Loading...
2005/02/08ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA -CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 8, 2005 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session at 3:05 P.M. in the Council Chambers of Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. PRESENT: Mayor Curt Pringle, Council Members: Richard Chavez and Harry Sidhu. Council Members Lorri Galloway and Bob Hernandez temporarily absent. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager David Morgan, City Attorney Jack White, and City Clerk Sheryll Schroeder A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on February 4, 2005 at the City Hall outside bulletin board. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS: The City Attorney recommended that Council add an item to the closed session agenda upon a determination that there was a need to take immediate action and that the need came to the attention of the City subsequent to the posting of the agenda for the February 8, 2005 agenda. The item was related to anticipated litigation due to significant land movement and property damage to properties located at and adjacent to 365 Ramsgate Drive. Council Member Sidhu moved to add the closed session item, seconded by Council Member Chavez. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 3; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Temporarily Absent - 2: Council Members Galloway and Hernandez. Motion Carried. Council Members Galloway and Hernandez arrived during the Closes Session. PUBLIC COMMENT: None CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9) Name of case: City of Anaheim v. Angels Baseball, LP, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 050001902. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency designated representative: Dave Hill Employee organization: Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (General Unit). 3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code). Number of potential cases: one Existing facts and circumstances: significant land movement and property damage to the properties located at, and adjacent to, 365 Ramsgate Drive occurring since February 4, 2005, when the meeting agenda was prepared and posted. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 2 At 5:36 P.M., Mayor Pringle reconvened the Council meeting, with all Council members present. INVOCATION: Sr. Chaplain Rossington, Anaheim Fire Department FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tem Richard Chavez PRESENTATIONS: Proclaiming February 6-12, 2005, as Make Kindness Contagious Week Mr. Chaefsky accepted the proclamation thanking Council for the opportunity to share his family's mission to help others in memory of his daughter, Natasha. ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER RECOGNITIONS (To be presented at a later date): Proclaiming February 23, 2005, as Rotary International Day. Proclaiming February 2005, as Stop in the Name of Love Month. Proclaiming February 20-26, 2005, as National Engineers Week. At 5:46 P.M., Mayor Pringle recessed the Council meeting to call to order the Redevelopment Agency meeting. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: James Robert Reade related Police Department concerns Stephanie O'Neill, representing the Concerned Citizens of the Canyon, opposed the addition of Big Lots bargain store in her community. Cary Smith, resident directly behind the proposed Big Lots bargain store, spoke in opposition to its construction and requested Council seek a grocery store in its place. Lorenzo Barnum, Garden Grove resident, spoke of fears associated with persons with mental illnesses. Saleem Arreola, Hermosa Village resident, invited Council to the next Hermosa Village community meeting operating under new property management and requested their assistance on certain parking issues. Victor Dominguez, president of Rotary Club of Anaheim, thanked Mayor and Council for the resolution prepared in honor of the Centennial Year of Rotary International. He announced the club would be unveiling a clock tower on March 3~d at the Anaheim Convention Center and invited Mayor Pringle and Council to attend. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 3 Michael Baker, Executive Director of Boys and Girls Club of Anaheim, announced the March 5th gala fund-raiser for motel outreach efforts. Marcus Gonzales, Orange County Human Relations Commission, offered information on the countywide services provided and specific Anaheim services performed during the year and presented a certificate of recognition to the City. Ed Perez, Heritage Forum, mentioned the Orange County Training Academy held their graduation ceremony at the Heritage Forum on February 7th and he was delighted to serve the community in that manner and honor the academy graduates. He further voiced his appreciation to Council for their leadership, inspiration and goals and took offense at the derogatory comments spoken during oral communications. William Fitzgerald commented on the need for additional police officers. The principal of Hillsboro School spoke in support of the Chaefsky family's "Make Kindness Week" and the rewards associated with words of kindness. Robert Miller, resident, expressed concern over the passive use proposed for the Burris Pit pointing to safety issues of the surrounding neighbors. Irene Gore, resident, opposed public access to the Burris Pit, as it was home to numerous birds such as egrets, pelicans, blue herons and the endangered least tern and disturbing the nesting birds would disrupt the