Loading...
1998/04/07ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, April 7, 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 CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Gary Johnson CIVIL ENGINEER: Natalie Armas SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER: Kristine Thalman ZONING MANAGER: Greg Hastings CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John Poole A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 1:45 p.m. on April 3, 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 meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there were no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Agency negotiator: Dave Hill Employee organi zation: Anaheim Fire Association, and IBEW Local 47, and unrepresented. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case: Delmonico, et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al. (and 18 related cases) Orange County Superior Court Case No. 70-80-71. 3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation: Name of case:.Ramirez vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 77-88-55. 4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 54956.9: one potential case. 5. CLAIM: Steven, Roxanne and Kristopher Wimberley, claimants. Agency Claimed Against: City of Anaheim. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 RECESS: Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:07 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of April 7, 1998 to order at 5:15 P.M. and welcomed those in attendance. INVOCATION: Cantor Zev Brooks of Temple Beth Emet gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Shirley McCracken led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATIONS 119: : The following Proclamations were issued by Mayor Daly and authorized by the City Council: Designating April, 1998 as Tree Planting Month in Anaheim as recognized by the California Department of Forestry Recognizing April 12 - 18, 1998 as National Telecommunicators Week in Anaheim Recognizing April 6 - 12, 1998 as National Community Development Week in Anaheim Recognizing April 5 - 11, 1998 as Anaheim Family YMCA Week Tree Planting Month: Mr. Jack Kudron, Parks Superintendent, accepted the Tree Planting Month Proclamation from Mayor Daly. Mr. Eric Oldar, California Department of Forestry subsequently presented the Tree City USA and Growth Award to Mayor Daly and Mr. Kudron. (Mayor Daly accepted on behalf of the Council and the City). Mr. Oldar explained the Tree City USA award recognizes communities for their outstanding efforts in community forestry. Of the 480 cities in California, 20% are recognized in conjunction with the National Arbor Day Foundation noting those communities who have done significant things in the past year. He noted, it is organizations like Releaf Anaheim that make a big difference in the City’s neighborhoods by planting trees. He also presented the Growth Award for achievements in public education and partnerships. National Telecommunicators Week in Anaheim: Captain Steve Sain introduced three representatives from the Communications Bureau -- Shelley McKerren, Communications Bureau Manager, Darlene Spalding, Communications Supervisor, and Sue Smith, Dispatcher II who were present to accept the Proclamation. He explained that the Communication Center receives and processes on the average 44,000 calls per month and in 1997 dispatched over 307,000 calls. Mayor Daly and Council Members commended and congratulated the representatives present from the Police Department noting their dedication and extremely important contribution to the community. National Community Development Week: Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development briefed the activities that were taking place as part of National Community Development Week (Exposition ‘98). “National CD Week was established by the National Community Development Association to provide local and state governments with a forum to showcase projects and services 2 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 provided by CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) to their citizens and various elected officials. It provides a unique opportunity to educate decision makers and constituents about the significant role CDBG plays in helping communities and the residents within them to achieve self-sufficiency and improve their standard of living.” Tomorrow, April 8, 1998 in the Gordon Hoyt Conference Center (City Hall West) from 4:30 P.M. to 7:30 P.M. there will be an opportunity to meet City department staff and nonprofit organization representatives and to view CDBG-funded project/service displays. Mayor Daly and Council Members then welcomed several members of the Community Development Advisory Board (CDAB) who were present including the Chairperson, June Lowry who accepted the Proclamation. They commended the representatives present as well as all the members of CDAB, members of staff, and all who are involved in the Community Development Block Grant program. Anaheim Family YMCA Week: Mr. Frank Jacobson, Chairman, 1998 Good Friday Breakfast, Todd Ament, Executive Director, YMCA and Dean Olson accepted the Proclamation. The Proclamation acknowledged that, “ . . . the Anaheim Family YMCA has offered the Good Friday Breakfast for 31 years to provide Christian fellowship, inspiration, and understanding for everyone in the community.” Mayor Daly and Council Members also extended their appreciation to the Anaheim Family YMCA for their continuing service to the citizens of Anaheim. RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME: 1. PROCLAMATION recognizing April 25, 1998, as Volunteer Connection Day in Anaheim. 2. PROCLAMATION designating April 26, 1998, as Let’s Make a Difference Day in Anaheim. 3. PROCLAMATION recognizing April, 1998, as Fair Housing Month in Anaheim. 4. PROCLAMATION recognizing April 19 - 26, 1998, as National Days of Remembrance in Anaheim. 5. PROCLAMATION recognizing April 12 - 18, 1998, as Medical Labora tory Week in Anaheim. 6. PROCLAMATION recognizing April 12 - 18, 1998, as National Boys & Girls Club Week in Anaheim. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,383,014.76 for the period ending March 30, 1998 and $3,197,702.52 for the period ending April 6, 1998, in accordance with the 1997-98 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Anaheim Public Financing Authority meetings. ( 5:38 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting ( 5:52 p.m.) ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to agenda items. 3 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Richard Palm. He is a business owner in the City presently in litigation with Caltrans which has been ongoing for two years. He refused their latest offer this morning. He does not understand the mechanics of the City, Planning Commission and Council. On November 9, 1992 Anaheim made an agreement with Caltrans and OCTA saying that zoning changes would be made to property owners who lost parking spaces (what? Pg. 15) but this has not happened in his case. It is his understanding that any zoning changes have to come before a Public Hearing. If that is true, he would like to have a record of that Public Hearing. He will contact the City giving his name and address so that he can receive this information. Mayor Daly. He asked that Mr. Palm follow up with the City Clerk who can direct him to the proper department(s) in terms of getting his questions answered. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Maurice Ogden, Minister, Unitarian Church of Orange County, 511 S. Harbor, Anaheim. He first thanked the members of the Council and City staff who have been so patient and helpful to them through the period of securing the permits and enabling them to settle into their “new home”. At the time, he made a number of representations, their principal objective being to look to the human condition and to make the community more peace loving, kinder and cooperative. No sooner had they settled in when they were called upon to help bring to the attention of their congregation and others the problems arising amongst some of the community and the Police Department through misunderstandings on both sides. He was asked to take part in a series of conversations between the Jeffrey-Lynne community representatives and others and the Police Department. Frustrations have continued and most recently an incident occurred where the kinds of communication they were hoping to develop broke down because of a couple of incidents and an action that took place in that community a couple of weeks ago. He understands there will be an opportunity to discuss some of the details of the incident. Jeffrey-Lynne is a neighborhood that has repeatedly complained of inadequate Police response to increasing drug traffic and gun-related incidents. Because of a recent relatively minor incident that took place involving slight damage to two City-owned Police motorcycles, there was a 5 1/2 hour visitation to the community by members of the Police Department and a number of tickets handed out over a period of time. The message sent to the community was entirely a wrong message. He is asking them to extend to the people in this community the same understanding and patience they showed to the Church and they will do everything in their power to reduce the hostilities and misunderstandings that exist today. Duane Roberts, 2276 W. Colchester, Anaheim. He is going to submit a letter after he reads it into the record. He then read letter dated April 7, 1998 to Mayor Tom Daly and the City Council - Re: Police Activities in the Jeffrey-Lynne Community (made a part of the record). The letter requested the presence of the Council at a community meeting to be held on Monday, April 13, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. at the Unitarian Church at 511 S. Harbor Blvd. There will be a viewing of a videotape taken by a resident of the Jeffrey-Lynne community showing a Police operation where citations were issued for various infractions and violations. Residents have alleged they were told by officers involved in the operation that the citations were issued in retaliation for the incident Mr. Ogden broached where two Police motorcycles were damaged “by unknown circumstances.” He thereupon submitted the letter. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS : Public input was received on Items A27, A29, A31. A33, A38, A39, C1, (see discussion under each item). MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of April 7 , 1998. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 4 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A40 : 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-57 through 98R-62 , both inclusive, for adoption. Mayor Daly offered Ordinance Nos. 5629 and 5630 for first reading. Refer to Resolution/Ordinance Book. A1. 