1993/07/27C£ty H&ll~ An&he~, C&lifoz'ni& - COUNCIL NI~S - JF..,Y 27, 1993 - 5:00
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Lisa Stipkovich
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was
posted at 4:30 p.m. on July 23, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all
items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly announced that the scheduled 3:00 p.m. workshop is cancelled and
will be rescheduled to another date.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session
to consider the following items:
a. To confer with its Attorney regarding pending litigation
pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) to wit:
Jones vs. City of Anaheim et al., Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 65-65-69.
b. To meet with and give directions to its authorized
representative regarding labor relations matters -
Government Code Section 54957.6.
c. To consider and take possible action upon personnel
matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.
d. To confer with its attorney regarding potential
litigation pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b) (1).
e. To consider and take possible action upon such other
matters as are orally announced by the City
Attorney, City Manager, or City Council prior to
such recess unless the motion to recess indicates
any of the matters will not be considered in closed
session.
MOTION: On motion by Council Member Daly, seconded by Council Member Pickler,
the City Council by unanimous vote of the members present waived the
applicable agenda posting requirements pursuant to Government Code Section
54954.2(b) (2) and added the following matter to the closed session portion of
the City Council agenda upon a finding that the need to consider and possibly
act upon such matters arose subsequent to the agenda being posted:
f. Guillory v. City of Anaheim, United States District
Court Case No. CV 85-2838 RG (Kx).
RECESS: By General Consent, the Council recessed into Closed Session.
(approximately 3: 12 p.m. )
527
C£t¥ Hall~ ~:~ahe£m~ Cal£forn£& - COUNCIL NINUT~$ - JULY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting.
(5:16 p.m. ).
INVOCATION: Mayor Daly asked that a moment of silence be observed in memory
of Chief of Police, Joseph Molloy who passed away suddenly at his office at
Police Headquarters this morning. Chief Molloy was the consummate
professional and was very devoted to his job, community and family. The City
is very saddened. Chief Molloy will be missed.
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tern Bob Simpson led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: DECLARATIONS OF RECOGNITION: Declarations of Recognition were
unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Wayne Casey and Karl
Kreutziger. Both men entered a burning house on May 21, 1993 in a selfless
attempt to search for victims as a result of which Marie Wallis was saved from
serious injury. Mrs. Wallis was also present in the Council Chamber today.
Mayor Daly and Council Members personally commended Wayne and Karl for their
unselfish act of heroism; Fire Operations Chief, Bob Hirst also expressed the
commendation of the Fire Department. The efforts made by the gentlemen
enabled the Fire Department to concentrate on extinguishing the fire thereby
minimizing the damage.
119: PRESENTATION - $500 GRAFFITI REWARD CHECKS: Mayor Daly announced that
five, $500 graffiti reward checks are to be presented today to Richard
Milligan, Bob Geidry, John Gibson, Thomas Aquino, Michael Provost, by Mr. John
Poole, the City's Code Enforcement Manager and Carolyn Griebe, the City's
Graffiti Consultant.
John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He is very pleased to have the five
individuals before the Council tonight. In the last few weeks, there has been
a reduction in graffiti incidents. He believes the reason Anaheim has less of
a problem than other communities is that Anaheim citizens get involved -
people like the individuals who are present today; Carolyn Griebe. She
presented the $500 checks to the five recipients which is a reward for
information they provided leading to the arrest and conviction of those
accused of graffiti vandalism. Several other people are receiving their
checks unanimously as well. Since the program began in 1989, forty-five $500
checks have been awarded.
Mayor Daly and Council Members congratulated the recipients.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,411,744.37 for the
period ending July 23, 1993, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were
approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment
Agency, Housing Authority and Public Financing Authority meetings.
(5:27 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:36 p.m. )
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: No items of public interest were addressed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS:
Public input received on Item All (see discussion under that item).
528
C£t¥ Hall, Anahe~a, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NINUT~$ - JULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to waive reading in full of all
ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of
July 27, 1993. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member
Pickler, seconded by Council Member Simpson, the following items were approved
in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished
each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member
Pickler offered Resolution No. 93R-160 for adoption. Refer to Resolution
Book.
Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken
as recommended: ~
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Susan Darshay for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 1, 1993.
b. Claim submitted by Michael Weldon Houghtaling, c/o Steven M. Hanna,
esq., for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City
on or about December 27, 1992.
c. Claim submitted by Regina Marx for bodily injury sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about April 14, 1993.
d. Claim submitted by Jameson T. Woodruff, c/o George J. Mankiewicz,
esq., for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City
on or about March 6, 1993.
e. Claim submitted by Mr. & Mrs. John A. chen for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 1,
1992 through May 31, 1993.
f. Claim submitted by Emma Vega for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about May 25, 1993.
g. Claim submitted by Raul Ortega Mejia for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 31, 1993.
h. Claim submitted by Senthil N. Kumar for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 12, 1993.
i. Claim submitted by Jim Flahive for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 17, 1993.
j. Claim submitted by Julia Davenport, c/o Robert J. Curtis, esq., for
bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about
April 25, 1993.
k. Claim submitted by Lawrence Brogdon for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 14, 1993.
1. Claim submitted by Vickie Lynn Gates for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 12, 1993.
529
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe~m~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NINUTE$ - ~ULY 27~ 1993 - ~:00 P.N.
m. Claim submitted by Aha Brook Animal Hospital, attn: Sarah Burguan,
for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or
about June 27, 1993.
n. Claim submitted by Eugene & Nadine Leyton for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 7,
1993.
o. Claim submitted by Francisco J. Martinez for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about February 28, 1993.
p. Claim submitted by Aristeo Aguilera, Jr. for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 24, 1993.
