2000/08/08The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Daly, Council Members: Frank Feldhaus, Luciile Kring, Tom Tait
and Shirley McCracken.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Ruth, City Attorney Jack White, City Clerk Sheryll
Schroeder, Planning Director Joel Fick, Traffic/Transpodation Manager John Lower,
Code Enforcement Supervisor John Poole, Public Works Civil Engineer Natalie Meeks,
Community Services Director Chris Jarvi, Zoning Division Manager Greg Hastings
A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on August
4, 2000 at the City Hall inside and outside bulletin boards.
Mayor Daly called the regular meeting to order at 3'16 P.M. in the Council Chambers of
the Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard.
WORKSHOP - TAXI FRANCHISES:
Code Enforcement Supervisor John Poole stated that the taxi issue was very complex
and they had provided information to the City Council of over two years of work by two
citizen adhoc taxi committees, a consultant and staff with input from the citizens,
businesses and the taxi industry. He said Mr. Schaller's proposal covered all aspects of
the taxi service and also had an option for the two current providers to raise the bar and
increase new service levels that were recommended through the franchise process. The
consultant's recommendation raised the bar for service by the fact that newer vehicles
would be required, he added, time of service would be cut back so that people could get
a cab quicker. Mr. Poole then introduced Bruce Schaller, the taxi consultant, to assist
the Council in clarifying the recommendations of the Code Enforcement Division.
Bruce Schaller presented recommendations to the City Council. A copy of the report is
available in the City Clerk's Office. Mr. Schaller said the report was designed to
establish a regulatory structure and address the needs for taxi service in Anaheim both
today and in the future and also designed to raise the bar in terms of the quality of
service provided. Four areas were covered starting with background information that
gave the methodology 0f his work, sources of information that were used and two key
findings from the research over the past year. He then explained the reasons to go to a
franchise system, five core principals to their approach and the specifics of what he was
proposing in terms of franchise requirements. Mr. Schaller reviewed the areas of
research he conducted and noted there were two key findings from the research. He
said the first was the need for additional service starling in January 2001. A 17 percent
increase was projected in occupied hotel room nights in 2001 compared with three years
ago. The 17 percent increase in hotel room nights was the main factor in projecting a
need for having 230 taxicabs starting in January 2001, he explained, and a need for
more at the peak. If there were a large convention in town, the City would need another
50 to 60 cabs on top of the 230. The second finding he identified was, strategically, the
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 2
Resod Area was positioning itself as a place known as quality and accordingly, he felt
there was a need to raise the bar for the quality of taxi service in Anaheim. The Schaller
survey showed that 92 percent of visitors and 86 percent of residents view service as
being either good or excellent; however, a majority of those, about two-thirds in each
case, took the middle point on a three-point scale and part of the objective was to move
up into the excellent range in keeping with the Resort Area's desire and Anaheim's
desire to be known as a place for quality. In addition, 27 percent of residents from the
Schaller survey felt that the length of time it took to get a cab was not acceptable.
Twenty-three percent were not able to get a cab at least once in the last month when
they wanted one, he reported, and one of the objectives was to improve the response
times for residents. Mr. Schaller highlighted three of the benefits of moving to a
franchise system. The first was that it afforded the opportunity and the mechanism to
raise the bar in terms of service quality using secondly a competitive process, having the
benefits of competition. He said there were a number of cab companies in Orange
County that had indicated an interest in coming to Anaheim and having them compete
created the opportunity for the City to obtain the best available quality service, he stated.
Thirdly, the City controlled the timing so that the City's expanding needs for taxis would
be met in a timely and organized process.
Mr. Schaller laid out the five aspects to the overall approach. The first was to utilize the
competitive process to select firms based on the quality of service. In the RFP process,
he noted, taxi companies had the opportunity to say what quality of service they would
provide, what the response times would be, how old the vehicles would be and with that
process, select the best. Secondly, give each company the flexibility to meet those
promises and some provisions for flexibility in operating. The third was to increase the
number of companies from two to three and once the franchise was established, have a
monitoring process to make routine, an annual review of quality to evaluate the
performance of the companies and to adjust the number of cabs as needed on an
annual basis. He noted that a number of companies over the past several years had
applied to add permits in Anaheim and this would channel that process among the three
selected companies into something that could be handled in a routine way. Mr. Schaller
recommended three franchises to reduce risk to the City. He said it was entirely
possible, and he said he had seen it happen in other jurisdictions, for a taxi company to
go out of business. If that happened with two companies, it would be very difficult to
maintain the service levels needed in the time that it took to go back through the
franchise process and replace that company. With three companies, that transition
process would be much easier. In addition, he said the annual monitoring process was
one where if a company was not meeting the requirements in the franchise, it could be
replaced, adding that it would be very difficult to go through that process and make that
provision meaningful if there were two companies as opposed to three to make it
through that transition. Three companies were more competition than two, more
customer choices than two and there were more opportunities for new ideas in terms of
service and more opportunities for smaller companies to serve Anaheim, he said. In
addition, three companies were much more able to meet the peak demand of large
conventions, to which he noted there were an additional 150 to 160 cabs needed at
those times.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 3
Mr. Schaller explained the first RFP requirement was to issue a franchise through an
RFP process for a term of five years with a rolling one-year extension. After the first
year, if everything is satisfactory, a year is added so they have five years, and each year
through the first five years a year would be added. This would be helpful to the
operators, he noted, since they have the franchise to go by, they could buy new cars and
take out loans against that. Ten years would be the expiration of the franchise and it
would be re-bid and it would provide an opportunity to start with a new set of
requirements and a new process. The third recommendation he spoke of was for a total
of 230 permits, based on the increase in the number of hotel rooms and in population in
the City, with an additional number, which would be determined in the franchise process,
of temporary permits to cover the peak need. Three recommendations that concern
allocation of the permits among the operators since there are 230 permits, three
companies and there needed to be a way to decide how many for each, he noted. In the
proposal, each company would propose, as part of the RFP process, the number of
vehicles that they would like. They could propose a range such as at least 80 and up to
100 and there was a minimum and maximum set of what that could be. Mr. Schaller
said a 15 percent flexibility had been built in for the company so that they will promise a
service standard and have the flexibility to meet it. He cited an instance, if a company
was awarded a franchise for 100 vehicles, that company could, on its own, increase by
15 percent, up to 115 vehicles, or decrease the vehicles down to 85 as long as they met
their standard. They may want a smaller number of vehicles working exclusively in
Anaheim or a larger number of vehicles that are more spread through the County and
they could supply the amount of temporary permits that they would like to have. Each of
the companies would propose a service standard that a number of their pickups would
be within 20 minutes. Mr. Schaller said when they did the market research they found
that a satisfactory pick up time was in the 15 to 20 minute range and each company
would have to say what percentage of calls they would pick up within that standard. He
emphasized this would be tracked through a computerized system so the data could be
evaluated in the annual monitoring. A minimum acceptable for a proposal, which met
requirements, would be 80 percent within 20 minutes.
He explained there would be an opportunity for new companies to phase in over six
months, at the same time indicating how they would meet the need for the two large
conventions of the first couple of months in 2001. He noted there would be an
opportunity for start-ups to have a somewhat slower phase-in if they could justify that.