118: Rejecting and denying certain claims filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management. The following claims were filed against the City and actions taken as recommended: a. Claim submitted by Steven Wimberly, Roxanne Wimberley, Kr istopher Wimberley(a minor) for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 6, 1997. b. Claim submitted by Kenya Boyd for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 15, 1998. c. Claim submitted by First Church of the Nazarene c/o Mary Ellen Forsythe for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 1, 1998. d. Claim submitted by Terry and Sherri Carrier for property damage sustai ned purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 14, 1998. e. Claim submitted by Rose M. Cunningham for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 25, 1997. f. Claim submitted by Claudine T. Gonzales for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 29, 1998. A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Redevelopment and Housing Commission meeting held March 4, 1998, and the special meeting held February 25, 1998. 173: Receiving and filing a Notice of Application filed by Manjit Singh and Sukhvir Singh, as filed with the Public Utilities Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to establish and operate a passenger stage service, on-call, door-to-door, between points in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties on the one hand, and: Ontario International Airport, John Wayne Airport, Los Angeles International Airport, Long Beach Convention Center, Santa Ana Amtrak Station, Fullerton Amtrak Station, Disneyland and Knotts Berry Farm Theme Parks, Anaheim Convention Center and Anaheim Stadium and The Pond on the other hand. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Budget Advisory Commission meeting held January 21, 1998. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Golf Advisory Commission meeting held March 26, 1998. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Private Industry Council meeting held February 26, 1998. A3. 150: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, United Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $80,260 for Palm Lane Park and John Marshall Park Security Lighting Improvements; 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. 5 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 A4. 166: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, TDS Engineering, in the amount of $115,208 for 21 Pole Mounted Parkway City Entry Signs at various locations (west of the I-5 Freeway); 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. 164: Approving Contract Change Order No. 1, in the amount of $54,475, in favor of Gillespie Construction, Inc., in connection with the I-5 Freeway Sewer Relocation Improvements - Segment B-6, Phase 2 (from Vermont Avenue to Santa Ana Boulevard). A6. 123: Approving the Second Amendment to Agreement with UMA Engineering, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $40,000 for Phase III of the Precise Alignment and Complete Right-of- Way Acquisition Documents on Imperial Highway Street from the Santa Ana River Bridge through the La Palma Avenue intersection; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Amendment. A7. 170: Approving the Subdivision Agreement of Parcel Map No. 97-155, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. Parcel Map No. 97-155 is for the Stadium Crossings development located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and Katella Avenue. A8. 158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1771 South Brookhurst Street (R/W 5190-1) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $523,185 to Grover Escrow. A9. 123: Approving Agreements with Gilray Enterprises, Inc., to provide environmental assessment, remediation and consulting services for the purposes of acquiring property for Katella Avenue Smart Street Project, the Anaheim Resort Area Improvement and Beautification Program, and various other acquisition projects. A10. 123: Approving a Street Lighting Utility Agreement No. 12-UT-430 with Caltrans for the I-5 Freeway Widening Project - Segment A3; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Utility Agreement. A11. 123: Approving a fourth year option to the Agreement with Orange County Striping Service, Inc., for street striping maintenance services. A12. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-57 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’s 5226, 5215, 5244, 5171) A13. 160: Accepting the low bid of Shallbetter c/o Matzinger-Keegan, Inc., in the amount of $30,591 for three manually operated padmount, sectionalizing switches with holders, in accordance with Bid #5774. A14. 160: Accepting the low bid of Shallbetter c/o Matzinger-Keegan, Inc., in the amount of $36,076 for four manually operated deadfront pad-mounted switches with holders, in accordance with Bid #5769. A15. 160: Accepting the low bid of Trayer Engineering Corporation, in the amount of $38,660 for ten 15KV loadbreak subsurface switches, in accordance with Bid #5768. A16. 160: Accepting the bid from CST Environmental, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $459,690 for asbestos abatement at the Anaheim Convention Center, in accordance with Bid #5764. 6 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Council Member Tait declared a conflict on this item and will, therefore, be abstaining from any discussion or decision. A17. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options and issue a Purchase Order to Phoenix Group Information Systems, in an amount not to exceed $101,083 for a period of one year, commencing July 1, 1998, with the option to renew for one additional year for parking citation processing, in accordance with Bid #5539. A18. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the final renewal of the Purchase Order to Nobest, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $701,669 for concrete replacement for a period of one year commencing July 1, 1998, in accordance with Bid #5386. A19. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the final renewal of the Purchase Order to Silvia Construction, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $262,500 for a period of one year commencing July 1, 1998, in accordance with Bid #5392 for asphalt recycling equipment. A20. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the final renewal of the Purchase Order to Nobest, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $655,452 for concrete and crossgutter replacement for a period of one year, commencing July 1, 1998, in accordance with Bid #5397. A21. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the second renewal of the Purchase Order to Manhole Adjusting, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $140,000 for manhole and water valve adjusting for a period of one year commencing July 1, 1998; and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal option for one additional year, based on favorable pricing, in accordance with Bid #5493. A22. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise a renewal option to Heli-Mart, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $120,000 and National Airmotive Corporation, in an amount not-to-exceed $60,000 for helicopter replacement parts as required for the period July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999; and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise renewal options for two additional one year terms, in accordance with Bid #5658. A23. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Purchase Order to Homac Company c/o Matzinger-Keegan, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for electrical connectors and parts, as required, for a two year period beginning May 15, 1998, through April 14, 2000. A24. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the second year renewal option to K & D Graphics, in an amount not-to-exceed $40,000 for typesetting services as required for the period July 1, 1998, through June 30, 1999; and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to exercise the third year renewal option, in accordance with Bid #5515. A25. 175: Ratifying the Terms and Conditions of Sale for the emergency purchase of transformers in the amount of $19,000.90 for Seagate Substrates and Lewis Substation. A26. 123: Approving an Agreement with Anaheim City School District to provide CDBG funds, i n the amount of $80,000 for a community shelter to be located at Thomas Jefferson II Elementary School. A27. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) accepting and authorizing the execution of the Financial Assistance Award from the Economic Development Administration of the United States Department of Commerce, (II) accepting and authorizing the execution of the Standard Agreement evidencing a grant from the California Trade and Commerce Agency of the State of California, (III) approving and authorizing the execution of the Owner Participation Agreement, substantially in the form attached, by and among Kilroy Realty, L.P., the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the City of Anaheim, and 7 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 (IV) authorizing the execution of other documents related thereto, all in connection with the development of the Anaheim Technology Center. Council Member Tait declared a conflict onthis item and will, therefore, be abstaining from any discussion or decision. Mr. Jeff Kirsc h, 2661 West Palais commented on this issue under Redevelopment Agency meeting this date, item No. 2. A28. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 98R -59 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) approving and authorizing the execution of Employment Training Panel Agreement No. 98-0195 between the City of Anaheim and the Employment Training Panel of the State of California and (II) authorizing the City Manager to execute other documents related thereto. (Community Development -JTPA) A29. 