up. There are ways to
remove gas tanks that are non explosive. He has already hired the movers to jack up the house. He has
been working on this lot for a long time. It would be a hardship to move it after the 15th since it would
cost another $2,000.
After additional discussion, questioning and input between Council and the applicant, Mayor Daly
requested a short recess to clarify the specifics with staff and possibly enable the Council to come to a
resolution.
Recess - By general Council consent, the Council meeting was recessed for 10 minutes (9:55 P.M.).
After Recess - Mayor Daly called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present (10:05 P.M.).
Mayor Daly. There is a recommendation from the City Attorney.
City Attorney White. Based upon the testimony during the Public Hearing by both sides, it is staff’s
recommendation that the Council approve the special permit for the house moving subject to the
expressed condition that prior to the issuance of a foundation permit for the house, the proposed site
shall be inspected to the satisfaction of the Fire Department to determine whether an underground gas
tank is on the site and, if so, removed no later than 90 days from the date of the resolution. In addition,
the resolution, if approved, will specify that the house and the property owner must comply with all the
provisions of both the Building Code and Zoning Code with regard to location, setbacks, driveways,
anything having to do with the structural integrity or all zoning code provisions so that it meets all
provisions plus the gas tank will be taken care of. This will allow the house to be moved but not placed
on a permanent foundation until the inspection is done and if there is a gas tank, that it be removed.
John Wiser, 1878 W. Castle. He thinks what they are doing is correct.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION:
On motion By Council Member
Zemel
, seconded by Council Member
Tait
, the City Council determined that the proposed activity falls
within the definition of Section 3.01 Class
3(c)
, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for
an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, Categorically Exempt from the requirement to file an
EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
31
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
Council Member Zemel offered Resolution No. 98R-187 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO.
187
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITHIN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (FROM
2890 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE TO 1250 SOUTH NUTWOOD STREET).
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R-
187
for adoption:
AYES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, D
aly
NOES:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R-
187
duly passed and adopted.
ITEM B1 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF
AUGUST 13, 1998 - DECISION DATE: AUGUST 20, 1998
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 4, 1998:
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 143 CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061 (b)(3)}:
B1.
179:
OWNER: The Okidoki Trust, Attn: Robert Rovinson, 2950 East La Jolla, Anaheim, CA 9
2806
LOCATION: 4811 East La Palma Avenue.
Property is approximately 3.15 acres located at the
northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Hancock Street.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces, to construct a 69,905 square foot industrial
building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Administrative Adjustment No. 143 APPROVED (ZA DECISION NO. 98-22).
END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS.
ITEMS B2 - B10 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
AUGUST 17, 1998:
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 8, 1998:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3921 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
B2.
179:
REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL:
OWNER:
F.J. Hanshaw Enterprises, Inc., 10921 Westminster Avenue, Garden Grove, CA
92843
AGENT:
Desapriya Jinadasa, 1112 North Brookhurst Street, Suite 1, Anaheim, CA 92801
LOCATION: 1112 North Brookhurst Street, Suite 1 - Cheers Market.
Property is 0.91 acre
located north and east of the northeast corner of Brookhurst Street and La Palma Avenue.
To consider amendment or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to hours of operation for
a previously-approved 2,200 square foot convenience market with retail sales of alcoholic
beverages for off-premises consumption and to consider a retroactive time extension to comply
with conditions of approval.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved a 60-day extension of time for CUP NO. 3921 (PC98-125)
(6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Denied amendment to conditions of approval
Negative Declaration previously approved.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 307 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-19
B3.
155:
32
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4038
OWNER:
Brian H. Krikorian, Adrienne L. Krikorian and Aram J. Krikorian, P.O. Box 5911,
Sherman Oaks, CA 91413
LOCATION: 1777-A West Lincoln Avenue.
Property is 0.5 acre located on the north side of
Lincoln Avenue, 500 feet east of the centerline of Crescent Way.
To reclassify th
is property from the CG (Commercial, General) Zone to the CL (Commercial,
Limited) Zone and to establish a beauty salon with massage facilities within an existing 1,320
square foot retail space in a commercial center.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 97-98-19 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC98-126).