Review of each franchisee's performance would be evaluated annually using response
times, computerized data, citations and complaint data from customers. Each year the
City could change the number of cabs depending on need and adjust the adjustment
percentage by 15 percent and adjust the number of temporary permits. The intent, he
said, was to have a self-regulating system where it was set up, started and worked on its
own with some monitoring by the City but not a great effort and not having big decisions
to make year after year. There was a provision to have a warning system. He said if the
annual review showed a significant issue, then the company would be given up to six
months to correct it and if it's a health and safety issue, like insurance, they could be
terminated. Other provisions were that they should abide by all applicable laws and the
fees would be based on cost recovery so the City would recover its cost of regulating the
franchises.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 4
Mr. Schaller said other requirements, as part of raising the bar, and the recommendation
was for vehicles to be no more that seven years old with a maximum of five years in
service as taxicabs. To meet the needs of people using wheel chairs, have two or three
wheel chair accessible vehicles per company and two if there was fewer than 100
permits in that company and three if there's more. To raise the bar, the recommendation
was to have no exterior advertising, especially in the Resort Area, so that there will be a
clean look. A number of customers considered credit card payment to be an important
feature and it was commonly used around the country, he informed. Clean fuels were
considered an enhancement but were not required.
The Schaller report had set forth a provision for existing operators, an option where the
City could permit existing companies to continue to operate provided that they met the
minimum requirements of the RFP. They would continue with the current number of
permits, which was 115 for Yellow Cab of North Orange County and 50 in the case of A-
Taxi. The selection committee would evaluate if the minimum requirements were met
and if the company wanted a larger number of permits; they would have to compete as
everyone else. A slightly higher minimum response time standard would be appropriate
if the Council elected to go in that direction, he informed. Eighty percent would be the
minimum standard, which was below the survey data for the residents, and if the bar
was raised, Mr. Schaller said, it should be a bit higher than it was. Evaluation criteria
was; the experience of the operator, financial viability, the proposed quality of service
and then the ability to perform to those standards and the five percent consideration for
clean fuels. Each company would have to meet a minimum of these per the RFP and
then would be evaluated using those weights.
if Council gave direction to proceed, Mr. Schaller projected issuing the RFP about
September 12th; the proposals would be due about five weeks later, around October 17th.
The selection committee would make recommendations and return to Council to make
the award in early December with franchises commencing on schedule on January 1,
2001.
Council Member McCracken asked for clarification if the current vendors wanted more
cabs than they had, would they have to give up the right to the ones they had and apply
or compete in the process. Mr. Schaller responded that it was not eithedor but the
company could say that they wanted the current number and that their proposal met the
minimum requirements and they could also compete for an additional number. They
could apply for an additional numbers as a separate part of the process.
Code Enforcement Supervisor John Poole stated that they would have to apply
separately and would, if they met the minimum requirements, keep what they had and if
they wanted more then they could make a proposal with everyone else.
Council Member McCracken asked Mr. Schaller if he was changing and increasing the
criteria if the current vendors were kept and he responded that was correct and that was
the recommendation. He also stated that in the main part of the proposal, the
recommendation was that there be a minimum response time of 80 percent within 20
minutes. He explained that Council may want to have a higher bar than what the
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 5
minimum acceptable standard would be and he recommended that Council move from
the 80 to 85 percent response time.
Council Member McCracken wondered if that would cover any additional cabs that they
had or would there be two sets of criteria which would be difficult to monitor. Mr.
Schailer stated that there would be two proposals from the Company and the selection
committee would go one way or the other. There would only be one standard that would
be applied to that company, not two.
Council Member Kring inquired as to who would be on the selection committee and if it
had been established. Code Enforcement Supervisor, John Poole, responded that the
selection committee had not been fully established and he recommended that it be
comprised of members of the Visitors and Convention Bureau, the Director, and City
Staff, and they were open to suggestions.
Council Member Kring explained that with very large conventions the City would need
temporary taxi-cab permits Mr. Schaller responded that it should be 50 to 60 percent
more, which worked out to be 150 to 160 more cabs during the large conventions.
Council Member Kring stated her concern and that the City had spent a lot of money,
had received Federal, State and AQMD funds, would also have an Anaheim
Transpodation Network that would travel around the Resod Area, taking people from the
Resort to Disneyland, hotels and restaurants and it seemed that it would decrease the
number of cabs that the City should have. She was concerned that putting more cabs
on the street would tend to make the franchisee or the applicant not make the financial
benefits that they were currently receiving.
Mr. Schaller commented that approximately three years ago, before the construction
which reduced the demands for cab service, there were around 200 cabs serving
Anaheim for a normal to mid sized convention, indicating there were more cabs in 1997
than there were today. At that time, there were no A stickers on the cabs to indicate
which cabs from that company had a permit for Anaheim. Mr. Schaller said he
interviewed and collected data on the companies last year and he estimated that there
were actually not 165 cabs operating, which was the number with permits, but about 200
in 1997. Schaller added the 17 percent increase in hotel room nights, which was the
closest indicator of the demand in the Resort Area, and the larger number of
conventions, the numbers should be going from around 200 in 1997 to 230 which would
be keyed into the hotel room expansion.
Council Member Kring asked how many complaints were received on cab service and
Code Enforcement Supervisor Poole responded that there were minimal complaints on
cab service and he explained that what they were trying to do with the proposal was
raise the bar and take care of the additional demand when the new Disney attraction
went online. Council Member Kring said that she was concerned the City would be
rushing into this before really knowing what was going on. With all the other
transportation options in place, she said she believed that the City would be better
served putting temporary permits out instead of having three franchisees and not having
enough business to take care of them.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 6
Mr. Schaller commented that the Anaheim Transportation Network was still several
years off so the needs would be in 2001. He agreed with that there was a changing
transportation network as well as changing attractions and restaurants and the demand
may still end up being higher or lower over time. He said that the taxi industry did not
have the opportunity to give a full compliment of options to travelers to be competitive
because that number had been constrained. If there were not enough cabs, the
residents would not be able to get a cab and the response times were much better in the
Resort Area. Council Member Kring said the City we must be cognizant of the residents
and how they are served and Mr. Schaller said that the standard would need to be met
for both the residential and the Resort areas.
Mayor Daly questioned the number of proposed franchises and asked about the rational
behind moving it to three companies asking why not four or five since there were a
number of firms interested in providing service. Mr. Schaller responded that there were
some benefits to having only three because when four or five companies divided 230
cabs, the smaller number of cabs would not be able to cover Anaheim in a satisfactory
way.
Mayor Daly asked if any of the committee members considered more that three and Mr.
Poole responded that the majority of the committee recommended three franchises so a
number greater than three was never suggested.
Council Member Tait asked how the consultant came up with the recommendation of
230 cabs and Mr. Schaller explained the process. They.considered the years 1997 and
2001 because in 1998/1999 there was a lot of construction. They looked at the number
of cabs that were operating in Anaheim under different situations, a slow day with a mid-
size convention and then with a large convention. They used information from both of
the companies and some of the other companies in the County. In slow times, there
were about 1,200 trips. A mid-size convention had around 1,800 trips and there were
3,000 trips for a large convention. The number of vehicles was about 190 to 220
operating in Anaheim for a mid size convention, adding the demand from the increasing
hotel rooms and a small increase in population.
Council Member Tait inquired about the criteria percentages and if it was firm or
individual experience and on the ability to perform to proposed standards. Mr. Schaller
referred to page 10 of his report for criteria and capabilities of the computerized system
that they proposed to use for call taking and dispatch procedures, Resort Area service
control procedures and other procedures listed in the consultant's report.
Council Member Feldhaus commented on the 80 percent response time within a 20
minute period and asked if it would be a reflection on the driver if he could not find the
address that was given, or bad traffic conditions or goa's and Mr. Schaller agreed that it
would not. Council Member Feldhaus asked Mr. Schaller if he had taken into
consideration that there may be a cutback in cabs if the need was not there and Mr.
Schaller responded that it would be something that would have to be addressed at that
time but he did not foresee it as being a likely occurrence. Council Member Feldhaus
addressed the seven years of age for vehicles, no vehicles in service for more than five
years and the clean fuel issue and he said he believed that these were too restrictive.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 7
He stated his disagreement with not allowing a taxi to have exterior advertising and said
he believed that signage could be regulated so that it would look professional.