ecosystem. She also referenced the potential for crime and graffiti should the area be open to the public. Mayor Pringle commented the Burris Pit was an area with value to the community and the City's commitment was to have limited public access with City oversight. He remarked the City would work to preserve the area and create similar areas along the river and would provide limited access for others to view the scenic area. CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Pringle pulled Item 13 for separate discussion Council Member Sidhu moved approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar Items 4-15, seconded by Council Member Galloway to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to approve the following in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway, Hernandez, and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion carried. 4. Reject claims filed against the City. C118 5. Reject applications for leave to present late claim. C118 6. Receive and file the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by the Finance Director for ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 4 6. Receive and file the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by the Finance Director for D128 three months ended September 30, 2004; minutes of the Golf Commission meeting B105 held October 28, 2004; and minutes of the Anaheim Housing and Community Development Commission meetings held January 7, 2004, February 4, 2004, April 21, 2004, May 5, 2004, June 2, 2004, and July 21, 2004. 7. Authorize the issuance of a change order to Performance Plus Distribution to D180 increase the not-to-exceed amount of the purchase order from $20,000 to $25,000 a year for consignment battery service for the Public Works Department, Fleet Services in accordance with Bid #6447. 8. Authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue multiple blanket purchase orders, in an D180 aggregate amount not to exceed $653,973 (plus tax), for the purchase of cable and wire for the Public Utilities Department as required, for a period of one-year with four one-year optional renewals and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #6562. 9. Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Robert Borders & Associates, to 2834 increase the design cost by $36,231, for consultant services to provide construction documents and construction observation services for the East Hills LibrarylPolice Department Interior Remodel project. 10. Approve a Second Amendment to Agreement with RDK Consulting, Inc. to amend the 2992 scope and compensation provisions of the agreement dated February 10, 2004 for project management, cost estimating and related services for the bidding and construction of Phase I of the Central Library Renovation. 11. Approve an agreement with Pinnacle Networking Services, Inc., in the amount of 3390 $39,840.51, for purchase and installation of internal network connections for the Haskett Branch Library and authorize the Director for Community Services to increase the contract amount by up to 10% if such increase is necessary due to unexpected cost increases in materials at the time of installation. 12. Approve a rate increase for the Aetna Life Insurance Company Temporary Disability D154 Income Plan to be effective March 1, 2005. 14. ORDINANCE N0. 5954 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY P100 COUNCIL amending Chapter 18.116 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Amendment No. 6 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Pian No. 92-2) {Introduced at the Council meeting of January 25, 2005, Item #17). ORDINANCE N0. 5955 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2004-00135) (Introduced at the Council meeting of January 25, 2005, Item #17). 15. Approve minutes of the Council meeting held January 25, 2005. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 5 13. Approve a Memorandum of Understanding with the Orange County Water District to 3377 enter into a partnership and begin planning the development of recreational improvements at Burris Pit (Continued from the Council meeting of January 11, 2005, Item #23}. Mayor Pringle stated Orange County Water District currently managed a water percolation pond located at the Burris Pit along the Santa Ana River between Ball Road and South Street and the Memorandum of Understanding for Council consideration allowed the City to establish management of that area and provide for some public interaction and use. Dave Morgan, City Manager, indicated this was the beginning of the process and staff was cognizant of Council's intention to enhance the area with passive and limited use and recognized final improvements were contingent upon community input through a process where all citizen concerns were taken into consideration. Terry Lowe, Community Services Director, reported the Burris Pit project was at a conceptual stage only and that it was staff's intention to recommend a passive use recreation area for the site and to preserve the natural makeup of the area. He pointed out the Water District required the original function of the pit be preserved with no water contact, fishing, boating, and swimming allowed and added that other jurisdictions within the state and federal government had input as to what could take place in a wildlife habitat. Mr. Lowe further emphasized staff was sensitive to the wildlife found in this area and realized the uniqueness of the Burris Pit. He believed it was important to move slowly through the process and apply the mechanics in