CUP NO. 4038 WITHDRAWN (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
EIR NO. 307 previously certified.
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3915 AND
B4.
179:
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Hussein Berri, 16205 Hemp Circle, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
LOCATION: 1199 South State College Boulevard - Mobil Service Station).
Property is 0.5 acre
located at the northwest corner of Ball Road and State College Boulevard.
Review of revised plans pertaining to the retention of an existing non-conforming billboard and
enlargement of the previously-approved car wash facility in conjunction with a previously-
approved service station and convenience market, with waivers of a) prohibi
tion of addition to
non-conforming use - APPROVED, b) maximum area of monument sign - DENIED, c)
maximum monument sign width - DENIED and d) minimum structural setback from an arterial
highway - DENIED.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3915 APPROVED, IN PART (PC98-127) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Waiver of code requirement, APPROVED, IN PART, Waiver (a) APPROVED, and DENIED
Waivers (b), (c), and (d).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
HEARING SET ON:
A letter of appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision was submitted by
David
A. Rose III in letter dated August 19, 1998. A Public Hearing is scheduled for September 22, 1998.
Informational Item at the meeting of September 1, 1998
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 98-99-02 VARIANCE NO. 4345 AND NEGATIVE
B5.
179:
DECLARATION TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15703 (appeal period ended 8/27/98):
OWNER:
Tatsuye Shozi, Tom Shozi, Yohko Shozi, Ray Shozi, and Takeo Shozi, 3038 West
Orange Ave., Anaheim, CA 9
2804
AGENT:
Greystone Homes, Attn: Douglas Woodward, 26 Executive Park, #100, Irvine, CA
92614
LOCATION: 3038 West Orange Avenue.
Property is 10.3 acres located at the southeast corner
of Halliday Street and Orange Avenue.
Reclassification No. 98-99-02
- to reclassify subject property from
RS-A-43,000 Zone to the RS-5000 Zone or a less intense zone.
Variance No. 4345
- waiver of minimum lot size, and maximum lot coverage to construct a 71-
unit, 2-story single-family residential sub
division.
Tentative Tract Map No. 15703
- to establish a 74-lot (including 3 lettered lots) 71-unit 2-story
single family residential subdivision.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 98-99-02 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC98-128)
(6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Variance No. 4345 GRANTED (PC98-129).
Approved Negative Declaration.
33
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BY COUNCIL ON
Tentative Tract Map No. 15703 APPROVED.
THE TTM NO. 15703
at their meeting of 8/18/98 (Item B20).
Council Member McCracken asked if they received any comment from WAND or from the West
Anaheim Better Business and Concerned Citizens group.
Joel Fick. WAND supported the project based upon the density and quality of the project; Council
Member McCracken. It is facing Twila Reid park. She asked if the road is going to be widened and if
there is going to be added parking at Twila Reid.
Mr. Fick answered, yes. Relative to additional parking for Twila Reid, additional spaces are presently
being examined and as many as 122 spaces may be added.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4054 CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 1:
B6.
179:
OWNER:
Michael R.A. Bagguley, 701 Concord Street, Glendale, CA 91202
AGENT:
Jack and Carol Cushing, 701 Concord Street, Glendale, CA 91202
LOCATION: 3000-3020 West Lincoln Avenue.
Property is 1.58 acres located at the southwest
corner of Lincoln Avenue and Beach Boulevard.
To permit 5 additional units (in existing floor area) for a total of 12 units within an 18,214 square
foot commercial
center.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4054 GRANTED (PC98-130) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3703, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
B7.
179:
OWNER:
Lewis R. Schmid, 1725 S. Douglass Road, Anaheim, CA 92806
AGENT:
Jason T. Schmid, 2610 E. Katella Ave., Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 2610 East Katella Avenue - J.T. Schmid’s Restaurant.
Property is 3.1 acres
located at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Douglass Road.
To permit the 2,018 square foot expans
ion of an existing 14,000 square foot semi-enclosed
restaurant (previously-approved for sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption) and to
consider amendment or deletion of conditions of approval to allow the retail sales of beer (½ keg
minimum size) manufactured on-site for off-premises consumption.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3703 APPROVED (PC98-131) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 4051, CEQA
B8.