Code Enforcement John Poole explained that most of the operating conditions were
addressed through the OCTAP regulations and the franchise set the number and the
standards for the cabs, but the operating procedures and fares were set and
recommended by OCTAP.
Council Member Feldhaus clarified that there was room for 65 more cabs to operate in
Anaheim, but on high convention days, another 100 to 150 would be needed. He asked
Mr. Schaller if current permit operators would have to apply for a franchise license in
order to continue to operate the 115 and 50 cabs and Mr. Schaller affirmed that they
would and stated that it was part of raising the bar. Increasing the number of cabs to 230
opened the door for a third operator.
Council Member Kring said if an operator asked for 200 cabs they would not necessarily
be granted 200 cabs, they would stay at 115 or 50 cabs and that would open up for a
third franchisee. Mr. Schailer said that the current operators could increase from 115
and the 50 and still have a third operator and the recommendation was for three
operators/franchisees. Under this framework, it would be decided how many cabs each
company would have.
Council Member Kring directed questions to Code Enforcement Supervisor John Poole.
He responded that an application fee is paid to OCTAP and they had recently informed
him that they would be reducing the annual permit fee of $180. The $10,000 security
deposit would be returnable at the end of the franchise, which would be used to make
sure that they followed through. Council Member Kring said she agreed with Council
Member Feldhaus that this was very restrictive and she said the City of Long Beach
operated on a two and a half page resolution that completely showed the needs of the
community. Mr. Schaller explained that the main benefit from the franchise process was
the opportunity to evaluate companies against each other and raise the bar.
Council Member Feldhaus commented that the existing operators could now fill 165
taxicabs and they were adequate up until this time. The committee was recommending
an additional 65 taxi cabs and he believed that those 65 should be distributed to
someone else in the RFP system but not restrict 115, 165 if they wanted to work the
extra conventions and place more cabs on the street. He said an operator in the City of
50 years provided cab service and there was no problem with them. Council Member
Feldhaus reported that he believed that there should be an additional amount of taxicabs
for the day to day operation of the City and he asked why some of the other franchisees
could not pick up that business.
Council Member Tait asked what cities had a reputation for managing taxicabs well and
Mr. Schaller responded that he found in his research that Las Vegas, which had a five-
year requirement in terms of vehicle age and does not have a franchise, was very
impressive and Orlando did a great job. Los Angeles was going through a re-franchising
process and they had additional restrictions and requirements that were not included in
the proposal. Mr. Schaller stated that every city was unique and had its own set of
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 8
needs. Las Vegas and Orlando both had very similar provisions for temporary permits,
which worked well there and should work well in Anaheim.
Council Member Kring asked Mr. Poole if he would be hiring another Code Enforcement
Officer to handle the reporting and record keeping that the companies would have to do
and Mr. Poole responded that computerized records were suggested and they hoped
that the franchisees would keep concise reports so that there would be minimal work for
City staff.
Mayor Daly announced that the item was on the business agenda for later that evening
and the workshop concluded at 4:23 PM.
Respectfully submitted:
Sheryll Schroeder, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2000
The City Council of the City of Anaheim, CA met in regular session.
Present:
Mayor Tom Daly, Council Members: Frank Feldhaus, Lucille Kring,
Tom Tait and Shirley McCracken.
Staff Present: City Manager Jim Ruth, City Attorney Jack White, City Clerk Sheryll
Schroeder.
A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on August
4, 2000 at the City Hall inside and outside bulletin boards.
Mayor Daly called the regular meeting to order at 3:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of
the Anaheim City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. The first portion of the meeting was a
workshop on taxi franchises.
WORKSHOP FOR TAXI FRANCHISES:
Minutes for the Workshop will be presented as separate minutes.
At the conclusion of the workshop, at 4:00 P.M., Mayor Daly recessed the meeting to
Closed Session.
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
There were no public comments relative to Closes Session items.
Motion
1.
to recess to Closed Session for the following purposes: (4:00 P.M.)
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
Name of Case: Vista Royale Homeowners Assn. v. 396 Investment Co.
fka The Fieldstone Company, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case
No. 77-30-74 (and related cases).
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6:
Agency designated representative: David Hill
Name of employee organization: International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, Local 47.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 2
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6:
Agency Negotiator: James D. Ruth
Unrepresented Employee: Executive Managers
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION:
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: one
potential case.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A) - EXISTING LITIGATION:
Name of Case: South Coast Cab et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange
County Superior Court Case No. 80-03-59 (4th Civ. No. GO26197);
United States District Court Case No. SACV99-416GLT(ANx) (9th Circ.
No.)-55761.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE
REVIEW:
Title: City Clerk
AFTER RECESS:
Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of August 8, 2000 to order at 5:43 P.M.
and welcomed those in attendance.
INVOCATION: Moment of silence offered by Mayor Daly.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Frank Feldhaus.
PROCLAMATIONS AND DECLARATIONS:
Mayor Daly read and presented a Declaration recognizing Bernice Jane Orwig as a
member of the United States Olympic Women's Water Polo Team.
Mayor Daly and Council Members presented a Declaration recognizing the Flag Day
essay contest winners, which were accepted by school district contest winners.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 3
At 6:00 P.M., Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the
Redevelopment Agency and Anaheim Housing Authority meetings.
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting at 6:08 P.M.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Linda Lee Grau requested A 23 be removed from the Consent Calendar.
Mayor Daly responded that she was flee to ask questions or make comments on the
item.
Ms. Grau asked that Savis Roditis be given 100 cab permits. She added that small
businesses had a difficult time operating in the City and that she felt government was in
business to install urban rail.
Ralph Montview, 1616 W. Broadway, explained his difficulty in securing assistance with
Section 8 housing. Executive Director of Community Development, Elisa Stipkovich,
said the housing staff would contact him regarding assistance.
Ron Chandler, 812 Falcon Street, said he took out nomination papers because of the
taxi industry. He said he had many years of experience, had read the Schuller report
and said he did not think the report was created by anyone with experience. He said the
City needed a diversified company other than the two currently doing business in the
City.
Mitchell Caldwell, 902 W. Broadway, spoke on Item A9, renaming Clemintine Street to
Freedman Way. He said the historical community wished to preserve the names in the
Colony District. He said a vote of the neighborhood was unanimous not to change the
name of Philadelphia Street.
Mayor Daly reported that the staff was re-evaluating the issue of re-naming Philadelphia
Street.
Bud Schultz, 156 South Avenida Felipe, spoke regarding the Anaheim Hills Golf Club
House and he presented a petition signed by Hills residents that wished to see a new
club house built.
Don D. Gutierrez, 2102 Westport, spoke regarding Item A23, taxi request for proposals,
and he said franchise licensing would limit competition. He said staff admitted that
during large conventions, there were not enough cabs. He wished to see provisional or
conditional licenses granted to other cab owners to handle the tourism during peak
hours. He asked if it was coincidental that staff was considering a franchise system
when there had been a ready, willing and able cab company that had been applying
since 1991.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 4
William Gregg, 110 E. Leatrice, said he was a manager for A Taxi Cab and he requested
that the request for proposals for the taxi franchise be delayed because they would like
to see if what was currently working could be kept. He noted the current application
process was working. He said they would like to reduce the burden on the City, adding
that there was enough regulations by OCTA, also, the time and attention for the debate
by Council, he did not think was wodh it. He said the solution was to give the 230
permits to the current providers or stay with the current application process.
A resident of 1758 Sumac Lane, wished to show the Mayor and Council a short video on
taxicabs. Mayor Daly asked Council if they wished to view the video, some Council
Members said they had seen the OCN video and if he wished to leave a copy they would
view it.