place for any recreation facility which included extensive community input. He noted that once the understanding was formalized with the Water District, staff would begin to develop conceptual plans and the first step would be to take those plans to the public in a series of public meetings. He stated that nothing would be done without extensive input and that the City had a good track record in managing wildlife habitats such as Oak Canyon Nature Center, Anaheim wetlands and Deer Canyon. Mr. Lowe pointed out that when the City sought to develop Deer Canyon, there had been a great deal of concern from the residents with staff able to mitigate those concerns and enlist the neighborhood's help in keeping that area in its natural state. He explained that what the City had to offer was constant patrol of the area by park ranger staff effective in minimizing crime in parks and schools as well as providing much greater access for law enforcement to be able to come in and deal with issues not appropriate for rangers. Mr. Lowe again stated this was very conceptual in nature and that all plans would go before the various approval bodies as well as the public. He asked for patience and confidence at this stage as the process began. Council Member Chavez remarked as he was the City's representative to the Orange County Water Board, this idea had been brought to his attention by the Mayor and he was fully supportive of the idea. He pointed out that Anaheim was blessed with this tranquil setting and ecosystem attracting varieties of birds and wildlife and for Anaheim children and residents who might not otherwise be able to view such a setting, it was a real advantage. Council Member Hernandez asked if the schematic provided to Council reflected the proposed project; Mr. Lowe replied that it was strictly a conceptual drawing prepared by an architect retained to look at the area and see its possibilities. He indicated the drawing had not been made available to the public as it was too early and too conceptual and none of the proposed uses had yet been considered by the Water District, whose approval would be required. Council Member Hernandez suggested providing this schematic to the public to ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 6 disarm some of the concerns expressed understanding that the drawing was in the very preliminary stage. Mayor Pringle concurred and asked Mr. Lowe to share the preliminary plan with the public. He reiterated that Orange County Water District owned the property and the City was looking for ways to enhance the environmental accessibility of the site as well as addressing some of the safety issues. The site would be similar to Deer Canyon or Oak Center facilities with look-out points and public access within a path system. Council Member Hernandez moved approval of Item #13, seconded by Council Member Sidhu. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5: Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway, Hernandez and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion Carried. 16. Consider appointing a member to the Cultural and Heritage Commission to B105 complete the unexpired term of Mary Ruth Pinson, term to expire June 30, 2008. APPOINTMENT: With no objection from Council, Mayor Pringle continued this item to February 15, 2005. 17. Consider appointment a member to the Budget Advisory Commission to complete the 8105 unexpired term of Ed Perez, term to expire June 30, 2006. APPOINTMENT: Patrick Pepper Council Member Sidhu nominated Rubin Skipper and Council Member Galloway nominated Patrick Pepper. A straw vote was taken for Mr. Skipper: Ayes - 2; Council Members Hernandez and Sidhu; Noes - 1; Council Member Galloway; Abstention - 2: Mayor Pringle and Council Member Chavez. Motion Denied. Straw vote for Mr. Pepper: Ayes - 4; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway and Sidhu. Noes - 1: Council Member Hernandez. Motion Carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 18. A public hearing to consider the introduction of an ordinance to approve a Fourth 1427 Amended and Restated Franchise Agreement with Taormina Industries, LLC. (Public hearing scheduled at the meeting of January 11, 2005, Item #28). ORDINANCE NO. 5956 (INTRODUCTION) ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Fourth Amended and Restated Franchise Agreement for collection, handling, transportation, processing, recycling and disposal of City solid waste for Taormina Industries, LLC. Doris Roush, Public Works Operations Manager, reported in July of 1994, Council granted a franchise to Taormina Industries for management of Anaheim's solid waste. The franchise had been amended three times since then; in 1997, when Republic Industries bought the firm, in the year 2000 to include yard waste and in 2002 to clarify certain contract language. She indicated the 4th amendment would again clarify certain contract language, add language in support of NPDES, the surface water quality regulations, and would reduce the bulky item collection rate from $73.34 to $62.17. Ms. Roush indicated all other conditions of the franchise would remain in full force. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 7 Mayor Pringle asked if the restatement added any expansion to the present agreement and Ms. Roush replied it merely cleaned up language and allowed the City to pay less money for the same service related to bulky items. Council Member Sidhu questioned whether commercial or construction pickup was allowed under this agreement and Ms. Roush stated the franchise was an exclusive contract for solid waste processing but if construction companies, such as roofers, brought in their own trucks and removed waste roofing materials, that would be allowed. She commented that no other outside hauler could have a bin in the City even for construction or demolition under the current franchise. Mayor Pringle questioned the term of the franchise and Ms. Roush indicated it was through the year 2011 and was an evergreen contract; i.e., on the 7'h year, when that year was rolled down, one more year was added and it was perpetually seven years unless the City terminated. The City Manager indicated that up until a year ago, the franchise was for 15 years and at that time due to capital financing, it was a business decision to reduce the term to seven years which more closely matched the process in other public agencies. Council Member Sidhu stated he would like to see other companies do some business in the City relating to hauling construction debris. Ms. Roush indicated a report would be provided to Council; Mr. Morgan interjected the current contract had been negotiated on the assumption of an exclusive franchise; therefore, the implications of change to the current contract would be included in the report. Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing. With no comments, offered, the Mayor closed the hearing. Council Member Chavez moved to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 5956 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Fourth Amended and Restated Franchise Agreement for collection, handling, transportation, processing, recycling and disposal of City solid waste for Taormina Industries, LLC; seconded by Council Member Galloway. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway, Hernandez and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion Carried. 19. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 327 E200 WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04431 SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2002-00001 AMENDMENT TO SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD ACCESS POINT STUDY: OWNER: Waddell Foods, 801 North Beach Boulevard, La Habra, CA, 90631. AGENT: John & Lisa Waddell, 4670 E. Cerro Vista Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807. LOCATION: Property is approximately 29 acres, having a frontage of 1,413 feet on the south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, located 983 feet west of the centerline of Festival Drive. Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04431 -Request to construct a wedding chapel and banquet facility with on-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and roof-mounted equipment with waivers of (a) maximum building height, (b) required street dedication and improvement and (c) minimum number of parking spaces. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 8 Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2002-00001 - To remove thirty (30) specimen Oak trees. Amendment to Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study (MIS2004-00088) - Amendment to Exhibit No. 7 of the Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Certified Environmental Impact Report No. 327 approved (PC2004-137) (6 yes votes, Commissioner Vanderbilt-Linares voted no). Waiver of Code Requirement approved in part, approving waiver (a) maximum structural height, and (c) minimum number of parking spaces, and denied waiver (b) pertaining to the required street dedication and improvement of Santa Ana Canyon Road. Conditional Use Permit No. 2001-04431 granted (PC2004-138). Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 2002--00001 approved. Recommended Council approval of Amendment to Exhibit No.7 of the Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study (MIS2004-00088) (PC2004-139). (Planning Commission decision appealed by Agent, Lisa Waddell). Sheri Vander Dussen, Director of Planning, reported Item 19 was a continued public hearing for a conditional use permit to construct a wedding chapel and banquet facility in Anaheim Hills. She recapped the application included a request to permit the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a request had also been submitted to allow roof-mounted equipment, the removal of 30 oak trees and an amendment to Exhibit 7 of the Santa Ana Canyon Road Access Point Study to allow an additional access point on Santa Ana Canyon Road to serve the project. The hearing was continued from January 25, 2005 to allow staff to provide Council with additional information pertaining to the status of other development proposals in the area and to report how funds previously collected for the improvements to Santa Ana Canyon Road had been allocated. Additionally, Ms. Vander Dussen stated, staff was directed to explore the option of reducing the required median along Santa Ana Canyon Road from 16 feet to 8 feet and to provide copies of the technical studies related to traffic that were found within the environmental impact report for the project. Ms. Vander Dussen offered the following information regarding the status of nearby developments: 1) the property owner immediately south, Stonegate Development, was currently proposing to develop a 32-acre site with 35 single family homes. The draft EIR for the project was currently out for public review and the Planning Commission tentatively scheduled to consider the matter in April. 2) The owner of the 11-acre property to the west of the project site had submitted apre-file application and the applicant had several discussions with staff about constructing a church and a private school, however, a formal application had not yet been submitted. 