179:
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
U.S. Sprint Communications Company, 901 E. 104th Street, Kansas City, MO 64131
AGENT:
R.H. (Hank) Sweers II, 712 Broadway, Suite 300, Kansas City, MO 64105
LOCATION: 1750 West Penhall Way - Sprint Switching Station.
Property is 1.03 acre located on
the south side of Penhall Way, 670 feet east of the centerline of Crescent Way.
To permit a 10,644 square foot 2-story expansion of an existing 13,165 square foot
telecommunication switching station
and to construct a maximum 65-foot high roof-mounted
telecommunications tower to replace an existing 125-foot high telecommunication tower with
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4051 GRANTED, for five years (PC98-132) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 322 RECLASSIFICATION 98-99-04
B9.
155:
34
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4034
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 97-187 (appeal period ended 8/27/98):
OWNER:
Plaza Properties, LLC, 13031 Newport Avenue, Suite 200, Tustin, CA 92780
AGENT:
John Killen, A.I.A. 13031 Newport Avenue, Suite 200 Tustin, CA 92780
LOCATION: 1500 South Douglass Road - Arena Corporate Center.
Property is 24.5 acres
located on the east side of Douglass Road, 1,080 feet north of the centerline of Katella Avenue.
Reclassification No. 98-99-04
- to reclassify this property from the RS-A-43,000
(Residential
/Agricultural) Zone to the CO (Commercial Office and Professional) Zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 4034
- to construct a 982,000 square foot commercial mixed-use
center consisting of a 290,000 square foot, 10-story office building, two 180,000 square foot
(each) 6-story office buildings, a 160,000 square foot 4-story office building, a 5,000 square foot
day care facility, a 7,000 square foot restaurant, a 200-room, 160,000 square foot hotel, a 3-level
parking structure, and a 4-level parking structure
, with waivers of (a) minimum landscaped
setback adjacent to the south and east (interior) property lines and (b) minimum parking lot
landscaping.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-187
- to establish a 9-lot commercial subdivision for a 982,000
square foot commercial mixed-use complex.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 98-99-04 GRANTED (PC98-133) (5 yes votes, 1 absent, and 1 vacancy).
CUP NO. 4034 GRANTED (PC98-134).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Certified EIR NO. 322.
NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BY COUNCIL ON
Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-187 APPROVED.
THE TPM NO. 97-187
at their meeting of 8/18/98 (Item B21).
Mayor Daly. He wants to verify that Planning staff and Public Works staff are comfortable with the
location of the structure.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. They believe it is. What is important, it is a phased project and keeps
options open into the future.
Mayor Daly. He asked if staff is comfortable with the building materials, the aesthetics of the office
complex, the restaurant and the parking structure.
Joel Fick. A great amount of attention was given to detail. There were a series of meetings both that the
developer had with the Pond and with staff and with staff and the Pond where that subject was discussed
in great detail.
Mayor Daly asked about the siting of the Pond from the north side, i.e., are the structures going to block
the view from the 57 freeway or from the north; Joel Fick. That was of concern to staff and also Public
Works. In some of the original sitings they did lines of site examples and elevation and grade
differentials to show that there still would be high visibility from the 57 Freeway. Staff recommended
approval of the project.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEM:
VARIANCE NO. 3315 - RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME:
B10.
179:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5:
Margaret J. LeVecke, 700 N. Helena Street, Anaheim,
CA 92805, requests retroactive extension of time to complete construction on a single-family
home with accessory
living quarters. This petition was originally approved on January 10, 1984
by the Planning Commission. Property is located at 700 North Helena Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved retroactive Extension of time for Variance No. 3315, to expire
35
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
1/10/99.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION:
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5649 for first reading.
B11.
179: ORDINANCE NO.