Francis Nutto, 621 Jambalaya Street, referred to a commercial sign erected at the corner
of East Lincoln and Larch. He said the Zoning Administrator called him and explained
the staff was working on the billboard situation and he asked why the sign was still
standing. He said according to the zoning map, the property was zoned single
family/residential and he asked why the zoning division would sign off approving a
business license and a sign permit for a commercial sign. He asked who was
responsible for requiring compliance with the conditions.
Joel Fick, Planning Director, responded that staff was looking at the billboard issue and
regarding the sign, he said he believed that a variance was granted that authorized the
sign and he would provide the information to Mr. Nutto.
Mr. Nutto said Council had approved a CUP based on a staff report that said the zoning
was commercial/office.
Mayor Daly said staff would report back on the item and he asked Mr. Nutto to provide
staff with any additional information.
Savis Rodiris, South Coast Cab Company, 10700 W. Katella Ave., spoke regarding Item
A23, taxi franchise request for proposals. He said he was against the franchise system
because it would eliminate the smaller taxi company from bidding and meeting the
requirements. He said the study was done by a person hired from New York, which had
independent cabs. He wished to see the City keep the taxi system the way it currently
was. He said he felt the proposal came up because he was applying for a license.
Kelly Aster, represented Yellow Cab of North Orange County, spoke on Item A23, saying
the results of the study would provide the City with an understanding of what it needed.
He said one flaw he noticed was that he did not think significant attention was given to
the opportunity of exploring further enhancements in service with existing service
providers. He said he felt it should be considered that maybe the City could
accommodate the needs of the City with the existing two service providers. He said the
City had state of the art service and people and if the issue was meeting peak needs
during convention season, he felt a franchise system might accomplish that but the
existing system could do it as well. He said his concerns with a franchise system would
be a sunset term, and as long as the company was doing well, they should not have to
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 5
lose the service. He asked that action be deferred until further discussion could take
place.
Todd Evans, Vista Taxi, said he had been in the taxi service business for some time and
had seen the City make many attempts to increase ridership. He noted during
discussions, the term "raise the bar" continued to surface. He said if the City used the
RFP process, they should use a straight, across the bar for everyone.
Christopher Montoya, 200 N. Carlton, regarding taxi service, he asked if the 5% clean air
requirement could be raised, adding that Rule 1194 from AQMD would be approved next
week. He said they wished to see the City consider that the taxi company that had the
John Wayne Airport contract be permitted to provide service in Anaheim, since they
were bringing the tourist into the City. He noted the sunset clause of 10 years may be
too long and they would suggest it be equal to the airport contract.
Greg Bradfield, 1724 Galloway Lane, Corona, public relations director for A Taxi, noted
that his company, through communications, had the ability to handle situations and
independent drivers were in business for themselves and provided service to be
successful. He said he was in favor of keeping the current process and maybe opening
it up to other companies.
Steve Malloy, California Yellow Cab, said if the two companies providing service in the
City were permitted to turn in proposals with the minimum under the RFP, that's what
the City would get.
Roy Smith, Irvine, A Taxi employee, said his company had set very high standards and
that the experience requirements should be raised if the City looked to a franchise
system.
Larry Slagle, Yellow Cab, 1619 E. Lincoln, said his company had been in the City for 55
years and provided good service. He said he felt they needed to "raise the bar". He
noted that there may be an occasion when someone would have to wait for a taxi, but by
large, 50% of the driver's day was non-productive. He said they would support a
proactive move and the RFP was a step in the right direction.
Anthony Palmieri, Long Beach, Fiesta Taxi, said he spent a great deal of money trying to
get the City of Los Angeles to grandfather his business and he was turned down. He
wondered if the City was considering grandfathering the two current service providers
and he said he felt everyone should be considered.
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted
upon, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA:
CITY OF ANAtlEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 6
City Manager, Jim Ruth, regarding Item A9, the second portion of the item, requested
that Council direct staff to work with the Freedman Foundation to find an acceptable
alternative to re-naming Philadelphia Street.
Council Member Feldhaus asked how long the item would be continued and John
Lower, Traffic/Transportation Manager, responded that all opportunities would be
explored in late September or early October.
Mayor Daly asked the City Manager to become involved in the discussion and Mr. Ruth
said he would do that and get back to Council. Mayor Daly clarified that the staff
recommendation on the second portion of Item A9 was that staff would work with the
Freedman Foundation.
Regarding Item A23, Council Member McCracken said she had some concerns and she
needed additional time to review and discuss the issues with the staff and entities
involved. She moved to delay Item A23 for two weeks, seconded by Council Member
Kring.
Mayor Daly commented that the City Manager's recommendation to move to a franchise
system addressed issues of fairness and competition. He said the request for a 2 week
continuance was fair.
Motion carried unanimously.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A24: On motion by
Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the following items were
approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished
each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried
unanimously.
A1.
Receive and file minutes of the Anaheim Redevelopment and Housing
Commission meeting held July 5, 2000; minutes of the Anaheim Public Library
Board meeting held June 7, 2000; minutes of the Public Utilities Board meetings
held April 20, 2000 and May 4, 2000; minutes of the Anaheim Park and
Recreation Commission meetings held May 24, 2000 and June 28, 2000; and
correspondence from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of
Markets Rates and Tariffs dated July 14, 2000.
A2.
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, All American Asphalt, in the
amount of $365,409.66, for State College Boulevard Street Improvements, from
Lincoln Avenue to South Street, and approve and authorize the Finance Director
to sign said agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
A3.
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Sequel Contractors, Inc., in
the amount of $382,222, for Harbor Boulevard North Gateway Median
Improvement/Beautification and Anaheim Resort Improvements and approve and
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 7
authorize the Finance Director to sign said agreement pertaining to contract
retentions.
A4,
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, DBL Construction
Corporation, in the amount of $503,870.54, for La Palma Avenue Street
Improvements Project, from Sequoia Avenue to Magnolia Avenue, and approve
and authorize the Finance Director to sign said agreement pertaining to contract
retentions.
A5.
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, R. J. Noble Company, in the
amount of $566,740.07, for Katella Avenue Street Improvements, Ninth Street to
Nutwood Street, and approve and authorize the Finance Director to sign said
agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
A6.
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Mabassaly Engineering,
Inc., in the amount of $596,280.88, for Euclid Street Improvements, Lincoln
Avenue to Ball Road, and approve and authorize the Finance Director to sign
said agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
A7.
Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, KEC Engineering, in the
amount of $2,040,930.89, for Ball Road Corridor Improvements, Walnut Street to
Anaheim-Barber Channel, and approve and authorize the Finance Director to
sign said agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
A8.
Approve the City's comments to the Orange County Grand Jury Report on Flood
Channel Debris findings and recommendations.
A9.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-160 A RESOLUTION QF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM rescinding Resolution No. 96R-109 pertaining to
the renaming a portion of Clementine Street to Freedman Way.
Direct staff to work with the Freedman Foundation regarding the renaming of the
Philadelphia Street segment between Broadway and Center Street to Freedman
Way. (Continued from the meeting of July 25, 2000, Item A18.)
A10.
Approve the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 503 West
Chapman Avenue for the Chapman Avenue (Northside) east of Harbor
Boulevard Street Widening project (RAN 5506-3), authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute said agreement and authorize the acquisition payment of $2,241
to the Morgenthaler Family Limited Partnership.
All.
Approve the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 216 South Euclid
Street for the Lincoln Avenue/Euclid Street Intersection Improvement project
(R/W 5362-05), authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement
and authorize the acquisition payment of $6,489 to Donna H. Coxeter.
A12.
Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Agreement with
Holmes and Narver, in an amount not to exceed $734,000, for design services
for the Gene Autry Way (west) HOV Interchange Improvement project.
CITY OF ANAIIEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 8
A13.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-161 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting cedain deeds conveying certain real
propedies or interests therein to the City. (City deeds 10293 through 10299.)
A14.
Accept the low bid of G & W Electric Company, cJo Banes Associates, in an
amount not to exceed $148,901.88, for (40) 15.5KV, 200 AMP three-phase
Submersible Switches as required for the period of August 15, 2000 through
August 15, 2001 with three one-year optional renewals and authorize the
Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options for warehouse stock in
accordance with Bid ¢f6056.
A15.
Accept the low bid of New Horizons in an amount not to exceed $209,418, to
provide computer skills training classes and course materials for city employees,
as required, for the period August 15, 2000 through August 14, 2002 and
authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise up to three one-year renewals, in
accordance with Request for Proposal f/8054.
A16.
Accept the bid of Pauwels Transformers, Inc., in the amount of $637,202 (plus
applicable taxes) for two Load Tap Changing Three Phase Oil Immersed
15/20/25 MV.A. Power Transformers, in accordance with Bid ¢f6044.
A17. Approve and authorize the City Librarian to execute an Agreement with Compaq
Computer Corporation for service on computer equipment.
A18.
Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. I to
Professional Service Agreement with ,John E. Spalding d.b.a. JES Associates to
increase the existing contract authority by $150,000 and extend the contract to
August, 2002.
A19.
Approve the conveyance of the City's fee title interest of certain abandoned
public streets in the Jeffrey-Lynne Neighborhood to the Anaheim Housing
Authority and make cedain findings that such transfer is in the best interest of the
City; direct staff to take all actions and execute all documents necessary or
desirable to implement the conveyance in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
A20. Appoint Mike Carter and Paul F. Duranczyk to the Anaheim Workforce
Investment Board to represent the business community for five-year terms.
A21.
Authorize the second amendment of a contract with the Orange County Fire
Authority allowing the City of Anaheim Fire Department to provide service to a
small unincorporated area in southwest Anaheim, extending the service
agreement through June 30, 2005.
A22.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-162 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM confirming the written repod of the Fire Chief regarding
the cost of weed abatement and directing the filing thereof with the County of
Orange.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 9
A23.
Direct staff to circulate requests for proposals from the taxi industry, which
contain components and criteria as recommended by Schaller Consulting in the
TaxiCab Franchise System Report dated July 20, 2000.
A24. Approve minutes of the June 20, 2000 and July 11, 2000 Anaheim City Council
meetings.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
The Ariahelm Housing Authority reconvened at 7:15 P.M.
Authorize the Executive Director to accept conveyance of those abandoned streets
formerly known as Jeffrey Drive, Michelle Drive and the alleys between Jeffrey and
Michelle, Walnut and Jeffrey, all between Lynne and Audre, together with Audre Drive
between Walnut and the alley between Michelle and Hampstead.
There being no questions, Chairman Daly moved the recommended action, motion
carried unanimously.
Chairman Daly moved to adjourn the Anaheim Housing Authority at 7:16 P.M., seconded
by Authority Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
A25.
BOARD/COMMISSION APPOINTMENT TO TERM EXPIRING JUNE 30, 2000:
(Continued from the meetings of June 20, 2000, Item A33, July 11, 2000, Item
A33 and July 25, 2000, Item A30).
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION FOR NEW TERM EXPIRING JUNE 30,
2004: (Sewell)
Mayor Daly asked if there were additional applications for the openin and the Clerk
responded no. Mayor Daly moved to continue the item to August 15t~], seconded by
Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member McCracken
requested the applicants update their applications.
A26. HEARING: REQUEST OF SOUTH COAST CAB COMPANY, INC., FOR A
PERMIT TO OPERATE A TAXI SERVICE:
REQUESTED BY: Savias Rodiris, 10700 Katella Avenue, Suite C, Anaheim,
California 92804-6159 To consider the application of South Coast Cab
Company, Inc., for the operation of 115 taxicabs in the City of Anaheim.
(Continued from the meeting of July 25, 2000, Item A33).
Mayor Daly called for presentations.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 10
Mary Ann Cazzell, attorney for South Coast Cabs, 1016 West Town and Country Road,
Orange, said she was in attendance to secure a license to operate and pick up taxicab
fares in the City, which they had been attempting to do for about four years. She noted
the handouts with four exhibits. She said Exhibit A was exerts from earlier Council
meeting transcripts which she said established that if anyone received a permit, the next
person should be South Coast Cab, they fulfilled all criteria, they had adequate number
of cabs and insurance was in place. She said her client had been compliant since
February of 1998 and waiting in line for their permits. She said the focus was on need or
necessity. She felt the video that was not shown, showed there was a need or
necessity, which should be based on what the public needed. Exhibit B were exerts of
Mr. Schaller's report. She said Mr. Schaller said the City needed a third company,
maybe four, phased in, and then go into a franchise. She said there was an immediate
need for cabs in the City and under the best case scenario, the City could not have new
cabs in place until at least January first. Exhibit C were exerts from a deposition taken
by herself in which Mr. Slagle of Yellow Cab said he had 115 cabs and she said he did
not have any more cabs to put on the road. She said South Coast Cab was ready,
willing and able to put in at least 40 cabs within a short time flame.
She said she was requesting that they, South Coast Cabs, be allowed to begin operating
now even if a franchise is awarded later.
Mayor Daly said the video she indicated she wished to show was of different nature from
the one mentioned earlier and he offered her the opportunity to show that under the
public hearing.
After some delay, the video referred to, undated OCN interview, was played.
Mayor Daly asked if there were any questions and there being none, Council Member
McCracken moved that the application be denied, based on a finding that the public
convenience and necessity did not require the operation of an additional taxi business in
the City at this time and the City was currently adequately being served with taxicabs by
existing two businesses for the reasons set forth on pages 2 and 3 of the Planning
Department staff report dated July 25, 2000. Council Member Kring seconded the
motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Daly noted for the record that staff had recommended moving to a franchise
system and inviting proposals from taxi companies for future service.
At this time, Mayor Daly requested Council Members consider the land use items and
return to Item A27, Charter Amendments, after land use items.
Items B1 through B8 From Planning Commission Meetin.cl of July 17, 2000: (No
action necessary unless Council desires to set a particular item for public hearing.)
APPEAL PERIOD ENDS August 8, 2000
B1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3400
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 11
(CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04230)
CEQA CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT-CLASS 1:
OWNER: Lederer - Anaheim Ltd., 1990
Westwood Boulevard, 3rd floor, Los Angeles,
CA 90025
AGENT: Farano & Kieviet, Attn: Thomas Kieviet, 2300 East Katella Avenue
#235, Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 1440 South Anaheim Boulevard. Property is 14.74 acres located
north and east of the northeast corner of Cerritos Avenue and Anaheim
Boulevard (Anaheim Indoor Marketplace).
To request reinstatement of this permit by modification or deletion of a condition
of approval pertaining to a time limitation (originally approved on July 23, 1991, to
expire on April 22, 2001) to retain an indoor swap meet.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved reinstatement of CUP NO. 3400 (CUP TRACKING O. 2000-04230) to
expire July 17, 2010 (PC2000-89) (4 yes votes, Commissioner Bostwick
abstained, and Commissioners Arnold and Boydstun absent).
Council Member Feldhaus requested CUP 3400 be set for public hearing, seconded by
Council Member Kring.
B2.
VARIANCE NO. 2000-04401
CEQA CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT-CLASS 5:
OWNER: Richard L. Johnson, Trustee of the Richard and Gene Johnson Trust,
P.O. Box 1759, Blue Jay, CA 92317
LOCATION: 516 West Chestnut Street. Property is 0.17 acre located on the
south side of Chestnut Street, 220 feet west of the centerline of Harbor
Boulevard.