A2. 123: Approving the Second Amendment to the Agreement with King Pump &
Dewatering Corporation, in the amount 'of $300,000 for dewatering services, and
authorize the City Manager to execute said contract with authorization for one
additional renewal.
A3. 123: Approving a Cooperative Agreement with the City of Fullerton to
reimburse Anaheim for 33-1/3 percent of consultant services to coordinate the
SR-91 HOV Freeway improvement project.
A4. 169: Approving a Notice of Completion of the construction of State
College Boulevard Street Improvements from Via Burton Street to Romneya Drive
by R.J. Noble Company, and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to
file said Notice of Completion.
A5. 123: Accepting the low bid of Artistic Maintenance, Inc., in an amount
not to exceed $63,811.00 for landscape maintenance at all Anaheim Water
Utility properties, in accordance with Bid No. 5163, for a two year period
beginning August 1, 1993.
A6. 123: Accepting the low bid of Artistic Maintenance, Inc., in an amount
not to exceed $15,703 for landscape maintenance at all Anaheim Electric
Utility properties, in accordance with Bid No. 5164, for a two year period
beginning August 1, 1993.
A7. 123: Accepting the low bid of Kim & Bill's Transportation, in the amount
of $142,564.48 per year, for buspool service from the Riverside and
Chino/Yorba Linda areas, in accordance with Bid No. 5160, and authorizing
execution of a contract for four years with one year optional extension.
A8. 123: Approving the Third Amendment to the Agreement with ARA Services
authorizing ARA to continue to provide food service at the Anaheim Convention
Center.
Mayor Daly. There was a question in terms of renewing the contract where the
language read that the City was obliged to attempt to negotiate with the
current provider, ARA. With this new agreement, which he understands is for
five years but could be terminated after three, he would like clarification if
there is any language where they would negotiate first with the incumbent or
is it different than the previous contract.
City Attorney White. To the extent that there is language in the current ARA
Agreement, they have fulfilled their obligation under that language. The City
Council legally is not obligated to enter into a contract with anyone. It is
up to the Council. He does not believe that there is similar language in the
530
C£tv Hal!~ Anahe£m~ Californ£a = COUNCIL #INIFfE$ - JULY 27e 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
new agreement. This will not be an issue the next time it comes up which will
be either in 3 years, if the City chooses to exercise the option to terminate
in three years, or at the end of the five-year term. He confirmed there is no
obligation to first negotiate with ARA.
Council Member Simpson. He asked if that is true of all their food service
contracts.
City Attorney White. If Council Member Simpson is talking about existing
contracts with Ogden at the Stadium, he will have to look at those. If there
is similar language, there is no legal obligation to extend those contracts.
One of the goals was at the end of three years to be in a position where they
could bid all of those together or bid them separately and have a "cafeteria
style" approach or lump them all together. That would be available three
years from now. There will be no obligations in any of the agreements at that
time which will prohibit the City three years from now from using that type of
approach. He further confirmed for Council Member Feldhaus that the Council
will be approving a contract that will have a term through January 31 of 1998;
however, the City will have the unilateral right at its absolute and sole
discretion to terminate the agreement effective as of January 31, 1996 by
giving notice to the concessionaire between June 1st of 1995 and September 1st
of 1995. That is the window in which notice would need to be given and if
given would terminate January 31, 1996. If not given, the contract would
continue through January 31, 1998.
Ag. 123: Approving an agreement with the Anaheim Union High School District
to transfer ownership of a City-owned restroom trailer located at 1800 West
Ball Road (Trident Center) to the school district.
Al0. 123: Approving the Third Amendment to the Master Consultant Agreements
with Anthony and Langford, Willdan and Associates, and Harris and Associates,
and the First Amendment to the Master Consultant Agreement with R.J.M. Design
Group, Inc., for consultant services on capital projects.
All. 123: Approving an agreement for English Today Institute's non-fee use
of Ponderosa Neighborhood Center to provide "English as a Second Language"
(ESL) classes for community residents.
Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. He asked if the English Today Institute
is a for-profit or non-profit organization. The agreement allows the free use
of the community center and to assume responsibility for the facilities. He
asked about cost of maintenance, utilities and other operating costs.
City Manager Ruth. It is a non-profit organization. There is no staff work
involved. A key is issued to open and close and to be responsible for
clean-up. There is very minimal cost for utilities only.
Al2. 103: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-160: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 89R-23 (REDISTRIBUTION OF
PROPERTY TAXES FOR ANNEXATION NO. 275-COAL CANYON.
123: Approving the agreement between the City and Coal Canyon Company for
wildland fire protection.
A13. 123: Approving the assignment of an agreement for standby ambulance
service for all major Stadium events, from Superior Ambulance, Inc., to
Laidlaw Medical Transportation Inc.
531
City Hall~ Anahe£m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - ,lilLY 27~ 1993 - 5=00 P.M.
Al4. 105: Receive and file Golf Advisory Commission'Minutes of the meeting
held May 26, 1993.
Al5. 184: Reviewing the need for continuing the Proclamation of the
existence of a Local Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on
January 19, 1993, concerning the Santiago Landslide and Pegasus Landslide in
the City of Anaheim, and taking no action to terminate the local emergency at
this time.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-160 for adoption:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-160 duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. NOTIONS CARRIED.