3) Deer Canyon Park was a City facility that contained a parking lot and public restrooms, however, these facilities could not be accessed by vehicles until Deer Canyon Road had been constructed and made available to the public. 4) In 1969, Council authorized collection of development fees along the Santa Ana Canyon Road Corridor for street improvements between Imperial Highway and Weir Canyon Road. A portion of the funds were collected from the Mello Roos District associated with the development of Sycamore Canyon, Summit and the Highlands areas. Subsequent to development of these communities, by special Mello Roos elections, these funds were reallocated to the police substation serving the hillside area. The remaining funds collected in connection with the development of other projects along the Santa Ana Canyon Road Corridor were utilized to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 9 and Solomon Road and aturn-in traffic lane for EI Rancho Jr. High School. There were no additional funds remaining in this account. With regard to the median, Ms. Vander Dussen indicated staff had reviewed the width plan for Santa Ana Canyon Road and believed construction of the 16-foot wide median was necessary to provide protection for the 12-foot wide left turnpocket at Deer Canyon Road. She explained the width was also appropriate since the project was within the Scenic Corridor Overlay which encouraged enhanced landscaping along Santa Ana Canyon road and an 8-foot wide median would only provide space for 4 feet of landscaping since 2 feet of hardscape area was required around the perimeter. Ms. Vander Dussen stated staff continued to support the 16 foot width to match other locations around Santa Ana Canyon road. The requested traffic studies were provided to Council. Ms. Vander Dussen remarked the study approved by staff addressed traffic impacts by offering mitigation measures to provide for vehicles to safely enter and exit the site and to maintain mobility on Santa Ana Canyon Road. These measures included construction of Santa Ana Canyon Road to a Primary Arterial 106 foot cross section, including a 16-foot wide fully landscaped raised median along the entire undivided section of Santa Ana Canyon Road to prevent left turns into the project site and U-turns to and from the project site. It also included construction of a 180 foot long 13-foot wide eastbound right turn only lane into the project site and construction and signalization of an opening in the Santa Ana Canyon Road median at the new Deer Canyon Road and construction of a left turn pocket of adequate length to allow for protected left turns and U-turns to serve the wedding chapel and future development west of the project site. Ms. Vander Dussen stated in August of 2003, an estimated cost-sharing analysis for the Santa Ana Canyon Road improvements was established based on the trip generation of each use. The actual cost would be determined as each project was finalized, but based on the preliminary estimate, Ms. Vander Dussen indicated the wedding chapel's fair share of the public improvements would be 19 to 31 percent of the cost, although the cost would need to be fronted by the first party to develop in the area. The party installing the improvements could then petition Council to approve a reimbursement agreement or benefit district to recover the cost beyond their fair share as subsequent properties developed. Ms. Vander Dussen remarked that staff continued to recommend Council uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the project and the denial of the street improvement waiver for the following reasons; 1) staff believed an unsafe traffic condition would occur if recommended public improvements were not installed prior to occupancy of the proposed wedding chapel and therefore the required findings to approve the conditional use permit could not be met; 2) the traffic impacts without the improvements would be environmentally significant, therefore the mitigation measure was necessary to insure public safety and the mobility of traffic along Santa Ana Canyon Road. Mayor Pringle asked the cost of the proposed road improvements and John Lower, Traffic Manager, replied the preliminary estimates were $1,835,000. Of that, he stated, the signal was roughly $150,000. The Mayor inquired why it was necessary to put a median through the entire expanse to the Deer Canyon signal and Mr. Lower responded that absent a raised median to prohibit U-turns, some motorists would make unsafe U-turns mid-block because it was shorter to get back to the direction they wanted to go in than proceeding to the next ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 10 traffic signal. Mr. Lower felt most of the U-turns would be for vehicles accessing the chapel. Mayor Pringle realized the applicant appealed to Council because of the high cost of the street improvements for the proposed project, but pointed out the wedding chapel would not be taking access at the signalized intersection but would take access directly off Santa Ana Canyon Road. The Mayor questioned how the other proposed developments would be required to share in the cost of the median when all of them would be taking access through a signalized intersection and it appeared the median was required for the exclusive use of the wedding chapel to alleviate safety concerns related to traffic. Mr. Lower stated the median island was important for traffic