Waiver of (a) minimum number of parking spaces (b) required screening of
parking areas, (c) minimum building site area per dwelling unit and (d) design of
vehicular parking areas, to construct an additional two-unit apartment building in
conjunction with an existing duplex.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 2000-04401 DENIED (PC2000-90) (5 yes votes, Commissioners
Arnold and Boydstun absent).
Council Member Feldhaus said he had received a fax from the properly owner of 516
West Chestnut Street.
Planning Director, Joel Fick, said the Planning Commission denied the item and that it
was very similar to a proposal that previously had been denied some time ago.
Council Member Kring said she would second the motion for a public hearing.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS:
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 12
B3.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4125
(CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04234)
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION - REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF FINAL
PLANS: Howard CDM, Attn: Denise Scribner, 2161 Gundy Avenue, Signal Hill,
CA 90806, requests review and approval of final fencing and landscaping plans
for a previously-approved outdoor swap meet facility with waiver of required
parking lot landscaping. Property is located 2150 South State College Boulevard
(former Orange Drive-In Theatre and Swap Meet).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved final plans for CUP NO. 4125 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04234) (5
yes votes, Commissioners Boydstun and Arnold absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B4.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4128 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04229)
Milestone Management, Attn: Dan Schultz, 21196 Jasmines Way, Lake Forest,
CA 92630, requests review and approval of final plans for a previously-approved
drive-through fast food restaurant. Property is located at 600-626 Nodh
Brookhurst Street (Carl's Jr. Restaurant).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved final plans for CUP NO. 4126 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04229) (5
yes votes, Commissioners Boydstun and Arnold absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B5.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4156 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04240)
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION- REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF FINAL
PLANS: John A. DeFrenza, 20301 SW Birch Street, #101-E, Newport Beach,
CA 92660, requests review and approval of final landscape, lighting and sign
plans. Property is located at 5445 East La Palma Avenue (Land Rover Auto
Dealership).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved final plans for CUP NO. 4156 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04240) (5
yes votes, Commissioners Boydstun and Arnold absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B6.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1981 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04231)
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION - REQUEST FOR SUBSTANTIAL
CONFORMANCE: Richard Bond of Coast Landscape Maintenance, 1418 North
Hundley, Anaheim, CA 92806, request for determination of substantial
conformance for modifications to a previously-approved sign program. Property
is approximately 4,300 acres generally bounded by Santa Ana Canyon Road to
the north, the Anaheim City limits to the south and east, and Meats Avenue to the
west (Anaheim Hills).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in substantial conformance with previously approved sign
program for CUP NO. 1981 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04231) (5 yes votes,
Commissioners Boydstun and Arnold absent).
CITY OF ANAIIEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 13
Negative Declaration previously approved.
Mayor Daly asked about the three proposed replacement signs in Anaheim Hills,
wondering if the word "Association" would be deleted when the signs are installed.
Planning Director, Joel Fick, responded that the signs had been installed by the time the
application was filed and staff did not feel it was a major concern and they had not heard
any further comments.
Mayor Daly asked if the replacement signs now said "Association" and Mr. Fick
answered yes. Mayor Daly asked if the City had a responsibility to make sure the signs
are accurate and reflect the community's desires.
Mr. Fick said what Mayor Daly expressed was staff's concern and what was learned at
the Commission meeting was that the signs were refurbished and updated by the
Association and that was why the Planning Commission approved the signs as they had
been installed.
Mayor Daly asked what the cost was to change the signs and Mr. Fick said that point
was not discussed. Mayor Daly requested a hearing on the item, noting he would
request the word "Association" be deleted from the community markers.
Council Member McCracken informed that the Association installed the signs and they
marked the limits of the Association and that the new signs were a big improvement over
the old.
Mayor Daly added that the old signs did not identity Association so this was a deliberate
decision to add the label "Association".
Council Member Feldhaus stated that he was surprised that organizations that follow
planning issues had not called regarding the sign issue.
Council Member Kring said that it sounded like they had spent a great deal of money
and perhaps next time, the word "Association" could be removed.
Mayor Daly said he had a few calls regarding this and Council Member Tait added that
he wondered why it was changed. He felt the content of the sign should probably be left
tO the members of the Association and that the City should not tell the Association what
they should put on their signs.
Mayor Daly asked if the signs were on private property and Mr. Fick responded yes.
Mayor Daly said that he wished to go on record that he did not think it was good for the
community identity to have those types of labels.
B7.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3381 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04239)
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION - REQUEST FOR SUBSTANTIAL
CONFORMANCE: Ken Self, New Mark Merrill, 18801 Ventura Boulevard, Suite
CITY OF ANAtlEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 14
300, Tarzana, CA 91356, request for determination of substantial conformance
with previously-approved elevation plans for a remodel of an existing commercial
center. Properly is located at 2134 East Lincoln Avenue (Anaheim Town).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in substantial conformance with previously approved plans for
CUP NO. 3381 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04239) (5 yes votes, Commissioners
Boydstun and Arnold absent).
Negative Declaration previously appreved.
B8.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4163 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04243)
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION - REQUEST FOR SUBSTANTIAL
CONFORMANCE: Allen Golden, 2888 East Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA
91107, request for determination of substantial conformance to amend floor plan
and site plans. Property is located at 321 North State College Boulevard.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in substantial conformance with previously approved plans for
CUP NO 4163 (CUP TRACKING NO. 2000-04243)(5 yes votes, Commissioners
Boydstun and Arnold absent).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
Items B9 throu.qh B10 From Zonin.q Administrator Meetin.q of July 27, 2000: (No
action necessary unless Council desires to set a particular item for public hearing.)
APPEAL PERIOD ENDS AUGUST 14, 2000
B9.
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WAIVER NO. 2000-04 CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT, SECTION 15061(B)(3):
OWNER: Joseph Perri, General manager for Mills Ford, 1600 West Lincoln
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92803 LOCATION: 1600 West Lincoln Avenue.
Property is 5.22 acres, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and
Loara Street, has frontages of 492 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and
613 feet on the west side of Loara Street. Approval for a six (6) month extension
of time for a special circumstance waiver to retain nineteen (19) pageantry-style
banners mounted on light poles in conjunction with an automobile dealership.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Appreved Special Circumstances Waiver No. 2000-04 for six months.
B10.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2000-147, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT -
CLASS 15:
OWNER: DSA Ariahelm Business Park, LLC, 333 City Boulevard West, #1700,
Orange, CA 92868 ATTN: Jeff Denning LOCATION: 1230-1260 North Fee
Ana Street. To establish a 5-lot industrial subdivision in the Northeast Area
Specific Plan (SP94-1) Zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 2000-147. (ZA Decision No. 2000-28).
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 15
ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION:
Bll.
ORDINANCE NO. 5733 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Ordinance No. 5729, as
adopted by City Council on May 16, 2000, nunc pro tunc, relating to
Reclassification No. 99-00-13. (Introduced at the meeting of July 25, 2000, Item
B6.)
B12.
ORDINANCE NO. 5734 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Ordinance No.5703, as
adopted by City Council, on September 21, 1999 nunc pro tunc, relating to
Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2. (Introduced at the meeting of July 25,
2000, Item B7.)
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance Nos. 5733 and 5734 for adoption. The City Clerk read
the titles of both ordinances.
Roll Call vote - 5 Ayes, no nays. Motion carried.
6:00 P.M. Public Hearings:
C1.
PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 99-4A:
To consider the abandonment of pipeline, slope, road and public utility
easements located at 421 South Country Hills Road.