Al6. 105: BOARDS/COMMISSlONS-APPOINTMENT/REAPPOINTMENT TO TERMS EXPIRING
JUNE 30, 1993:
This matter was continued from the meeting of June 29, 1993 to this date.
Mayor Daly. There are eight separate boards and commissions where
reappointments/appointments are necessary to be made. Some of the persons who
had been serving no longer wish to serve while others have expressed a desire
to be reappointed. At this time, he is going to recommend continuing the
Library Board appointments for one week.
LIBRARY BOARD - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997 (Dahl, Taylor):
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue reappointments/appointments to
the Library Board for one week. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion.
MOT I ON CARR I ED.
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMISSION - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997 (Clark,
Kennedy ):
Council Member Hunter. He renominated Jimmy Kennedy to serve on the Budget
Advisory Commission.
Council Member Simpson. Dick Clark has reluctantly resigned from the Budget
Advisory Commission to take on duties as president of the Chamber of Commerce.
Council Member Simpson thereupon nominated Mary Knoll Benner.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to approve the reappointment of Jimmy
Kennedy and the appointment of Mary Knoll Benner to the Budget Advisory
Commission £or the terms expiring June 30, 1997. Council Member Simpson
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997
(Perreira, Renner):
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint both Cheryl Perreira and
Doug Renner to the Community Redevelopment Commission for the terms ending
June 30, 1997. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997 (Dexter, Tafolla):
Mayor Daly. He noted that later on the agenda the Council is accepting the
resignation of Steve Staveley from the Community Services Board. With the
532
City Hall, Anaheim, California -COUNCIL MINUTES- JULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
vacancy created by Mr. Dexter and Staveley there will-then be two vacancies to
fill.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint Patricia Tafolla to the
Community Services Board and to continue appointment on the Dexter vacancy for
one week. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
HOUSING COMMISSION - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997 (Gold, Patino):
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint Marvin Gold and Margaret
Patino to the Housing Commission for the new terms expiring June 30, 1997.
Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
PLANNING COMMISSION - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30 1997 (Boydstun, Messe):
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint Phyllis Boydstun and
Robert Messe to the Planning Commission for the terms ending June 30, 1997.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1997 (Kazarian, Stanton,
Wi seman ):
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint Bob Kazarian, Dale Stanton
and L. Ward Wiseman to the Public Utilities Board for the terms ending
June 30, 1997. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
SENIOR CITIZENS COMMISSION - NEW TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1996 (Hawley,
MacLaren, Sarno):
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to reappoint George MaClaren and Ralph
Sarno to the Senior Citizens Commission for the terms ending June 30, 1996.
Council Member Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to continue the Hawley vacancy on the
Senior Citizens Commission for one week to August 3, 1993. Council Member
Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Al7. 105: RESIGNATION FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD UNSCHEDULED VACANCY:
Accepting the resignation of Mr. Steve Staveley and authorizing the City Clerk
to post a notice of unscheduled vacancy for the Community Services Board for
the Staveley term ending June 30, 1995.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to accept the resignation with regrets and
that the City Clerk post the unscheduled vacancy. Council Member Feldhaus
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
thanking him for his dedicated service on the Community Services Board.
It was also determined that the appointment to this unscheduled vacancy will
be scheduled on the Council agenda of August 10, 1993.
ITEMS BI - B4 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ME~ETING OF JULY 8, 1993.
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS JULY 27, 1993~
B1. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4226, CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 3.'
OWNER: Gary & Theresa Samples
1719 West Cris Ave Anaheim 92804
533
C£ty Hall, ~nahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL M!NIFTE$ - ~JLY 27, 1993 - 5g00 P.M.
AGENT: FRED BRETZ
1719 West Chris Ave Anaheim 92804
LOCATION: 1719 West Cris Ave. Anaheim 92804
north side of Cris Avenue, west of Euclid Street.
Waiver of maximum fence height to retain 7-foot high block wall.
DENIED VARIANCE - ZA93-41.
B2. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4227, CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 3:
OWNER: Pinch Chich & Norma S. Wu
567 Peralta Hills Drive, Anaheim 92807
AGENT: Moriumi Shimonura
10601 Morado Drive, Orange CA 92669
LOCATION: 267 Peralta Way
2.3 acres on the west side of Peralta Way
Waiver of maximum fence height within required setbacks and yards
to construct an 8 foot high wrought iron fence with 9.5 foot high
pilasters.
GRANTED CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 3
GRANTED VARIANCE NO. 4227 - ZA93-42
B3. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4228, NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Northwest Motor Welding
6309 N.E. Columbia Blvd
Portland Oregon 97218
AGENT: Direct Manufacturing
3839 East Coronado Street Anaheim 92807
LOCATION: 511 East LaPalma Avenue
.94 acre at the northeast corner of Sabina Street and LaPalma Ave.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to retain an existing
industrial building.
GRANTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
GRANTED VARIANCE NO. 4228 - ZA93-43
B4. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4229, NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: P.Y.B Bldg Corp & Youth Fund of So Calif
Yorba Linda CA 92686
Att: Donald F. Jeanson. Trustee
LOCATION: 303 West Lincoln Avenue
1.9 acres with frontages on the north side of Lincoln Avenue, and
south side of Chartres Street.
Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces to expand an existing
masonic lodge facility.
GRANTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
GRANTED VARIANCE NO. 4229 - ZA93-44
Council Member Feldhaus. He expressed a concern that 374 parkin~ spaces are
required and only 124 are being proposed. Questions were posed to staff which
were answered by the Zoning Administrator Annika Santalahti. The parking
study was provided. Part of the reason the Traffic Engineer concurred
relative to parking was that the hours of operation of the lodge are not
regular business hours.
After additional questions and a brief discussion, Council Member Feldhaus
requested a review of the Planning Commission's decision concurred in by
Council Member Pickler. Therefore, a public hearing will be scheduled at a
later date.
END OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS
534
C£t¥ Ha~l~ Anaheim, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIl, MI~S - ~JLY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
B5. 179: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3581:
Request for rehearing and Declaration of Merit submitted by Floyd
L. Farano, on behalf of Anaheim Memorial Hospital, concerning
Conditional Use Permit No. 3581, for automotive repair facility at
8205 E. Santa Aha Canyon Road (Pep Boys).
MOTION: For purposes of discussion, Mayor Daly moved to approve the request
for rehearing. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Hunter moved to deny the request for
rehearing.
The City Attorney interjected and explained that only one motion can be
entertained at a time.
Mayor Daly. One concern he has if there is to be another hearing is that a
time certain be set which both parties can live with - that they fix a date
and not allow any continuances or schedule jockeying and that only new and
different evidence be introduced because there has already been an extensive
hearing.
Council Member Feldhaus. He feels it would be appropriate to ask questions of
both parties. The request for the rehearing is open ended with .no date.
Council Member Hunter. The Council voted 3 to 2 on June 22, 1993, to bring a
Pep Boys to Anaheim Hills. It is something that is needed. There is no such
service being provided within a four or five mile radius. It will bring sales
tax dollars to the City as well as many jobs. In these days of recession,
both the City and the Chamber of Commerce should be working hand in hand to
bring business into the City. He cannot believe the Council would be voting
for a rehearing and feels that the Chamber should be lined up in support of
Pep Boys. The Council should deny the request and let Pep Boys build the
facility. They have mitigated all of the concerns that could possibly be
mitigated.
City Attorney White. If there is a rehearing, it would be a new hearing and
all evidence presented fresh to the Council. It is incumbent upon both
parties to present their case as a new case.
Council Member Feldhaus. He does not think he is ready to agree to a whole
new rehearing but would be willing to hear any additional evidence.
City Attorney White. There is no mechanism that allows the Council to do
that. The declaration that was prepared and submitted requesting the
rehearing, the summary of what the evidence relates to is petroleum product
spills and hazardous materials from other sites. If the Council wants that
expanded upon at this time, he does not have a legal problem in having the
applicant come forward.
Floyd Farano, Attorney representing Anaheim Memorial Hospital, Farano and
Kieviet, 2100 S. State College Blvd., Anaheim. During the last hearing, a man
named Gary Carlin alluded to the potential of environmental spills having
taken place by various Pep Boys stores and various citations issued in
Southern California. Because of the difficulty in obtaining that information,
it was not available to them at that time and could not have been available.
They learned the depth of that information and those occurrences after the
past hearing. It is that information they want to bring to the Council's
attention. It involves serious environmental questions and problems that may
535
C_it¥ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
be created by the facility and have been created at other locations. He
respectfully requests that the hearing take place on August-24, if the Council
votes in favor. He will be in Texas taking the bar exam on August 17, 1993
(the date which staff indicated would be sufficient allowing for noticing and
advertising of the public hearing). Secondly, the recovery of the information
is extremely complicated and expensive. They were told it will take
approximately 3 weeks to recover that information.
A1 Meloro, National Director, Site Development, Pep Boys. It seems to him
that Mr. Farano would have had enough time to gather his information since the
original hearing was postponed from May 18 and then held on June 22, 1993. By
then, Mr. Farano should have had the information. Today is ten weeks from
when the meeting was first postponed. He reiterated he feels Mr. Farano had
sufficient time to gather the information unless after he was denied at the
June 22, 1993 hearing, he wanted to turn over some rocks. He requested that
the Council deny the request for a rehearing on the basis that the Planning
Commission approved the project as well as staff and the Council. He cannot
be present for a hearing on August 24, 1993, but could, if necessary, come on
August 17.
City Attorney White. He asked a question of Mr. Meloro. Would Pep Boys, if a
rehearing is granted, be willing to stipulate that only evidence taken at the
rehearing would relate to the new grounds being submitted by the hospital to
avoid having a rehearing on all the other evidence. Would Mr. Meloro agree to
limiting any hearing, if it is granted, to only the new issue that is being
raised.
A1 Meloro. They have a right to rehear the whole case. He would like to have
the whole case heard.
Mayor Daly. There is a motion and second to allow a rehearing. If granted, a
decision must be made on a date. He asked if it was possible to hold a
rehearing on August 10, 1993; City Clerk Sohl. A public hearing on that date
would just barely allow enough time for proper and legal notification.
City Attorney White. He noted that Mr. Farano stated the results of what he
is planning to present would not be available until August 17.
Floyd Farano. Answering Council Member Pickler, he stated he cannot represent
to the Council that it will be possible to have the information available by
August 10. He talked to the environmental engineer on Monday who told him it
would take approximately 3 weeks. He did not ask if it could be done any
sooner. His impression is that the information comes from a number of
agencies. He will try but he cannot say he will have what he needs prepared
by August 10.