5649
(INTRODUCTION) Amending Title 18 to rezone property
under R
eclassification No. 97-98-14 (1) located at 2630 - 2650 East Katella Avenue (Orange
County Katella Yard)
PORTION A:
from the County of Orange M1 (FP-2) (Light Manufacturing,
Flood Plain Overlay) zone to the City of Anaheim RS-A-43,000 (FP) zone.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 TO
REZONE PROPERTY UNDER RECLASSIFFICATION NO. 97-98-14 (1)
LOCATED AT 2630 - 2650 EAST KATELLA AVENUE (ORANGE COUNTY
KATELLA YARD) PORTION A: FROM THE COUNTY OF ORANGE M1
(FP-2) (LIGHT MANUFACTURING, FLOOD PLAIN OVERLAY) ZONE TO
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RS-A-43,000 (FP) ZONE.
ADDENDUM TO THE SEPTEMBER 1, 1998, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA:
ITEMS B12 - B14 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 31, 1998:
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 10, 1998:
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL
B12.
144:
PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED LEASE OF SPACE FOR A GROUNDWATER TREATMENT
FACILITY:
Geroge Rukas, Engineering Technician Specialist, County of Orange, Public
Facilities and Resources Departmen
t, 300 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA 9207-4048, requests
determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for leased space to operate a
grouncwater treatment facility. Property is located at a portion of the Placentia Retarding Basin
at Placentia Avenue, south of Orangethorpe Avenue.
(7 yes votes).
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
B13.
144:
FOR THE PROPOSED SALE OF COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY:
George Rukas,
Engineering Technician Specialist, County of Orang
e, Public Facilities and Resources
Department, 300 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048, requests determination of
conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for the proposed sale of County surplus property.
Property is located east of the easterly of terminus of Frontera Street between the Riverside
Freeway (SR-91) and the Santa Ana River (Parcel No. 1601).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined that the County’s proposed sale of surplus property for railroad spur purposes is in
s
ubstantial conformance with the Anaheim General Plan.
(7 yes votes).
REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN FOR
B14.
THE PROPOSED LEASE OF OFFICE SPACE FOR MENTAL HEALTH OUTPATIENT
SERVICES FOR CHILDREN:
County of Orange Health Care Agency (Contractor, Aspen Health
Services, Inc.), 309 Civic Center Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92701, requests determination of
conformance with Anaheim General Plan for the proposed lease of office space for Mental
Health Outpatient Services for Child
ren. Property is located 221-225 West Cerritos Avenue.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined that the County’s proposal to lease office space at 221-225 West Cerritos Avenue
for mental health outpatient services is in substantial conformance with Anaheim General Plan.
36
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
(7 yes votes).
DISCUSSION - PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES MASTER PLAN:
C1.
150:
Mayor Daly, noting the lateness of the hour, asked that this item be again be continued until the next
Council Meeting on September 15, 1998.
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS:
C2.
112:
City Attorney Jack White stated that there are no actions to report.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
C3.
114:
Council Member Tait. He would like staff to submit a report regarding the new sign that went up off Weir
Canyon. It is a “Vegas” style sign on the Savi Ranch property in Yorba Linda, one that would never have
been allowed in Anaheim. He would like to know if there is anything they could do although he is
doubtful.
Tom Wood, Deputy City Manager. Staff will prepare a report.
Mayor Daly. He feels they should consider sending a protest letter; Council Member Tait. Anaheim has
worked hard to keep the integrity of the scenic corridor and now there are three “mega” signs intruding on
that corridor.
Mayor Daly. He referred to the Savi Ranch wayfinding program and all the cooperative work Anaheim
has done with them (Yorba Linda/Savi Ranch) on signage as well.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Council Member McCracken. She spent three days last week at a Redevelopment Workshop for the
League of Cities. In that regard, she would like to know if there are any further plans for the City’s
Redevelopment area for Anaheim Boulevard south of Broadway other than landscaping. Perhaps there
are concerns others may have as well. She would like staff to submit information to the Council on that
issue.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Daly. The Council received a letter from the Anaheim Hills Woman’s Golf Club requesting that
they revisit the subject of the club house at the Anaheim Hills Golf Course. He asked that it be put on
the next agenda (September 15, 1998) for discussion.
ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting of September 1, 1998 was
adjourned (10:16 P.M.). The next scheduled Council Meeting is September 15, 1998.
LEONORA N. SOHL
CITY CLERK
37