At their meeting held June 20, 2000, the Anaheim City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2000R-107 declaring its intention to vacate certain public streets,
highways and service easements, and to consider abandoning pipeline, slope,
road and public utility easements located at 421 South Country Hills Road.
REQUESTED BY: Muskika Development, Inc,
Attn. Brian Kerr, 34 Balboa Coves, Newport
Beach, Ca 92663-3226.
Natalie Meeks, Public Works Department, gave the staff report, which is available in the
City Clerk's Office.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing, hearing no testimony, he closed the hearing.
Mayor Daly moved to approve the CEQA finding, Categorically Exempt, Class 5,
seconded by Council Member Kring. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 2000R-163 for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-163 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating that cedain easement for road, pipeline, public utility and
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 16
slope purposes located east of Fairmont Boulevard and north of Canyon Rim
(Abandonment No. 99-4A)
Roll call vote - 5 Ayes, no nays. Motion carried.
C2.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2000-00020:
OWNER: O.C.T.A., Attn: Rick Grebner, 550
South Main Street, Orange, CA 92863
AGENT: Chuck Hance, 828 West Vermont
Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 867 South Cottonwood Circle. Property is 0.195 acres located on
the west side of Cottonwood Circle, 280 feet west of the centerline of Citron
Street.
To reclassify subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural)
and the RS-7200 (Residential, Single-Family) Zones to CL (Commercial, Limited)
Zone to construct a parking lot for the abutting automotive dealership facility.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 2000-00020 GRANTED
(PC2000-70) (7 yes votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item at the City Council meeting of June 13, 2000, Item B10.
Review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by Mayor Daly and
Council Member McCracken.
Continued from the meeting of July 25, 2000, Item C6.
Mayor Daly informed that the Planning staff had provided a memo regarding some of the
questions regarding this item and a request to continue the item to September 19, 2000.
Mayor Daly asked staff to distribute to the residents in attendance, a copy of the staff
repod.
Greg Hastings, Planning Department, presented the staff report, which is available in the
City Clerk's Office.
Council Member Kring noted Mr. Hance informed there was a deadline of October to
exercise his option and she asked if the issue was continued, would he still have time to
exercise his option. Mr. Hastings answered affirmatively.
Mr. Hastings added that the Planning Commission would be considering another request
south of Coast Corvette, which was under consideration at next Planning meeting for a
storage facility and a component having to do with U-Haul truck rental on the same piece
of properly.
Council Member McCracken asked if the neighborhood park was only being considered
if the City allowed the parking lot. Mr. Fick said there was discussion in terms of the
merits of the open space use in that neighborhood, but Mr. Hance had indicated that he
was willing to negotiate with the City.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 17
Upon a question by Mayor Daly, Mr. White, City Attorney, informed that since this was a
continued public hearing, additional testimony could be accepted either at this meeting
or at the continued meeting.
Mayor Daly said he would suggest Council accept the staff recommendation to negotiate
with the applicant and to agendize the applicant's abandonment application, which was a
separate but related question. He said he would recommend continuing the rezoning
request to September 19, 2000. Mayor Daly asked Mr. Hance if he wished to address
the issue.
Chuck Hance, 828 West Vermont Avenue, said if the continuance would help find a
solution for everyone, he would support it. He noted his concern about extending it to
September 19th.
Mayor Daly explained that there was not a Council meeting scheduled until the 19th. Mr.
Fick suggested that staff would immediately work with the applicant.
Michelle Morton, spokesperson for the Citren/Haster Neighborhood Council, said that
after reviewing the memo from the Planning Department, they were in agreement with it.
Mayor Daly moved to accept Planning Department recommendations (3), motion carried
unanimously. The matter was continued to September 19, 2000.
C3.
PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2000-00376
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2000-00002
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2000-00023
AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
REQUESTED BY: City of Anaheim (Redevelopment Agency), 201 South
Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Ariahelm, CA 92805
LOCATION: Subject area consists of approximately 430 acres located along,
and surrounding, Anaheim Boulevard between Broadway to the north and the
Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway to the south.
General Plan Amendment No. 2000-00376 - A proposed amendment to the Land
Use Element of the General Plan to: a) redesignate properties from the General
Industrial, General Commercial, Medium Density Residential and Low Density
Residential designations to the Low-Medium Density Residential designation; b)
redesignate properties from the General Industrial, Business Office/Mixed
Use/Industrial, Commercial Professional, Medium Density Residential and Low-
Medium Density Residential designations to the General Commercial
designation; c) redesignate properties from the General Commercial, Medium
Density Residential, and Low Density Residential designations to the
Commercial Professional designation; and, d) redesignate propedies from the
General Commercial and Medium Density Residential designations to the
Special Park Site designation.
the South Anaheim Boulevard Commercial Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone which
would serve to: a) permit new land uses in the Overlay Zone area in addition to
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 18
those allowed under existing zoning; b) establish a design review process for
future development projects within the Overlay Zone area; c) adopt, by reference,
a Master Plan for public and private landscaped areas; d) restrict establishment
of additional locations for off-premises sales of alcoholic beverages, and; e)
adopt a sign amortization program which would require the removal
of freestanding signs not in conformance with the sign regulations contained
within the Anaheim Municipal Code after a 15-year amortization period.
Reclassification No. 2000-00023 - To reclassify subject area by combining the
South Anaheim Boulevard Commercial Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone with each
parcel's existing underlying zoning designation while removing certain properties
located north of Katella Avenue, east of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway, south of
the Southern California Code Amendment No. 2000-00002 - To amend Title 18
by establishing Edison Easement and west of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-
of-way from the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2000-00376, Exhibit
A, to City Council (PC2000~60) (5 yes votes, Commissioners Bostwick and
Boydstun abstained).
Recommended adoption of Code Amendment No. 2000-00002 to City Council.
Reclassification No. 2000-00023 Granted (PC2000-61).
Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Set for public hearing on June 20, 2000, due to GPA No. 2000-00376.
Mayor Daly noted staff recommendation was to continue the item to August 29, 2000
and he so moved. Motion carried unanimously.
C4,
PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 370
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-10
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4171
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 323
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW:
OWNER: California Drive-In Theaters, Attn: John Manavian, 120 Nodh
Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048
LOCATION: 1500 North Lemon Street. Property is 26.34 acres located at the
southeast corner of Lemon Street and Durst Street.
General Plan Amendment No. 370 - An amendment to the Land Use Element of
the General Plan to redesignate the subject property from the General Industrial
designation to the General Commercial designation.
Reclassification No. 99-00-10 - To reclassify subject property from the ML
(Limited Industrial) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone.
Conditional Use Permit No. 4171 - To construct a 294,632 square foot
commercial retail center including a home improvement store, health club, three
(3) drive-through fast food restaurants, two (2) full-service restaurants, a multi-
tenant pad building, and a freeway-oriented sign with waiver of (a) minimum
number of parking spaces, (b) minimum parking lot landscaping, and (c) required
dedication and improvement of right-of-way.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 19
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended adoption of Exhibit A for GPA No. 370 to City Council
(PC 2000-73) (6 yes votes, Commissioner Bostwick absent).
Granted Reclassification No. 99-00-10 (PC2000-74)(6 yes votes, Commissioner
Bostwick absent).
CUP NO. 4171 GRANTED (PC2000-75) (4 yes votes, Commissioners Koos and
Vanderbilt voted no, and Commissioner Bostwick absent).
Waiver of code requirement approved in pad, approving waiver (a) and
denying waivers (b) and (c) (4 yes votes, Commissioners Koos and Vanderbilt
voted no, Commissioner Bostwick absent).
Recommended certification to the City Council of EIR 323.
Informational item at the City Council meeting of June 20, 2000, Item B3 and set
for public hearing due to GPA 370.