Further discussion followed between Council Members, Mr. Farano and Mr. Meloro
regarding a possible date for a rehearing. Council Member Pickler stated he
would consent to a rehearing if it is heard on August 10. The Council should
make the determination on when the hearing is to be held. Mr. Meloro stated
that August 10 was acceptable to him, but expressed his displeasure with the
fact that Mr. Farano is just starting to gather information he says he needs
for a rehearing and thus questions if a rehearing is really necessary.
City Attorney White. If the rehearing is granted, the Council will be doing
so because they are making a finding that there was a lack of due process and
unfairness to the hospital in the last hearing. He then explained the
problems that would arise should the rehearing be granted and setting a
536
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe~a~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINIFTES - ~YLY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
specific date but if the attorney for the hospital is not Prepared at that
time, it would be incumbent upon the Council to grant an additional period of
time. Answering the Mayor, what he would recommend is that the Council set
August 24 as the date for the rehearing unless a representative from Pep Boys
is able to articulate a reason why he is unable to attend. If the hearing is
unable to be held on August 24, they may want to look at a date in September,
the first available date being September 14, since the Council is not
scheduled to meet on August 31 and September 7.
Council Member Pickler asked relative to lack of fairness, is it lack of
fairness on the applicant if they do not have a rehearing.
City Attorney White. The Council is going to decide if there was a lack of
fairness in the last hearing. The Council may decide there was no unfairness
and deny the rehearing. He is only indicating if they vote for the rehearing,
by doing so, implicit in the decision is the finding there was unfairness.
Council Member Pickler asked if Mr. Farano would be ready by August 10; Mr.
Farano answered no.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to approve the request for rehearing with
no date attached. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Council Member Pickler stated having a date attached
to the motion will have a bearing on the way he votes. He will not go out to
August 24.
Mayor Daly thereupon called for the question on the motion which he made
seconded by Council Member Simpson to approve the request for a rehearing
only.
The motion failed to carry by the followinq vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Simpson, Daly
Feldhaus, Hunter, Pickler
The request for a rehearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 3581 requested by
Anaheim Memorial Hospital was thereupon denied.
B6/B7. 155: REQUEST FOR REHEARING - THE DISNEYLAND RESORT -ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 311; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 331; THE DISNEYLAND R~.SORT
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 92-1 (INCLUDING ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, A DESIGN
PLAN AND CUID~LINE~ AND A PUBLIC FACILITI~ PLAN) ~ AND ANAgm. IM O0MM~ROIAL
RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL HEIGHT ORDINANCE:
To consider a request dated July 16, 1993 from the Anaheim City School
District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort submitted by John E. Brown,
Best, Best & Krieger, 400 Mission Square, Riverside, CA 92502-1028.
MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved to deny the request for a rehearing
submitted by the Anaheim City School District on the Disneyland Resort from
John E. Brown, Best, Best & Krieger. Council Member Simpson seconded the
mot ion. MOTION CARRIED.
To consider a request dated July 16, 1993 from the Anaheim Union High School
District for a rehearing of the Disneyland Resort submitted by John E. Brown,
Best, Best & Krieger.
537
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe~a~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NI~S - ~ULY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
City Clerk Sohl announced that letter dated July 22, 1993 has been received
from Best, Best & Krieger withdrawing their request for a rehearing on the
Disneyland Resort submitted on behalf of the Anaheim Union High School
District.
MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to permit withdrawal of the request for
rehearing on the Disneyland Resort submitted by John E. Brown, Best, Best &
Krieger on behalf of the Anaheim Union High School District. Council Member
Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
B8. 179: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3390:
REQUESTED BY: Dwyer J. Beesley, 125 N. Gilbert $206, Anaheim, CA 92801
The property is located at 209 N. Gilbert Street and the petitioner is
requesting an extension of time retroactive to May 21, 1993 and to
expire May 21, 1994 to comply with conditions of approval. Conditional
Use Permit is for the construction of a 9-unit affordable senior
citizens apartment complex with waivers of minimum building site area
per dwelling unit, maximum structural height, minimum structural setback
from the street, and minimum setback to single family residential
zoning.
This item was carried forward from the meeting of July 20, 1993 to this date,
due to a tie vote on July 20.
Council Member Hunter moved to approve the requested extension of time on
Conditional Use Permit 3390 retroactive to May 21, 1993 to expire May 21,
1994. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White asked if the motion includes all
of the additional conditions referred to in the July 13 staff report that
relates to the code requirements that have been adopted since the date the
project was originally approved.
Council Member Hunter thereupon incorporated the additional conditions in
staff report dated July 13, 1993 as part of his motion to approve the
requested extension of time.
Mayor Daly. He is going to vote against the extension which would be
consistent with his previous votes.
council Member Pickler. He has no problem with the project, but if it is
approved there are five or six other single-family residences in the immediate
ar0a that will go to tho s~amo typ~ pr~joet. It will inundato ~ho aroa.
Traffic and circulation is unbearable even at this time.
Miriam Kaywood, Anaheim resident. The street is not only being inundated but
the project calls for four major waivers. Ail over the City, senior citizen
buildings are sitting vacant. People cannot afford $500, $600 or $700 for a
one-bedroom apartment. The need is to keep the City where it is liveable.
A vote was then taken on the foreqoing motion as amended:
AYES ..
NOES:
Feldhaus, Hunter, Simpson
Pickler, Daly
AFTER RECESS: Chairman Daly reconvened the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency.
(6:30 p.m.)