safety as well as for the scenic corridor designation of the area, would enhance property values and was immediately on the approach to the other developments referenced. He believed the right turn lane was separated from that cost as that was almost exclusively for the use of the wedding chapel. Greg Hastings, Zoning Manager, indicated the property was zoned as Transitional Scenic Corridor, the zoning that was present when the property was annexed to the City. He indicated the General Plan designation for the property was residential. As to why the wedding chapel and banquet facility was an acceptable use in a residential zone, Mr. Hastings indicated it was an allowed use under a conditional use permit as listed in the Zoning Code. Mayor Pringle remarked that when the General Plan was adopted last year, even though there was interest on the site, it still went forward as general residential. Mr. Hastings stated the property was in a Transitional Scenic Corridor zone and the regulations for that zone were different from a residential zone. Council Member Sidhu inquired as to what was allowed on Transitional zones. Mr. Hastings replied there were a list of uses that did not fit neatly into residential or commercial zones and were therefore transitional and in the conditional use permit category, there were many of the same permitted uses. Mr. Hastings stated there was a mix of zoning in the Deer Canyon area and properties currently utilized for residential as well as those for which the City had plans for residential, either are or would be rezoned for residential land uses. With the proposed property, he commented, there would be no necessity to change to residential, although the General Plan allowed for that, because the project was not a residential project. The Mayor asked if all commercial uses were allowed in a transitional zone and Ms. Vander Dussen responded in the negative, stating the wedding chapel/banquet use was classified as community, and religious assembly use and it was typical for churches to be located in residential zones. Council Member Sidhu expressed concern that the wedding chapel was allowed to have an alcohol license. Ms. Vander Dussen stated that was called out as one of the specific actions necessary if Council wished to approve the project but the use could still be approved if Council found the sale of alcoholic beverages was not appropriate and that component could be denied. Council Member Sidhu voiced his concern that plans for a church and school were being considered next door to the chapel and the use of alcoholic beverages could be in conflict with the ABC license. Council Member Galloway confirmed the applicant was appealing the required street improvements and her request was that the project be approved and those street improvements be eliminated. Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 11 Lisa Waddell, applicant, believed the street improvements were excessive and had no technical merit. She believed the Traffic Department's method of determining vehicular trips as well as the required parking for her banquet facility were faulty. She stated that the basic operation of the banquet facility would have limited day trips and the peak hour trips would be so minor as to not warrant a traffic study and she indicated that her business occurred on the weekends rather than weekdays. Ms. Waddell objected to the numerous other studies required by the Traffic Department as well as to the removal of 275,000 cubic yards from the top of the hill. She was willing to redesign the shoulder as a deceleration lane, although she did not feel it was needed. She was also willing to underground the one utility pole, prior to the project for Underground District 40. Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing. David Kalb, resident near the project site, expressed concern there would be an increase to the amount of noise emanating from the banquet facility, with late night receptions disturbing the neighbors. He objected to the extreme grading involved to construct the facility and the removal of 30 specimen trees citing landslide concerns and the need to retain the scenic corridor. Patrick Pepper, Chairperson of the Anaheim Hills Citizens Coalition and speaking on behalf of the Board of Directors, stated the conditional use permit was an inappropriate use for a residential zone and the environmental impact report was inadequate as it did not address the surrounding developments when considering the cumulative impact of the project. He also stated the scenic corridor guidelines for the State of California called for a minimum amount of grading. Christine Haines, resident, objected to the proposal as the area was predominantly residential with a planned school with classes K through 12 next door pointing to traffic congestion and safety issues associated with the use of alcoholic beverages. Sonya Greywald, Anaheim Citizens Coalition, expressed concern that the project was being processed as an appropriate use in a residential neighborhood, when it was not, and if the site was developed for residential use, no separate access on Santa Ana Canyon Road would be needed. She also felt the environmental report did not adequately address the impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. Bob Zemel objected to the establishment of a commercial use in a residential zone and addressed the traffic and safety concerns associated with a wedding chapel in full operation, remarking that emergency vehicles would not have easy access due to traffic congestion. He expressed concern that departing banquet guests who had celebrated with alcohol would pose a traffic safety issue for the difficult to navigate Santa Ana Canyon Road. Mayor Pringle closed the public hearing Lisa Waddell stated she had established a reputation for banquet parties with dignity and monitored her operation closely. She believed the proposed school use would generate more traffic than her facility. She indicated that no noise complaints had been received at her facilities nor were the police ever summoned. She questioned the use of road development fees for a police substation. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 12 Mayor Pringle inquired as to the number of weddings and receptions that would occur in one day. Ms. Waddell indicated Saturday was the best day and two events could occur in the evening and two in the day time. The Mayor stated there was then the potential of having 450 people there at one time which could mean 250 cars entering the facility during a window of 45 minutes to half an hour. Mayor Pringle felt the City's traffic engineer had accurately determined the vehicle trips and that it made sense to him not to have 100 cars making U-turns on Santa Ana Canyon Road. He expressed real concern over traffic safety impacts related to the increased traffic by banquet guests. Ms. Waddell replied the guests may all come at the same time but did not leave at the same time and provided a conceptual drawing as a way of preventing U-turns without the need for a raised median. Council Member Sidhu asked what the objection was to having a right hand turn on the intersection and Ms. Waddell indicated it made engineering sense to access the property at the highest point of elevation on Santa Ana Canyon Road, next to a commercial property. She also responded to his questions regarding alcohol use and noise impacts, stating alcohol consumption was down in general and that the music provided was by DJ's and would be contained within the banquet facility. In response to Council Member Chavez' question on noise, Ms. Vander Dussen indicated the environmental impact report stated the noise would be significant both during construction and during operation. Mayor Pringle questioned the grading requirement; Mr. Hastings indicated that as part of the project there would be grading on the property at the top of the hill, reducing it by 82 feet. Mayor Pringle stated this was a challenging project but that he would oppose its approval. He indicated his opposition was due to the significant traffic issues, the safety concerns on Santa Ana Canyon Road and the project's unacceptable use for a residential area. He pointed out that Santa Ana Canyon Road was a winding road with relatively high speeds and 200 vehicles exiting a banquet with alcohol served on a Saturday evening could not be supported without traffic mitigations in place. He was also concerned as to how the facility would interact with residential neighbors and for those reasons, would not support the project. Council Member Sidhu also questioned the commercial use in a residential area and would not support the project. Council Member Galloway recognized the work that had gone into the development of the project but would not consider the project without the traffic mitigation and since the applicant objected to the traffic mitigations, she could not approve the project. Council Member Chavez felt there was a need for additional banquet space but could not support one in this area without the mitigation measures. Council Member Sidhu moved to approve Resolution No. 2005-12, Resolution No. 2005-13 and deny CEQA FINDING: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 327 and deny SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 2002-00001 seconded by Council Member Hernandez. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2005 Page 13 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYNG CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2001-04431. RESOLUTION NO. 2005-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING APPROVAL AN AMENDMENT TO EXHIBIT NO. 7 OF THE SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD ACCESS POINT STUDY. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway, Hernandez and Sidhu. Noes - 0. Motion Carried. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Pringle reported that Council continued the added closed session item relating to anticipated litigation and Item No. 1 of the Closed Session agenda relating to the City vs. Angels Baseball to February 15, 2005. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Hernandez announced that he attended the funeral of Harvey Nelson, a dedicated volunteer for the American Red Cross and CERT Program. Council Member Galloway invited the community to contact her at IgallowayCa)anaheim.net to report random acts of kindness as she would like to share those acts throughout the year. Council Member Sidhu asked the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator items be forwarded to Council in an easy-to-read manner. Council Member Chavez thanked the Planning Department for their efforts on the Banquet Facility Project. Mayor Pringle created a taskforce to help design the Heritage Room and other exhibit space and appointed the following members; Kathleen Cable, Betty Aiken, Chris Lowe, Steve Faessel, Joyce Franklin, Barbara Gonzalez, and Gary Murray ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Pringle adjourned the meeting at 8:48 P.M. Respectfully submitted: Sheryll Schroeder, MMC City Clerk