123: Approvin g a 3-year contract with the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, in the amount of $200,000 to provide support services to the Anaheim business community. Floyd Farano (Past President, Chamber of Commerce). He first clarified he is speaking on his behalf and not as the official spokesman of the Chamber of Commerce. The idea of a contract between the Chamber and the City goes back a long way and the same misgivings were present 20 years ago -- whether such a relationship would be compromising the Chamber, would there be things the Chamber could not or would not say because of its involvement and perhaps the same for the City. There are six past presidents of the Chamber present tonight who were in office between 1985 and 1997 as well as the present sitting President. They have made a concerted effort to get along with the City and work in a constructive manner. After additional comments relative to the proposed contract, Mr. Farano stated he feels the Chamber and the City are on the right track but there is a condition under which the City should not vote for this contract -- if the City does not feel the Chamber is going to render a meaningful service. This contract will not be a gift but a professional relationship the same as other City contracts. He believes there is a majority of the Council who will vote to approve the contract. He would hope that it would be unanimous which will send a positive message to the community. Council Member Zemel. He has served as Liaison to the Chamber for four years. One of the issues they have worked on was a service to be provided by the Chamber. He was a very big advocate of having the Chamber provide services for the City although he was concerned that it might be a duplication of efforts with the City’s Economic Development Department and another concern was the independence issue -- can the Chamber maintain its independence when they are employed by the City to do a service. This is a three-year contract and the terms of the contract make perfect sense. He feels this is a need the City has and will help bring business to the City and augment economic development opportunities. He is going to support approval of the agreement but with the caveat and expectation that the Chamber maintain its independence and speak up when they feel Council/Staff is going in the wrong direction. Council Member McCracken. She also served as Liaison to the Chamber during this past year . She believes they have developed a professionalism and a very positive attitude towards the City Council. The Chamber can be a real asset to the community in addressing the needs of a large percentage of the business community yet untouched by the Chamber or the City except perhaps in a negative way, i.e., code enforcement issues. It will help owners to upgrade their businesses and to launch them into the 21st Century. She believes this contract can do that and the partnership Anaheim can have with the Chamber can be as vital as partnerhships that other cities have with their Chambers of Commerce and provide the opportunities particularly for small businesses and minority businesses in Anaheim. A30. 150: Increasing revenue and expenditure appropriations in Fund 235, Program 4277, by $19,904 in order to provide a youth sports component at the Kids In Action program at Franklin Elementary School. 8 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 A31. 123: Approving an Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Cinco de Mayo Fiesta Committee, in the amount of $5,000 for the 27th Annual Cinco de Mayo Fiesta at La Palma Park on May 2nd and 3rd; and approving a boxing exhibition by the Anaheim Boxing Club at La Palma Park on May 2, 1998. John Kelly, 2420 Cliff Park, Anaheim, President of the Board, Annual Anaheim Cinco de Mayo Fiesta and Chairman of the CDF Committee. He is present to invite the Mayor and City Council to attend their activities, especially the opening ceremonies on Sunday, May 3 and the breakfast at 11:00 a.m. at La Palma Park. Due to their financial restraints and unexpected expenses from last year, they are somewhat behind in their finances. They have lost the support of some of their major large sponsors. In an attempt to “pick up the pieces” they are looking for smaller sponsors as well as support from the community. He thanked the community and Council for supporting the Fiesta. A32. 149: ORDINANCE 5629 (INTRODUCTION) Repealing provisions of Chapter 14.32 of Title 4 and enacting new provisions of Chapter 14.32 pertaining to parking in public parking lots. A33. 139: Approving the recommended positions on the following legislative proposals according to the City’s 1998 Legislative Program, and communicate their position to appropriate representatives in Sacramento and Washington D.C. 1) SUPPORT - SB 1405 (Lee) regarding the public safety aspects of security bars (burglar bars) that present a fire or public hazard. 2) SUPPORT - SB 2086 (Maddy) regarding the establishment of tourism economic development zones. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. There is a mention in the bill (SB2086) of indexing. He is concerned with flat lining. He requests that if this provision does not allow for indexing for inflation for the amount of diverted tax increment, perhaps support should be withheld until it comes in line with that. 3) SUPPORT - AB 1368 (Villaraigosa) and SB 1857 (Brulte) regarding funding for alternative fuel and energy efficient programs. 4) SUPPORT - HR 3181 (Sanchez) regarding the authorizing for background checks of potential caregivers to seniors and the elderly. 5) OPPOSE - 139: RESO LUTION NO. 98R-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OPPOSING PROPOSITION 224. Council Member Zemel. He is going to ask for a continuance on items No. 1 through No. 4 but would like to act on the resolution, No. 5, tonight. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved that Items No. 1 - No. 4 be continued for three weeks but that they act on Item No. 5 (supporting staff’s recommendation) tonight. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member McCracken asked if there was a need to expedite these matters at this point. Mayor Daly. Of particular interest to him is the tourism and economic development zones (No. 2 - SB2086). He assumes three weeks will not be a problem; Kristine Thalman, Government Affairs Manager. That bill is going to be heard on April 15, 1998. 9 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Council Member Zemel stated that is one of the four issues that he is comfortable with. He will, therefore, amend his motion that only Items 1, 3 and 4 be continued and that the Council support Item 2, SB2086 and adopting the resolution opposing Proposition 224; Council Member Tait was agreeable in his second. A vote was taken on the foregoing motion as amended. MOTION CARRIED. A34. 123: Approving Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 3CA41260, the Wildland Fire Protection Agreement for certain wildland areas within the city, which updates the rate per acre to be charged, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the Amendment. A35. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-61 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C ITY OF ANAHEIM approving the classification of Convention Center Concessionaire at salary schedule 0575, plus net commission income, effective April 10, 1998. A36. 178: Appointing Robert Carr as the City’s alternate representative to the Water Advisory Committee of Orange County (WACO) as recommended by the Public Utilities Board at their meeting of March 5, 1998. A37. 137: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) authorizing the Invitation of Proposals for the purchase of not to exceed $65,000,000 aggregate principal amount of bonds by the Anaheim Public Financing Authority; (II) authorizing a Notice Inviting Bids relating to the bonds and a Notice of Intention to Sell Bonds; (III) approving an Installment Purchase Agreement, an Indenture of Trust and a Continuing Disclosure Agreement; (IV) authorizing the delivery of a Preliminary Official Statement and an Official Statement; and (V) approving certain actions in connection with the 1998 Series Revenue Bonds. ORDINANCE NO. 5630 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an Installment Purchase Agreement. Authorizing and directing the Mayor, the City Manager, the Public Utilities General Manager and other City officers and officials to take all actions necessary to complete the transactions contemplated by the financing and ratifying any such actions previously taken. A38. 123: Approving an Agreement with Parsons Engineering Science, Incorporated, in an amount not-to-exceed $392,114 to provide engineering services for the Water System Master Plan project; and authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager on behalf of the City to execute said Agreement and any other related documents necessary to complete said project. Submitted was report dated April 7, 1998 from the Public Utilities General Manager recommending approval of the subject agreement. Bob Kerr, Assistant General Manager for Water Services/Public Utilities. He briefed the subject report which gave an overview of the plan. He explained that part of the project will provide a computer hydraulic model of Anaheim’s water system for ongoing system planning. Mr. Kerr then presented two slides - Water Master Plan and Master Plan Schedule - and briefed the information contained in each. A39. 179: RESOLUTION NO. - - - - - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Findings of Fact and recommendations of Hearing Officer Victor J. Kaleta, Esq, modifying and adding new conditions of approval to Conditional Use Permit No. 3421 (La Estrella Restaurant). Council Member Zemel. Having gone through this issue for the last year or so, he would like to see if there is support on the Council to ask the City Attorney to review the case and come up with new 10 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 findings. He believes the Council can make new findings. He would like to get a statement from the City Attorney as to what that procedure will be. City Attorney White. The Council has the opportunity in every case in which a Hearing Officer is appointed to make a recommendation to disagree with the determination of the Hearing Officer and the findings if they choose to do that after having reviewed the record of the proceedings. If the Council would be inclined to suggest or look at a different determination from the one recommended, he would suggest continuing this to the next meeting to give his staff an opportunity to draft an appropriate resolution. The decision of the Council has to be supported by findings and findings have to be based on evidence in the record. It is not to say the Hearing Officer’s is the only possible decision. If the Council would like, his office can bring back a different resolution for Council consideration or the Council can proceed tonight with what the Hearing Officer has recommended. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to continue Item A39 for three weeks to give the City Attorney an opportunity to offer new findings that would allow the Council to deny the permit. Mayor Daly seconded the motion for purposes of discussion. Mayor Daly. He asked if the City Attorney crafts findings and recommendations which are different, what would the procedure be. City Attorney White. The Council would not hold another hearing. They would have an additional three weeks to review the administrative record by the Hearing Officer and if they direct him, he will bring back a resolution for consideration that they would deny the continuation of the use and not give it the six months the Hearing Officer recommended. The Council could consider either of those resolutions at their next meeting and could adopt either. He confirmed it would be on the consent calendar since there is no mechanism for another hearing. Council Member Zemel. He surmises that the Council did not give their decision-making authority to the Hearing Officer. City Attorney White. The Hearing Officer has two functions -- gather the evidence in a form that constitutes the administrative record and, secondly, to make a recommendation based on the evidence he heard. He is the sole gatherer of the evidence but not the sole decision maker and the Council’s decision may be different from his. That decision has to be supported by findings of fact and supported by evidence in the administrative record. Council Member Zemel asked if they damaged themselves in any way by giving a different finding. City Attorney White. The ultimate test if challenged is to demonstrate that the evidence in the record supports their findings and their findings support their decision. Council Member Lopez asked to hear from the Code Enforcement Manager on this issue; John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. It was staff’s recommendation to terminate the use permit. Staff has spent many hours with this business and there have been many inspections. The business continues to violate various conditions. His belief is, even with new conditions, it is giving more time for the inevitable because he feels they are going to be back again as many times before. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion to continue the matter for three weeks and that the City Attorney prepare alternate language for Council consideration and decision. MOTION CARRIED A40. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meetings held March 17, 1998, and March 24, 1998. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R- 57 through 98R-62 , both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly 11 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 98R-57 through 98R-62 , both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. END OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. (Council Member Tait abstained on items A16 and A27.) A41. 121: CONDEMNATION HEARINGS - 956 AND 952 S. WALNUT STREET : To consider the adoption of the following resolutions finding and determining the public interest and necessity to require condemnation of certain real properties for the purposes of making public roadway improvements, as part of the Anaheim Resort Area Specific Plan, and the Ball Road/Walnut Street Improvement Project; and authorizing the law firm of Rutan and Tucker, special counsel to the City, to proceed with said condemnation action. Mayor Daly. This is the time and place for the hearing on the proposed acquisition by eminent domain of the two properties located at 952 and 956 South Walnut Street in connection with the Ball Road/Walnut Street Improvement Project and the Anaheim Resort Area Improvement and Beautification Program. The property interests which are proposed to be acquired are legally described in the resolution attached to the staff report. He asked for a staff presentation on the proposed acquisition. Natalie Armas, Public Works/Development Services Manager. She briefed the reasons for the proposed acquisition. Staff has been in negotiation with the property owner(s) but to date have been unable to obtain an executed acquisition agreement. Staff recommends adoption of the resolutions but will continue to work with the property owners. Adoption of the resolutions will allow construction to begin as scheduled. Any delay could jeopardize funding for the project. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and in doing so stated that in conducting the hearing, they will hear from the owner of record of the property or a designated representative and 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. (5) Whether the City has met all other prerequisites to the exercise of eminent domain in connection with the property. The Mayor invited the owner or representative for the property at 952 or 956 S. Walnut Street to address the Council. Mr. Darrell Meyer. He is speaking for the property at 956 S. Walnut. They have been property owners and taxpayers in the City since 1948. This is a little property that helps his mother to exist (Esther M. Meyer, Trustee, 18 Vista Encanta, San Clemente, California). It is a home located at the northeast corner of Walnut and Ball. He is present to suggest that the real issue is fair and just compensation for the taking of this property. They have been able to endure traffic because of the wall that is there. The offer that the appraiser, and hence the staff, has made to his mother, he feels, is almost an insult. They are faced with compromising rent income from the property and loss of value because of the taking of the right-of-way frontage. The appraiser based his value on conditions after the taking. He is faced with making adjustments and improvements to the property. The right of way will come within 8’ of the corner of the house. He is not present to say they cannot do what is proposed, but that they step up and pay his mother for the property they are going to take. Walnut is designated as a secondary highway. This condition is not going to get better. They have endured it for 20 years and it is only going to get worse. The only offset they have is compensation. Mayor Daly. Staff will be asked to comment. He then asked if anyone else wished to speak; Mr. Meyer stated that the other owner (of 952 S. Walnut) is in the Chamber but does not wish to speak. He clarified for the City Attorney that he is speaking for 956 S. Walnut. 12 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Natalie Armas. The City hired Stephen G. White, MAI to appraise the partial taking as shown on the posted exhibit. The appraisal did not show any severance damage to the site and so the appraisal was based on the square footage value. The take is 613 square feet. They have talked to Mr. Meyer about potential business losses and he has the right to claim those up to three years after the project. Staff is trying to address his concerns. They have talked about some compensation for walls or what he feels is necessary. They have not come up with any figures on what he thinks is necessary. Mayor Daly asked, if there continues to be disagreement, what would the next step be; Natalie Armas. The City would file for possession of the property through the court system. They will take a 90-day possession and that is why they have to take actions early in the process. Staff will continue to work with Mr. Meyer as they do with all property owners and hopefully they will be able to address his concerns and reach an agreement. City Attorney White. Staff will make every effort to reach an accommodation and an agreement with Mr. Meyer; however, if not, Mr. Meyer and his mother have the right to have the matter decided by a Superior Court Judge as to what is fair compensation. It is not just the City making that determination. Additional questions were posed by Council Members which were answered by Ms. Armas at the conclusion of which Council Member Zemel noted that the City Attorney mentioned Superior Court but this is just a $10,000 issue. The property owner would have to hire an attorney if it went to court thereby incurring an expense. He asked if there was any other process they can use. City Attorney White answered, no. What he would suggest, and it was correctly stated that the purpose of tonight’s hearing is not to determine compensation, if the Council moves forward with this resolution of necessity, staff will come back to the Council with a recommendation as to how to resolve the matter. Relative to compensation, they cannot tonight negotiate a settlement. This is not the type of case of a magnitude that should end up going to trial but staff has a responsibilty to make sure they are being prudent with public funds. If the resolution was not adopted tonight, it would not mean that staff was going to meet less intensively with the property owner. Natalie Armas. They do not want to go to trial on this dollar amount either. It is not their intent to give compensation above what is reasonable; Council Member Zemel stated Mr. Meyer may realize he will be saving perhaps $6,000 in attorney’s fees and sit down one more time with staff and thereby avoid going to court. Council Member Lopez. He suggested rather than vote for the resolution tonight, why not just continue the matter; Council Member Tait. He does not believe they can do that. City Attorney White. He reiterated that the only thing the Council is doing tonight is declaring the need and necessity for this property as part of the improvement project and that the Council is willing to use the power of eminent domain to accomplish the project by acquiring the property. It does not in any way prejudice the property owner with regard to what compensation would be paid for the property. He believes there is a potential downside if the resolution is not adopted tonight but will let the Public Works Director speak to that. There is plenty of opportunity between now and the next few months to resolve the matter but if they delay the acquisition, they are not going to be able to acquire the property to get the project done. Mr. Gary Johnson, Director of Public Works and City Engineer. Typically, staff does not bring these matters forward until they are at a point where they need to move ahead. The area south of Ball Road on Walnut is being constructed by a Disney-managed project. It is necessary to have the lane configuration and the traffic signal moved for safety purposes when that project is completed. Delaying the project will create an unsafe condition because the lanes will not line up. It is important to move ahead and construct the project. As in the past, these matters are usually worked out and settled. It is not typical where they have to go to trial especially on such a small piece of property. Mayor Daly. It might end up costing more down the road if they do not approve the resolution this evening. As the City Attorney stated, staff will continue to negotiate with the property owner. He 13 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 believes they mean it when they say they try to avoid court proceedings. He wants to make it clear this is not about determining a price but simply about whether it is necessary to condemn the property for purposes of the project schedule. Relative to compensation, if a price is not agreed upon, it goes to a judge who then “picks the price.” It is bad public policy for the Council to do so. The procedure for settling the issue is in place. Staff has successfully negotiated purchases in almost every case. They are certainly sympathetic with Mr. Meyer and the long-term ownership of the rental property. He reiterated the decision before them is simply to condemn or not. Mr. Meyer stated he is not present to contest that they have that power but fair and just compensation is the issue. If he has to start expending money with appraisers and attorneys to defend what he feels is grossly unfair, he would like the Council to authorize the expenditure of another appraiser -- either direct that this matter be continued so he can continue with some cards in his deck, or authorize an appraiser to work on his behalf. Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. Council Member Zemel. He agrees with the Mayor’s comments but the reason why this appears different to him, it is such a small amount of money. He would be willing to support a three-week continuance so that staff and the property owner can get together one more time with the strong message to the property owner that a decision will be made three weeks from now. Council Member Tait. He feels one thing they cannot do is continue this item. It is about whether there is a public convenience and necessity, not whether the property owner is being treated fairly or unfairly. At this point, it will cost the City a fair amount of money to continue the matter. He reiterated, they cannot continue this item. At the conclusion of discussion, Mayor Daly offered both Resolutions, 98R-63 and 98R-64 to determine the public interest and necessity in moving forward with the condemnation proceedings. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 98R-63 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 956 S. WALNUT STREET FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT (Esther M Meyer, Trustee - R/W 5221). RESOLUTION NO. 98R-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE CIT Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUISITION OF PORTIONS OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 952 S. WALNUT STREET FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT (Ruth Ann Drauglis RW 5221-1). Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R- 63 and 98R- 64 , both inclusive, 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 Nos. 98R- 63 and 98R- 64 , both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 105: APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION: A42. Appointment to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy of Julie Mayer, term ending June 30, 1999. This matter was continued from the meeting of March 24, 1998 to this date. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved for a three-week continuance on this appointment. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 ITEMS B1 - B6 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 16, 1998: INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 7, 1998: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2992 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B1. 179: OWNER: Leonard and Cyndie Chaidez, P.O. Box 29, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 507 South Lemon Street - Leonard Chaidez Tree Service. Property is 0.56 acre located at the southwest corner of Santa Ana St. and Lemon Street. To consider reinstatement of this permit by the modification or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to a time limitation to retain a tree service contractor’s yard. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 2992 APPROVED for one year, to expire 1/22/99 (PC98-31) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Negative Declaration previously approved. VARIANCE NO. 447, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 21: B2. 179: OWNER: Steven and Loraine Lazerson, 541 South Grand Avenue, West Covina, CA 91791 INITIATED BY: City of Anaheim (Code Enforcement Division), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 302 South East Street (also known as 300 South East Street and 1200 East Broadway) - Anaheim Service Station. Property is 0.49 acre located at the southeast corner of Broadway and East Street. Staff-initiated (Code Enforcement Division) request to consider the modification or revocation of Variance No. 447 (to operate a gasoline service station). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: VARIANCE NO. 447 MODIFIED (PC98-32) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3992 CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION OWNER: William Taormina, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: Steve Eide, 158 Orange Street, Covina, CA 91723 LOCATION: 411 and 423 North Anaheim Boulevard. Property is 1.79 acres located at the southwest corner of Sycamore Street and Anaheim Boulevard. To construct a 51,238 square foot indoor roller hockey facility with two roller rinks, snack shop, pro shop and support offices and lockers with waivers of minimum number of (a) parking spaces, (b) maximum structural height, (c) minimum structural setback and (d) minimum setback adjacent to residential zones. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: WITHDRAWN by the applicant. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4007, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B4. 179: OWNER: John Lim, Jr. and Hun Han Lim, 2504 Oshkosh Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 2127 East Almont Avenue (Unit A & D). Property is 0.21 acre located on the north side of Almont Avenue, 842 feet east of the centerline of State College Boulevard. To permit a boardinghouse for up to ten (10) residents. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 4007 GRANTED, for one year, to expire 3/16/99 (PC98-33) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Approved Negative Declaration. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-04 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B5. 179: 15 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 OWNER: Nader Semerome Safaie and Zahra M. Safaie, 13741 Clinton Street #46, Garden Grove, CA 92683 INITIATED BY: City of Anaheim, (Planning Department), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, An aheim, CA 92803 LOCATION: 2235 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is 0.19 acre located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Kathryn Drive. To reclassify this property from the RS-A-43,000 Zone to the CL Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 97-98-04 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY, (PC98-34) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Approved Negative Declaration. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3909 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL B6. 179: OF A FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Philip Sniderman, 10806 Cactus Avenue, Hesperia, CA 92345, requests review and approval of a final landscape plan for a previously- approved service station with accessory convenience market. Property is located at 1201 South State College Boulevard. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved final landscape plans for CUP 3909 (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Negative Declaration previously approved. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS OF MARCH 16, 1998. ITEMS B7 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF MARCH 26, 1998 DECISION DATE: APRIL 2, 1998 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 17, 1998: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3968 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Mennen Industries, Inc., 2305 Cherry, Long Beach, CA AGENT: J.D. Property Management, Attn: Pastor Gamez, 3520 Cadillac Avenue, #B, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LOCATION: 2115 East Ball Road. Property is approximately 2.8 acres having a frontage of 555 feet on the north side of Ball Road, having a maximum depth of 238 feet and located 177 feet west of the centerline of Belhaven Street. To permit on-premises sale and consumption of beer and wine in a fast-food restaurant with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 3968 APPROVED (ZA DECISION NO. 98-08) Approved Negative Declaration. END OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS. ITEMS B8 - B18 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 30, 1998: INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 21, 1998: VARIANCE NO. 4330 B8. 179: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 97-212 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Gary Calkins and Elaine Calkins, 6263 E. Trail Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807 16 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 LOCATION: 6263 East Trail Drive. Property is 3.75 acres located on the north side of Trail Drive, 162 feet west of the centerline of Whitestone Drive. To establish a 4-lot single family residential subdivision with waiver of minimum lot frontage abutting a public or private street. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Variance No. 4330 DENIED (PC98-36) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-212 DENIED. Denied Negative Declaration. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION B9. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3680 : OWNER: The Eli Home, Inc., Attn: Sonja Grewal, 4530 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, CA 92869 LOCATION: 100 South Canyon Crest Drive - The Eli Home. Property is 0.22 acre located at the southeast corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Canyon Crest Drive. To consider reinstatement of the conditional use permit to retain a group home for abused children and their mothers. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved reinstatement for two years for CUP NO. 3680, to expire 4/2/00 (PC98-37) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Negative Declaration previously approved. Council Member McCracken requested a review of the Planning Commission’s decision on this item and that it be heard in conjunction with modified conditions of approval previously approved by the Planning Commission on which a review was requested (by Council Members McCracken/Lopez) on March 3, 1998. Council Member Lopez concurred. (A Public Hearing will be held on both issues on April 28, 1998 since the previous matter was set for that date.) RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-14 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B10. 179: OWNER: County of Orange, PF&RD, Real Property, Attn: Donna Garza, P.O. Box 4048, Santa Ana, CA 92702 INITIATED BY: City of Anaheim (Planning Department), 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 2630-2650 East Katella Avenue (County of Orange Katella Yard). Property consists of two parcels totaling approximately 16.6 acres located on the south side of Katella Avenue, 340 feet east of the centerline of Douglass Road. Request for reclassification of 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 (Residential Agricultural) Zone; and, Portions A and B , a Resolution of Intent from the County of Orange M1 (FP-2) (Light Manufacturing, Flood Plain Overlay) Zone (Portion A) and City of Anaheim ML (Limited Industrial) Zone (Portion B) to the City of Anaheim PR (Public Recreational) Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Reclassification No. 97-98-14 GRANTED (PC98-38) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Approved Negative Declaration. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3929 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B11. 179: OWNER: F.J. Hanshaw Enterprises, Inc., Attn: Frederick J. Hanshaw, 10921 Westminster Avenue, Garden Grove, CA 92843 LOCATION: 2930 West Lincoln Avenue #1, Cheers Market. Property is 0.89 acre located at the south side of Lincoln Avenue, 200 feet east of the centerline of Laxore Street. 17 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 To amend or delete a condition of approval pertaining to required signage and landscaping for a previously-approved 2,400 square foot convenience market. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3929 APPROVED (PC98-39) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Negative Declaration previously approved. Mayor Daly. He asked if Planning staff is comfortable with all of the signage regulations approved by the Planning Commission. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. The applicant asked that the condition that the Planning Commission had originally approved to remove the sign be altered so the sign could remain. The Commission approved that because the existing sign has less square footage than what code would allow. The Planning Commission was able to retain the landscaping requirement that went along with that. They felt the sign could remain in place as it is currently. Staff, as always, would like to see improvements to signage and in this particular case would recommend that sign be modified but, as he mentioned, it is lower in square footage than the code permits. Mayor Daly asked if as a result of this action, will there be any changes to the existing signage; Mr. Hastings answered no. The Planning Commission did limit the sign to what it is now even though the code allows for more square footage. Council Member Zemel left the Council Chamber temporarily (7:25 p.m.). GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 353 B12. 134/179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-11 REVISION TO SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD ACCESS POINT STUDY - EXHIBIT NO. 7 WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4005 SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL NO. 98-01 CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: OWNER: The Hazel Maag Trust, Attn: Lloyd Copenbarger, 4675 MacArthur Court #700, Newport Beach, CA 92660 John R. Schantz, Melvin R. Schantz, Attn: Robert H. Pernell, etal., 21 Chelsea Pointe, Dana Pointe, CA 92629 AGENT: Keisker and Wiggle Architects, Inc. 15751 Rockfield Boulevard, #210, Irvine, CA 92618 LOCATION: Property is 24.5 acres located at the northeast corner of Via Cortez and Santa Ana Canyon Road . General Plan Amendment No. 353 - to redesignate a portion of the subject property from the Hillside Low-Medium Density Residential land use designation to the General Commercial land use designation. Reclassification No. 97-98-11 - to reclassify this property from the RS-A-43,000(SC) Zone to the Revision to Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study - Exhibit No. 7 - CL(SC) Zone. to revise the Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Points Study - Exhibit No. 7 to permit one additional access point Conditional Use Permit No. 4005 - on Santa Ana Canyon Road. to construct a 243,180 square foot commercial center with heights in excess of 35 feet, roof-mounted equipment, a 4,685 square foot fast food restaurant with drive-through lane, a 171,674 square foot self-storage facility and a 28,350 square foot electronics sales store with vehicle retail parts installation facilities with waivers of: (a) permitted commercial center identification sign, (b) permitted directional signs, (c) permitted types of signs, (d) permitted wall signs, (e) minimum number of parking spaces, (f) minimum parking lot landscaping and (g) minimum drive-through lane requirements and (h) minimum structural and Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 98-01 - landscape setbacks. to approve the removal of 29 specimen trees. 18 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy) Recommended approval of GPA NO. 353 to City Council (PC98-40). Reclassification No. 97-98-11 GRANTED (PC98-41). APPROVED Revision to Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study - Exhibit No. 7 (PC98-42). Approved waivers of code requirement. CUP NO. 4005 GRANTED (PC98-43). Approved Specimen Tree Removal No. 98-01. Approved request for City Council review . To be scheduled for a City Council public hearing due to the General Plan Amendment. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4011 B13. 179: CEQA GENERAL RULE-EXEMPTION NO. 15061(b)(3): OWNER: John P. Butler, 19542 Sierra Canon Road, Irvine, CA 92612-3803 AGENT: Bill Reinhardt, 5405 Alton Parkway, #5A, Irvine, CA 92604 LOCATION: 1177 South State College Boulevard, Units A4 and A5, Daddy’s Pizza, Pasta and Salads. Property is 0.72 acre located at the southwest corner of Almont Avenue and State College Boulevard. To permit and retain an existing arcade for up to 10 amusement devices. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 4011 GRANTED (PC98-44) (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 356 B14. 134/179: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 97-98-16 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 97-171 NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: OWNER: Savi Ranch Associates, A General Partnership, Attn: William Krum, 2485 Natomas Park Drive, #350, Sacramento, CA 95833 AGENT: Michael E. Balsamo, 567 San Nicolas Drive, #208, Newport Beach, CA 92660 LOCATION: 8015-8095 East Crystal Drive. Property is 21.62 acres located on the west side of Pullman Street, 38 feet west of the centerline of Crystal. To redesignate this property from the General Commercial land use designation to the General Industrial Reclassification No. 97-98-16 - land use designation. to reclassify this property from the CL(SC) Zone Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-171 - to the ML(SC) Zone. to establish a 13-lot industrial subdivision for the development of a 12-unit industrial complex. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy). Recommended approval of GPA NO. 356 to City Council (PC98-45). Reclassification No. 97-98-16 GRANTED (PC98-46). Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-171 APPROVED. Approved Negative Declaration. Approved request for City Council review . To be scheduled for a City Council public hearing due to the General Plan Amendment. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS: REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF ANAHEIM B15. 134: GENERAL PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE: Anaheim City School District (Michael Amling, LSA Associates), One Park Plaza, Suite 500, Irvine, CA 92614, requests determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for the development and construction of a proposed elementary school site. Property is located at the northeast corner of Loara Street and Westmont Drive (510-540 North Loara Street). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Determined to be in substantial conformance with the Anaheim General Plan. 19 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Mayor Daly, under Council Comments (see Item C4), posed questions relative to Items B15. and B16. See comments under that item. REQUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN B16. FOR A PROPOSED PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY: Anaheim City School District, c/o LSA and Associates, One Park Plaza, Suite 500, Irvine, CA 92614, requests determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for a proposed public school facility. Property is located at 1000-1010 South Harbor Boulevard. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Determined to be in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan. REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 342 TO CONSIDER B17. 134: DELETING CONVENTION WAY FROM THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN: City-initiated, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests initiation of General Plan Amendment No. 342 to consider deleting Convention Way between West Street and Harbor Boulevard from the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Initiated General Plan Amendment. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 152 - REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF B18. 179: SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE TO EXPAND AN EXISTING PARKING AREA: Anacal Engineering Company, Attn: Cal Queyrel, 1900 East La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92803-3668, request determination of substantial conformance to expand and reconfigure the parking lot area for an existing private organization. Property is located at 1341 West La Palma Avenue (Assistance League of Anaheim). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Determined to be in substantial conformance. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FROM 3/30/98. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3966 AND D1. 179: NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Walter A. Friedman, 624 Barnsdale Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: Mark Scheuerman, 105 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 105 South State College Boulevard - Insta-Tune and Lube. Property is 0.35 acre located at the southwest corner of State College Boulevard and Center Street. To permit a 1,266 square foot expansion of an existing 1,008 square foot lubrication, oil change and smog check and minor auto repair facility. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3966 GRANTED, for two years, to expire 1/21/00 (PC98-7) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. Review of the Planning Commission’s decision requested by Council Members Lou Lopez and Tom Daly at the meeting of February 10, 1998, Item B1. Public hearing continued from the meeting of March 17, 1998, Item D2. City Clerk Sohl announced that immediately prior to the meeting (4:41 P.M.) letter dated April 7, 1998 was received from Mr. Walter Friedman, Owner, requesting that the Council continue the subject Public Hearing from this date to May 5, 1998. There was no specific reason given but she believes Mr. Friedman is continuing to work with the Planning Department. Mayor Daly. He met with Mr. Friedman earlier today and he is in ongoing discussions with the Planning Department. 20 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to continue the subject Public Hearing to Tuesday, May 5, 1998 as requested by the owner. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. Council Member Zemel was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT D2. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3994 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: California Drive-In Theaters, Inc., Attn: Jay Swerdlow, 120 N. Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048 AGENT: A. Terrance Dickens, P.O. Box 2488, Long Beach, CA 90801 LOCATION: 1500 North Lemon Street (formerly Anaheim Drive-In). Property is 24.95 acres located at the southeast corner of Durst Street and Lemon Street. To establish an outdoor swap meet marketplace with waivers of minimum parking lot landscaping and permitted encroachments in setback areas. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3994 GRANTED (PC98-10) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement. Approved Negative Declaration. Review of the Planning Commission’s decision requested by Council Members Tom Daly and Lou Lopez at the meeting of February 10, 1998, Item B5. Public hearing continued from the meeting of March 17, 1998, Item D3. Mayor Daly. He understands the property owner has been discussing some of the changes to the property with Planning staff. He referred to staff report dated April 7, 1998 from the Planning Department with a revised recommendation. He asked staff to summarize how the recommendation has changed. Mr. Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. Staff has had an opportunity to review revised plans. The applicant continues to emphasize this is a short-term, interim use. In addition, the applicant indicates the use would be terminated on this property following the completion of the 91 Freeway and Lemon Street improvements. He then briefed some of the specifics of the project as well as portions of the four-page staff report of April 7, 1998 (Supplemental Information for Conditional Use Permit No. 3994 - Former Anaheim Drive-In - 1500 North Lemon Street). If the request is approved, the CUP shall expire on January 31, 2000. The recommendation is to approve CUP3994 subject to the conditions approved by the Planning Commission and as further amended by the seven conditions listed on page one of the April 7th report (See conditions as listed - Nos. 6, 12, 17, 24, 30, 31 and 32). Council Member Zemel entered the Council Chamber (7:30 P.M.). Mayor Daly noted that an important point made by Mr. Hastings in his presentation was staff’s suggestion that perhaps this CUP which transfers a swap meet from State College (from the Orange Drive-In site) to Lemon Street might not be effective until development proposals have been submitted for the State College site. That is something he had not heard before. He also noted that 32 portable toilets are proposed for the (Lemon Street) site for 19 months. He asked if there will be any activity on the site Monday through Friday. Mr. Hastings answered it is his understanding that the only activity will be during the weekend swap meet hours and that everything shown on the plans would remain on site. He also confirmed that it is an interim use for 19 months unless the Council wishes to have the beginning date after the application is received for the other site; Mayor Daly noted it is actually 21 months. Mr. Hastings also confirmed for Council Member Lopez that the request is for the use of the site as a swap meet only with no other type of events. Council Member McCracken asked if the applicant has agreed to the additional conditions (see staff report of April 7, 1998); Greg Hastings. They would have to ask for confirmation by the applicant. He believes there may be one or two outstanding issues -- the security lighting and the start date. Staff’s recommendation is that a condition be imposed that the applicant meet with the Police Department to 21 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 establish what works for the Police relative to lighting and that lighting be installed prior to the occupancy of the facility. That condition would remain as required by the Planning Commission. Council Member Lopez expressed his concern that they have security on site Monday through Friday when there is no swap meet to preclude homeless people camping out at the site during the week. Mayor Daly noted this was a continued Public Hearing (see minutes of March 17, 1998). He asked to hear from the applicant or applicant’s agent. Applicant’s Statement: Terrance Dickens, Agent for the applicant. He referred to the comment broached by the Mayor, the idea that the CUP would not be effective until the entitlements are finalized for the State College site which he believes the intent is that only one swap meet would be operating. The State College property lies both in Anaheim and Orange and he is not sure when that entitlement process will be finished. It is conceivable Pacific Theatres in their development process might decide that once this site at the Riverside Freeway and Lemon Street is paved and ready to roll, that perhaps they should move ahead and demolish the improvements to get ready for the development down at the State College site. It is possible those entitlements might not be complete at that time. Rather than saying at the end of the entitlement approval process to say when that one is closed (the State College site) this one (Lemon Street) will open and when it closes it cannot operate any more. There would then be a terminal date for a swap meet, in general, as January, 2000. They could live with the latter. Council Member Tait suggested, “upon closing of the Orange Drive In swap meet” to be sure two are not operating at the same time. Terrance Dickens. Relative to the portable restroom facilities, he believes there is a plan to remove those during the week. If that were a condition, that would be fine. Mayor Daly. He assumes then, that Monday through Friday, all that would be seen on the site would be an asphalt parking lot surrounded by some trees and landscaping and with a small snack bar; Mr. Dickens added, and some security lighting that the Police Department has worked out with Pacific Theatres. Mayor Daly. He asked if they intended to seek entitlements for the Lemon Street site and if soon, may not even have to operate to January 2000. Mr. Dickens answered that they did intend to seek entitlements and hopefully it is on the near horizon. Paper work should be in the City within months, if not weeks. Relative to the January 2000 date, if things work out the best way, they would hope to be ready to operate the new development concurrently with the opening of the (Lemon Street) bridge. Construction would have to commence before that. The grading anticipates the ultimate development. He is asking for the Council’s favorable vote this evening. Additional discussion followed relative to confirmation/finalization of the wording amending/adding conditions. City Attorney White proposed the following (re: two swap meets not operating at the same time) -- “That the activity authorized under this resolution shall not commence and shall not be permitted prior to the permanent closure and discontinuation of the old swap meet activities at the Orange Drive-In site.” (That was agreeable to Council Member Tait.) The next change would be adding Condition No. 33 as follows: “No portable toilets shall be permitted on the site Monday through Friday.” Mr. Dickens stated relative to the latter (Condition No. 33), he would guess the portable toilets will be moved in late Friday and removed early Monday; City Attorney White suggested, “noon Friday to noon Monday.” Mayor Daly. The goal is that they do not sit out on the vacant lot four or five days at a time. He then asked about the signage that now exists for the site, the Anaheim Drive-In sign; Greg Hastings. That would be the only sign on the property and it will be refurbished. 22 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Council Member Tait. He feels the most important condition is that the use expires January 31, 2000. This is an interim use while the freeway improvements are constructed and then there will be no more swap meet either at the Orange Drive-In site or the Lemon Street site. If so, he can support the proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION : On motion by Mayor Daly , seconded by Council Member Zemel , 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. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 98R-66 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3994, subject to all City Planning Commission conditions and including all of the recommendations contained in the Planning Department memo dated April 7, 1998. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3994. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 98R- 66 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 98R- 66 duly passed and adopted. 115: DISCUSSION - FLYING OF THE POW-MIA FLAG: C1. Request by Council Member McCracken to discuss flying of the POW-MIA flag either on special occasions or year round. The following input (Mr. Kakuk) was given at the start of the Council Meeting. Bob Kakuk, Vietnam Veterans of Orange County, 21661 Brookhurst St., #377, Huntington Beach, CA 92646. He gave special thanks to Council Member McCracken who put the item on the agenda. He is hoping the Council will fly the POW-MIA flag year round in Anaheim just as many surrounding cities are doing. (He named 16 cities that are doing so.) Next week, he is on the agenda in six other cities. Only about 10 cities have not responded to the letter sent. Although he is a Vietnam Veteran there are POW’s-MIA from World War II with over 78,000 still unaccounted for, over 8,000 in the Korean War and over 2,000 in Southeast Asia. He understands that Mrs. McCracken’s uncle is still missing from WWII. He feels they owe it to those who are still unaccounted for to fly the flag. He then displayed the POW- MIA flag (predominantly black with white) designed by a mother for her son. The United States government has adopted this flag which flies in the (Capital) rotunda in Washington, the State legislature in Sacramento, and the County administration building. The flag needs to be flown until there is a reasonable accounting of POW’s-MIA. He urged their consideration as soon as possible. Council Member McCracken. The Council received a letter from Bob Kakuk, member of the Vietnam Veterans of Orange County regarding the subject and Mr. Kakuk addressed the issue earlier in the meeting. When this issue was discussed by the Council approximately 10 years ago there was concern if they allowed one flag to be flown, that others would have a right to ask for their flags to be flown as well. There was mention made that this is now considered a U. S. governmental flag. If that is the case, she would like additional information. If it has been recognized by the U.S. government, it is a totally different set of rules as far as flying flags and the City would not be under the pressure to fly flags not otherwise authorized. She feels they need to have that information and if the POW-MIA flag does have such recognition, it would make a difference to her relative to the request. If the Council agrees, she 23 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 would like to direct the City Attorney to find out if it is true that the POW-MIA flag is a U.S. governmentally recognized flag and once that is determined that the matter be put back on the agenda for Council consideration and a decision. Many other agencies have now recognized the flag and are flying it. City Attorney White. Once he has adequate direction and will report back to the Council at the next meeting or at such time as he has the information. 