538
Hall, Anahe:L~ Cal£fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
D1. 161: CONTINUED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - REDEVELopMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL:
To consider the proposed allocation of public funds for the purpose of paying
all or part of the value of the land for, and the cost of the installation and
construction of, certain buildings and other public improvements to be jointly
owned by the City and the Agency, to wit, City Hall West and appurtenant
improvements, pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement, as amended, by and
between the City and the Agency (the "Agreement"). The purpose of the joint
public hearing is to receive testimony from the public regarding the proposed
expenditure of Agency funds. Public Hearing continued from the meetings of
July 13, and July 20, 1993 to this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - June 29 and July 6, 1993
RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV) ..... : Making certain findings with respect to City
Hall West.
RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV) ..... : Approving First Amendment of Cooperation
Agreement for City Hall West.
RESOLUTION NO. (REDEV} ..... : Approving the Co-Tenancy Agreement for City
Hall West.
RESOLUTION NO. (COUNCIL) ..... : Making certain findings with respect to City
Hall West.
RESOLUTION NO. (COUNCIL} ..... : Approving First Amendment of Cooperation
Agreement for City Hall West.
RESOLUTION NO. {COUNCIL) ..... : Approving the Co-Tenancy Agreement for City
Hall West.
City Clerk Lee Sohl. She announced that the intent of staff is to withdraw
the first public hearing and reschedule it at a later date.
Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. The reason for
requesting a rescheduling of the subject public hearing, after consultation
with Bond Counsel, they would like to restructure part of the deal which will
necessitate renoticing of the public hearing and resubmitting the matter again
as an agenda item in the future.
MOTION: Agency/Council Member Daly moved that this item be removed from the
Agenda at the request of staff. Agency/Council Member Simpson seconded the
mot ion. MOTION CARRIED.
Before adjourning the Redevelopment Agency, the Graphics Program for Anaheim
Plaza was again before the City Council for a decision. (See Public Hearing,
Item D2 of July 27, 1993, City Council meeting.)
At the conclusion of the public hearing before the City Council wherein the
Graphics Program was approved with certain amendments (see Item D2, 7-27-93),
the Redevelopment Agency meeting by general Agency consensus was adjourned.
(6:55 p.m.)
SWEAR-IN OF THOSE TESTIFYING AT PUBLIC HEARINGS:
539
C£ty Hall, ~nahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NI~S - ~ULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
The City Attorney announced that it is appropriate at this time for all those
intending to testify at any or all of the public hearings including staff be
sworn in at this time.
Those testifying were requested to stand by the City Clerk and asked to raise
their right hand. The oath was then given.
D2. 155: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NO. 316,
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 92-93-05, WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL. USE
PERMIT NO. 3566:
OWNER: California State Teachers' Retirement System, a Public Entity,
7667 Folsom Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95826
AGENT: O'Connor Realty Advisors, Inc., Attn: Mike Strle, Vice
President, 11601 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90025
Donahue Schriber, 3501 Jamboree Road, Ste. 300, Attn: Brad Deck, Vice
President, Development, South Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 444-600 North Euclid Street. Property consists of two
irregularly-shaped parcels of land: Parcel 1 consists of approximately
38.25 acres bounded on the north by Crescent Avenue, on the east by
Loara Street, on the south by the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5), and
on the west by Euclid Street (Anaheim Plaza). Parcel 2 consists of
approximately 8.82 acres located at the northeast corner of Crescent
Avenue and Euclid Street, having approximate frontages of 620 feet on
the north side of Crescent Avenue and 640 feet on the east side of
Euclid Street.
To consider certification of Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
No. 316 (Anaheim Plaza Project).
To reclassify subject property (Parcel 1) from CG (Commercial, General)
to CL (Commercial, Limited).
To permit the phased construction of a commercial retail center with an
indoor entertainment facility, an automotive repair and parts
installation facility in conjunction with a major retail tenant, semi-
enclosed restaurants (outdoor dining/food court), and an
auditorium/community meeting room with waiver of minimum structural
setback abutting an arterial highway, permitted encroachment into
required yard areas, landscaping of required yards, parking lot
landscaping, maximum sign area, maximum number of freestanding signs,
maximum area of freestanding signs, minimum distance between
freestanding signs and/or roof signs, maximum height of freestanding
signs, maximum number of roof signs, maximum area of roof signs, maximum
height of roof signs and maximum height of illuminated roof signs.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Final Supplemental EIR NO. 316 CERTIFIED
Reclassification No. 92-93-05 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC93-72) (4 yes
votes, 2 abstained, and 1 absent).
CUP NO. 3566 GRANTED (PC93-73) .
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 93-01 CONTINUED to the Planning Commission
meeting of July 26, 1993.
Appealed by the agent, Donahue Schriber. Set for City Council public
hearing this date (See Item D2).
This item was continued from the meeting of July 20, 1993 to this date.
City Attorney White explained that the public hearing portion had previously
been closed at the meeting of July 20, 1993. However, the Council and Agency
can address questions to the agent for the applicant or anyone else. The
540
C£t¥ Hallr .~tnahe£~_, C&l£forn£a - COUNCIL NINIFTES - ~ULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.~4.
public hearing portion should not be reopened. Other members of the public
could have been misled they would have been given an opportunity to testify.
Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. There was a
question raised last week regarding fast food uses and she responded that any
fast food uses would require a CUP. She needs to correct that - drive thru
fast food uses would require a CUP. However, fast food uses would be
permitted as related uses. She has discussed with the O'Connor Group and
Donahue Schriber imposing restrictions specifically on pads A, B and C - the
pads directly along Euclid on the southern portion. They are willing to
restrict fast food uses on that area which he believes the Mayor's question
was implying. That might be an additional condition of approval of the
entitlements, that there be no fast food uses on pads A, B and C. There could
be sit down or other retail uses but nothing dealing with' fast food. Other
than that, fast food is allowed in the food court or in the northerly pads.