Greg Hastings, Planning Department, gave the staff report, which is available in the City
Clerk's Office.
Discussion took place regarding the pedestrian walkways and the proposed restaurants.
Upon a question by Council Member Feldhaus, Mr. Hastings said two Planning
Commissioners asked the applicant to reorient the buildings to face inward and toward
the freeway. He said the applicant said it would not work and staff met with them and
found further information regarding the problem with accomplishing that.
Mr. Fick informed that the remaining issue to be focused on was the sign. He said staff's
recommendation was 25 feet, size of 125 square feet and they did not think it was
appropriate for the food stores to have prominent signs. He said there would be other
monument signs on site. He informed that the signage would return to Planning
Commission for approval.
Mayor Daly asked if the City had plans to work with Fullerton regarding the underground
utility lines at the freeway. Mr. Fick said he was not aware of discussions regarding that
and Mayor Daly said he wished to have follow up information on that subject.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing.
John Manavian, Pacific Theaters Realty Corporation, said they had attracted Lowe's for
the property, which would be a $50 to $60 million effort at the location. He gave a power
point presentation, a copy is available in the City Clerk's Office.
Discussion took place regarding signage and Mayor Daly suggested the signage be
limited, as much as possible, to just the major stores.
Mayor Daly asked if the developer was indicating that the sign the City's Planning
Director was recommending was unworkable for the project, adding that the staff should
meet with the developer again.
Mr. Manavian said they worked within the criteria given to them.
CITY OF ANAHEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 20
Mayor Daly asked if the signage had to be decided at this time and Mr. Fick responded
that the balance of the signage on the site went back to the Planning Commission. He
said they would be looking at what signage and height was needed on Lemon. He noted
the items Planning would decide would be final design, overall sign package, and where
the wall signs are located.
Mr. Manavian said the understanding was that the wall signs and the pad elevations
would return to Planning but they understood through the whole process that they could
put on the wall what they wanted for the project, it would be the final design and location.
He said he was confused about having to return to Planning Commission.
Joel Fick clarified that that the condition that the Planning Commission approved,
Condition No. 14, says that a comprehensive sign program for all signage shall be
submitted to the Zoning Division for Planning Commission review and approval as a
Report and Recommendation Item. He said that the Planning Commission had
approved, in concept, what was proposed but had asked to see the signage program
come back in final form.
Mr. Manavian said that hopefully after the Council meeting, there would be direction
regarding the height of the signs and they would deal with content or final details.
Mr. Fick said the conditional use permit did deal with a freeway-oriented sign, so the
height, square footage and the number of tenants on the sign should be addressed in
the CUP.
Mayor Daly suggested that the Council consider approving the project as recommended
by the Planning staff with the exception that Council approve the freeway pylon sign not
to exceed 30 feet in height and not to exceed 150 square feet.
Mr. Fick said he would suggest that the detail be left to the sign program that would
return to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Manavian asked that when the developer presented 35 feet, would the 30 feet be on
top of the 5 foot berm and Mayor Daly said he would define it 30 feet from the ground, 5
feet, plus 25 feet. Mr. Fick said sign height was measured from the equivalent grade.
Mayor Daly moved to approve the CEQA finding, Environmental Impact Report 323,
seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Daly moved to approve Resolution Nos. 2000-R164, 165 and 166, seconded by
Council Member McCracken.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-R164 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Anaheim
General Plan designated at Amendment No. 370, Exhibit A
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-165 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM finding and determining that the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of
CITY OF ANAtlEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 21
the Anaheim Municipal Code should be amended and that the boundaries of certain
zones should be changed.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-166 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM granting Conditional Use Permit No. 4171
Roll call vote - 5 ayes - 0 noes. Motion carried unanimously.
A short break was called and after the break, Item A27 was considered.
A27. CONTINUED CHARTER AMENDMENTS:
To consider possible ballot measures concerning Charter Amendments.
Mayor Daly moved to direct the City Clerk to prepare an impartial analysis of the ballot
measure for the proposed amendment to Section 703 of the City Charter relating to
special prosecutors, seconded by Council Member McCracken. Motion carried
unanimously.
City Attorney White explained the resolutions on the agenda were placeholders in case
the Council wished to consider additional ballot measures or reconsider or amend the
five previously approved measures.
Mayor Daly said that when he read the ballot language regarding the measure for the
special prosecutors, he wished to have the City Attorney re-word the measure and use
language that was more self-explanatory. He felt the previous language seen by the
Council implied that prosecution of criminal cases generally might cease or might be
limited and that was not the intent of the measure.
Mr. White suggested the wording read, "Shall Section 703 of the City Charter be
amended to provide that all criminal prosecutions shall be conducted by the City
Attorney or other public agency and prohibit the City Council from contracting with any
person to act as a special prosecutor in criminal cases".
Mr. White suggested Council could adopt a Resolution amending the previously adopted
Resolution for that ballot language.
Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 2000R-167 for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000R-167 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM to amend Resolution No. 2000R-156 ordering the submission of one
or more proposed amendments to the City Charter to the electors of said City at the
General Municipal Election to be held in said City on Tuesday, November 7, 2000.
Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Feldhaus said he would still like to see all the proposed amendments
put on the ballot.
CITY OF ANAIIEIM
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 22
Council Member Kring asked where the City Attorney stood on the Budon Bill and he
responded that he had provided a report that analyzed the content of the bill. He said if
the bill was signed into law, the most likely result would be that the City's Charter
provisions would apply to firefighters and the state statute would apply to police officers
with regard to the binding arbitration issue. He added that if the City ended up with two
different systems, the three proposed amendments would not invalidate the exemption
that the Burton Bill had built into it for Charter cities.
Council Member Kring asked if the Council could put a ballot issue on now and Mr.
White said yes.
Mr. White said his suggestion would be to do nothing due to the fact that the City was
unsure whether the legislation would be adopted and if it did, exactly in what form it
would be passed.
Council Member Feldhaus moved to place all proposed Charter amendments
recommended by the Charter Review Committee on the November 7, 2000 ballot.
Council Member Tait requested the amendments be voted on individually.
Council Member Feldhaus moved to place the proposed amendment for Section 502,
compensation, on the November ballot. Council Member McCracken seconded the
motion for purposes of discussion.
Roll call - ayes 1, Council Member Feldhaus. Noes - 4, Mayor Daly, Council Members
McCracken, Tait, Kring. Motion failed.
Council Member Feldhaus moved to place the proposed amendment for Section 503.5,
repealing term limits, on the November ballot. Motion seconded by Council Member
McCracken.
Roll call - ayes 2; Council Members Feldhaus and McCracken. Noes - 3; Mayor Daly,
Council Members Tait, Kring. Motion failed.
D. Report on Closed Session Actions:
City Attorney White said there was no report from Closed Session.
E. Council Communications:
Council Member Tait noted that discussion for Capital Improvements, Maag Ranch, La
Palma Park and budget items would be held at the meeting of August 29, 2000.
Council Member McCracken announced the Anaheim Ballet would be performing at
Pearson Pan~ on Saturday, August 12, 2000, at 8:00 P.M.
CITY OF ANAHE1M
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2000
PAGE 23
Council Member Kring offered condolences to John Lower, the City's Traffic and
Transportation Manager, on the loss of his Father last week.
Council Member Feldhaus asked the City Manager to report back on how to get the
community and the kids involved in initiating a skate park in the City of Anaheim.
Mayor Daly requested that a discussion on Neighborhood Advisory Council's be
agendized for the meeting of August 15, 2000.
Adjournment
No further business to come before the Council, Mayor Daly adjourned the August 8,
2000 Council meeting at 10:20 P.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Sheryll Schroeder, CMC
City Clerk