108: COMMUNICATION PROGRAM - SEX ORIENTED BUSINESSES: C2 Request of Mayor Daly to discuss a communications program on the subject of Sex-Oriented Businesses (SOB’s). (Also see minutes of 2/24/98, Item A27. and 3/17/98, Item C1. where the issue of the possibility of a Town Hall meeting be held on the matter). Mayor Daly. In trying to schedule a Town Hall meeting, it is difficult to try to align all their schedules and perhaps a way to get information in people’s hands and in a more wide-spread manner would be a simple communication method using all the tools available including cable television, mailings that go to every resident and any other communication devices as a way to convey the latest information. Because they are in a position of operating under Federal and State law, it is important to convey that to the citizens so rather than a Town Hall meeting that instead they compile all the existing information on the subject, the view of the City Council, and then submit that to the residents using the Anaheim Magazine, cable TV, and any other opportunities that Council and staff have that they can suggest. Council Member Zemel. An important issue is the interaction the public wants with the Council. Many members of the public actually desired to serve on the Task Force that was set up. However, because of the legal issues and the things the Task Force wants to accomplish, they felt it was not necessarily appropriate to have members of the public sitting in on some of the meetings where legal issues were being discussed. It was felt instead that a Town Hall meeting where they could come and express their views would be appropriate. While he realizes they can do that on any given night at a Council meeting, they wanted to have interaction on that subject alone. Perhaps they could set it for an open Tuesday in May. He feels that is a better way of going about it only because of some of the public input they have had. The City Clerk noted that no Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 26, 1998. Council Member Zemel suggested they set that date and that as many Council Members as can be present attend. It will give enough time to agendize it, for the Council to clear their calendars, and for the Task Force to meet again. Mayor Daly. There have been opportunities to hold a meeting in April and then there was a feeling it should be on a Tuesday. If the goal is to give citizens an opportunity to comment, the Council meets almost every Tuesday. To have a special meeting with staff in attendance when the goal is to provide information seems to be missing two objectives. His suggestion is, in lieu of a meeting, to have a communications program. If citizens want to comment, they can come on any Tuesday. Council Member Tait. The suggestions are not mutually exclusive. They could do both and he would not be opposed to doing both. Council Member McCracken. As part of the communications program, they might use some of their neighborhood meetings. There is a close-knit group of neighborhoods who are interested in the concerns in their neighborhood and they could give the Council their input. Almost every neighborhood in the City is represented and they seem to be on top of things and very well spoken in giving their input. It is a little less threatening to meet in that kind of situation. She feels perhaps they need to go out to the community whether the West Anaheim Neibhborhood Development group, or Rio Vista, or Anaheim Hills Homeowners Association, etc. Council Member Lopez. He feels having a workshop before a Tuesday meeting with advanced notice would work well; Council Member Zemel noted that people who work could not attend. 24 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Additional discussion followed with further suggestions from Council Members, one being that a meeting be held on a Council meeting day but later at a time certain; Council Member Lopez stated he will support such a meeting at 7:00 P.M. on a Council meeting date. Mayor Daly. He suggested that they ask staff to prepare an update on the subject (of SOB’s) to be placed on the City Council agenda as a discussion item for a time certain of 7:00 P.M. at the meeting of May 5, 1998. Also, if citizens want to speak to the Council on the subject, there is an opportunity to do so at any City Council meeting and the Council meets approximately three Tuesdays every month. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved that a discussion on the subject of Sex-Oriented Businesses be held at the Council meeting of Tuesday, May 5, 1998 at 7:00 P.M. (time certain) and that staff prepare an update on the issue so that the Council will have documentation as to the latest legislative efforts regarding such businesses. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Zemel stated he was going to support the motion because he feels it is important that the public have an opportunity to react to what the Council has to say. He would like the public to know what the Police Department is doing, the City Attorney’s Office and the Planning Department (relative to SOB’s). He reiterated, he will support the motion but would really like to accomplish one of the original goals of the Task Force, to hold a Town Hall meeting where legislators will be invited. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS: C4. Mayor Daly. He has questions on two items, B15 and B16 where the Anaheim City School District is asking for Determination of Conformance with the City’s General Plan for the development and construction of a proposed elementary school site at 510-540 North Loara Street and a proposed public school facility at 1000-1010 S. Harbor Boulevard. He asked if the City government does not make a conformity finding at the Harbor and Ball site, what happens. City Attorney White answered basically, nothing. The County has to give notice to the City and give the City the courtesy or opportunity to comment relative to conformity to the City’s General Plan. If the City reports back that the project is not in conformity, it does not mean they cannot go forward with it. Mayor Daly. He asked relative to the construction plans and the architectural design, does City government have any ability or power to review and regulate the design or appearance; City Attorney White answered, no. The plans are all approved and controlled by the State Architect’s Office and the City does not even have the ability to regulate the type of construction. Mayor Daly asked if the School District had a responsibility to communicate with nearby property owners as to the typical design issues, i.e., setback, height, landscaping, etc. City Attorney White. Legally they do not have an obligation to do that. Whether they do so as a matter of course, he does not know. He is not aware of any statutory obligation. The items on the agenda are basically perfunctory. Council Member Tait. In Anaheim Hills on the Canyon Rim Elementary School, they set up an architectural committee. It was informal in nature but the School District seemed to listen to the community. Perhaps the City could send a letter requesting that same process in these cases. City Attorney White. He does not see anything wrong with that. School Districts are going through a process of asking the City to do certain things for the Districts. Maybe as a courtesy to recognize what the City’s needs are it would be appropriate to tell them what the City would like them to do; Mayor Daly. Perhaps the question can be posed to them. They may already have a process set up where they intend to communicate with the nearby community. He feels it would be worth finding that out. 25 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Member Zemel. He referred to the property along Santa Ana Canyon Road in the scenic corridor adjacent to the Hughes Shopping Center. It is a three-story office structure and a Montessori School. He visited the property this week after hearing many complaints. The City has had experience with that site with the developer not adhering to time frames given him. The property was supposed to be cleared up by a certain date and it was not. There was an issue of beginning construction by a certain date or he would lose is entitlements and although he “blew” that time frame, somehow he was still able to get a permit. The trailers were suposed to be removed and they were not. Since making a cursory visit to the property without going on to the property, he noted there is an 8’ or 9’ block wall fence which may have been a condition but it has serious cracks in it every few feet where it is possible to see through those cracks. On the inside of the fence at each crack, the developer has planted an ivy type vine and those plantings are only in front of the cracks. Those walls are where the Planning Commission and/or City Council demanded that the playground be which means children are going to be playing next to walls with serious cracks. Also relative to drainage, there are 3” to 4” drainage holes without a plan to allow water to come through the fence from the property to the cul de sac (Calle Jame) draining dirt and water across the sidewalks. That same fence has leakage where sand and dirt and water is coming from that property across the neighbor’s project creating a distressed situation for the neighbor. One of the main things, it appears to be a 3-story building. He has been told by someone who has been inside that there is a 10’ high attic. He would like to know what is going on at the property and what the legal parameters are. He would like a formal report. He has been told that the Planning Commission has asked to review the project but he does not know what portions they are going to review. He feels it is a “runaway” situation. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He will give an update and subsequently submit information back to the Council. About a year and a half ago, they prosecuted the contractor because he did not clean up the property. He will review the matter with the Building Department tomorrow and make sure that everything is being done according to code. The Planning Commission has set this matter to determine if the developer has put in a third story because it was never approved for a third story. It will be coming back on the Commission’s agenda for review. Council Member Zemel. The school is going door-to-door trying to sell tuitions and are going to have 100 kids in the school. He does not know if that is allowed but, if so, he does not know how they approved that. Additionally they are entering into an agreement with the church which is a 115-member church. He does not know where they are going to park. The Hughes Shopping Center is extremely upset and are not going to allow them to park on their property. He also heard there was a neon sign not on Santa Ana Canyon Road but towards the back of the property right where the residents are on Calle Jame. He reiterated, he would like a legal report, a code report and possibly a Planning report and try to have the report(s) prepared before the Planning Commission meeting so that the Commission will have the benefit of that information. Mayor Daly. He drove by the site and it is a real problem. Staff should provide as many details as possible. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Member McCracken. She would like staff to provide an update on the Jeffrey Lynne issue previously broached and an explanation relative to the matter. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Council Member McCracken. Council Member Zemel mentioned that there are travel plans for some of the Council Members. The Anaheim Sister City delegation which has about 24 Anaheim residents are travelling to Anaheim’s Sister City, Mito, Japan next Monday (April 13) for the dedication of the Cultural Center. They are then going on to Chunchon City, Korea in response to their (Chunchon’s) visit to 26 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 7, 1998 Anaheim and their interest in being a Sister City. She will be participating in all or part of the trip to these sites in Japan and Korea along with Mayor Daly and Council Member Tait. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting of April 7, 1998 was adjourned (8:20 P.M.). No Council Meetings are scheduled for April 14 and 21, l998. The next scheduled meeting is April 28, 1998. LEONORA N. SOHL CITY CLERK 27