Last week, there were also questions raised by Mr. Jeff Kirsch regarding solid
waste and traffic problems in regard to the EIR. She has a statement she
would like to pass out to the Council. Both issues were reviewed and
discussed in the EIR. She read the response into the record (Response to
Public Comments - Final EIR for Anaheim Plaza Project - made a part of the
record). The final paragraph stated, "The comments raised no additional
issues of significant impact which were not addressed in the EIR, and no
additional environmental documentation for the project is required in response
to these comments".
Mayor Daly asked if she was suggesting that they incorporate the language
regarding prohibition of fast food uses on pads A, B and C; Mrs. Stipkovich
answered that it be a condition of approval.
Mayor Daly asked how many garage bays are proposed at Walmart.
Mrs. Stipkovich. To her knowledge, they have not been able to get an exact
number. They will be seeing the project again at the design development stage
and even after the construction drawing stage it will come back to the
Redevelopment Agency.
Brad Deck, Donahue Schriber. He believes there will be six service bays for
the Walmart Building intended for automotive use. The bays face south towards
the freeway and it is proposed that they be screened. He clarified it is a
condition that was imposed as a planning condition. They will be screened
from Loara as well as the freeway. People will be able to access Walmart from
Loara and then into the service bays.
During further questioning, Mr. Deck reported that to the best of his
kn0wled~e, all retail automotive sales will 0ccur inside the facility. The
service bays are strictly for service and not retail sales. He does not know
if they restrict against selling in service bays. Service bays are for work
to be done by Walmart employees on customer cars, not by customers on their
own cars.
Mayor Daly. He saw a newspaper story about a new Walmart design, one that is
environmentally sensitive with solar panels, etc. He asked if Mr. Deck had an
idea which type of Walmart is planned for the site.
Brad Deck. It will be a traditional Walmart store. The store the Mayor is
referring to is being tested and whether or not they are planning to
incorporate some of those technologies in the plaza Walmart building, he
541
C4ty Hallf Anahe4mr Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - 01JL¥ 27r 1993 - 5~00 P.M.
cannot say. It would not affect the site plan. This is their standard
prototype building. It is designed for future expansion so they could add
30,000 square feet of in store building space.
Relative to the additional anchor stores, Mrs. Stipkovich stated she would
hope after the Walmart deal is signed, they will be able to make announcements
on the others shortly thereafter, she would think within the next 3 months.
Brad Deck. Mervyns is committed to stay in the project. On the other two
anchor stores (25,000 square foot stores), they are about 99% of the way
through lease documents with those stores. He believes they will be in a
position to make an announcement in 30 days. Relative to the development to
the north, they are looking at a number of different concepts. There is
interest from two supermarkets and three or four promotional type tenants that
would range in size from 25,000 to 40,000 square feet. They are trying to
figure out the most desirable tenant mix and which tenants have a high level
of interest that they can commit to a lease.
Mayor Daly. Relative to pads D and E in the front of the neighborhood center,
one looks like a drive-thru possibility. He asked if there was a chance that
both could be drive-thru fast food.
Brad Deck. There is a chance that both could be and current thinking is they
would like to accommodate a fast food user on the corner and either a retail
building or a financial service center, savings & loan, bank branch or
whatever on the other parcel (pad E).
Lisa Stipkovich. The site plan they are approving as the Agency and the
Council, if there are any significant deviations, it would require another
approval by the Agency. Any major modifications to the site plan would come
back for Agency approval.
Mayor Daly. There was a person who earlier expressed an interest in speaking.
He asked the City Attorney if he was comfortable with additional public
testimony.
City Attorney White. He is not sure he would be comfortable in reopening the
hearing, but he believes Mr. Bob Kazarian indicated a desire to speak. The
Council may wish to ask a question of him as a Public Utilities Board Member.
Mayor Daly called upon Mr. Kazarian.
Bob Kazarian, 1463 Westmont Drive, immediately west of the Anaheim Plaza
Shopping Mall. For the past several years, the neighboring residents have
watched the mall decay and lose its luster to compete. At one time it was a
~reat place to shop with a ~ood variety of stores. He commended the
Redevelopment staff and Agency for moving the redevelopment of the plaza
forward. They have the best redevelopment plan they can get. However,
together with many of his neighbors, he has a concern about traffic on
Westmont. It is a short street that runs east and west between West Street
and Loara. It serves as the ingress and egress to a single-family residential
area. They are proud of their homes and a desire to maintain their
residential atmosphere. The street currently carries more traffic than they
would like. It is used as a shortcut to Euclid. There are other east/west
streets better able to handle the capacity they have at present. He has
petitions signed by some of the neighbors which he would like to submit. He
is requesting that the City Council instruct the City Traffic Engineer to make
a study of the traffic situation in and around Westmont Drive and develop a
542
C£t¥ Hall~ Anah~£m~ Cal£~orn£a - COUNCIL MINIFTE$ - JULY 27~ 1993 - 5~00 P.M.
plan along with the redevelopment of the shopping center to restrict the
traffic using the street and possibly even consider a method to close off
Westmont at Loara.
Mayor Daly. He asked for clarification if Mr. Kazarian was requesting that
the City Traffic Engineering staff evaluate the potential of closure and
report back to the City Council at some future date.
Bob Kazarian. Not necessarily a closure, just a method to restrict traffic
flow on Westmont to stop shortcut traffic that goes to Euclid through the
area.
Mayor Daly. Staff has suggested an additional condition on the conditional
use permit that would prohibit fast food on pads A, B and C on the east side
of Euclid on the west side of the Anaheim Plaza project.
Mayor Daly. He asked Mrs. Stipkovich if she would see to it that the
necessary analysis is done regarding the closure of Westmont and a report
prepared; Lisa Stipkovich. She will coordinate that with the City Traffic
Department.
Council Member Pickler. It is his understanding that they are just going to
look at the possibility at this time; Lisa Stipkovich. They will come back
with an analysis.
MOTION: On motion by Council Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member
Simpson the City Council certified Final Supplemental EIR No. 316 as being in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and adopting a
Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 93R-161 for adoption, approving
Reclassification No. 92-93-05, subject to City Planning Commission's
conditions and amendments and offering Resolution No. 93R-162 for adoption,
granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3566, prohibiting fast food on pads, A, B
and C. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-161: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF
CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
RESOLUTION NO. 93R-162: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITION;iL USE PERMIT NO. 3566.
vote., ,o.n l~es0~ut~0n Nos. 951;-161 and ~;~R-~6~ ~or adopt~on~
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-161 and 93R-162 duly passed and
adopted.
By General Consent the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency was reconvened.
GRAPHICS PROGRAM- ANAHEIM PLAZA:
543
City llall, Anahe£a, Ca].£fornia - COUNCIT~ MX~$ = JU~Y 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Chairman/Mayor Daly. The Agency/Council heard a presentation on the Graphics
Program last week. The signage is very striking and should result in a
1 andmark project.
MOTION: Agency/Council Member Simpson moved to approve the Graphics Program
for Anaheim Plaza submitted as conditioned by the Community Redevelopment
Commission. Agency/Council Member Pickler seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, City Clerk Sohl asked for clarification that the
Graphics Program is being approved as it was proposed at the last meeting with
the three clarifications brought forward by Simon Andrews of Graphics
Solutions as outlined in letter dated July 20, 1993 to the City Clerk,
re: Anaheim Plaza/CUP 3566/Appeal of Approvals related to the Graphics Program
which was made a part of the record; Agency/Council Member Simpson answered
yes.
A vote was then taken on the motion to approve the Graphics Program, including
the three clarifications as articulated at the meeting of July 20, 1993:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Pickler, Simpson, Daly
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter
ADJOURNMENT: The Anaheim Redevelopment Agency meeting was adjourned.
(6:55 p.m.)
D3. PUBLIC HEARING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 92-93-08, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
3603 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Pierce Cranstoun Ommanney, Mary Fifield Ommanney, 1019 W. La
Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801
AGENT: Denny Muth, 373 N. Center Street, Orange, CA 92666
LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 1019 West La Palma Avenue
and is approximately 0.56 of an acre located at the northwest corner of
La Palma Avenue and Leisure Court. The request is to reclassify the
subject property from the RS-A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) and CL
(Commercial, Limited) Zones to the CO (Commercial Office and
Professional) Zone. The Conditional Use is to permit a 2,548-square
foot, 24-hour, residential recovery home within an existing office
building and in conjunction with a previously approved remedial
educational/ vocational facility.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 92-93-08 GRANTED (PC93-66) (6 yes votes, I no
vote).
CUP NO. 3603 GRANTED, for 2 years (to expire 6/14/95) (PC93-67) (4 yes
votes, 3 no votes).
Approved Negative Declaration.
HEARING SET ON: The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by Carol
Larson, Sunshine Nursery School and public hearing scheduled this date.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - July 15, 1993
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - July 12, 1993
Posting of property - July 12, 1993
PLANNING STAFF INPUT:
See staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 14, 1993.
544
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. He briefed the proposal as outlined
in the staff report and clarified for the Council that there will be a total
of 19 maximum in the recovery home including what would be a caretaker.
The City Attorney then outlined the format to be used for the public hearing.
Mayor Daly. Because the item was appealed from the Planning Commission to the
City Council, this is a brand new public hearing. He would encourage a
spokesperson from each side to speak for those in favor or against with a ten
minute time limit for each side. He asked to hear from the applicant.
Dr. Mary Ommanney, Psychological Guidance Center, 1019 W. La Palma, Anaheim.
She came to the meeting last week to get recommendations on how to present
their information. She was told they could provide a written letter to ask
for a continuation because they have not been able to get their presentation
together. They are asking for a continuation on the CUP but for the item of
zoning (reclassification) to be considered separately.
Mayor Daly asked if a letter has been received asking for a continuance of the
public hear ing.
Dr. Ommanney. She was told by someone in the City Clerk's Office that it was
not possible to do so in writing.
City Clerk Leonora Sohl. If her office confused Dr. Ommanney, she apologizes;
however, several members of her staff did indicate to Dr. Ommanney that a
request for a continuation of a public hearing needs to be in writing. It is
standard practice.
Dr. Ommanney. Her request is to continue the public hearing on the
conditional use permit but to deal with the zoning issue (reclassification)
now.
City Attorney White. The Council has absolute discretion if they wish to
separate the two items and hold individual hearings. The Council may hear
testimony of those persons present tonight on the CUP. However, if the
applicant has not had an opportunity to gather its evidence together and
wishes more time, as a matter of practice, he recommends granting one
continuance to make sure each applicant is afforded a fair opportunity to
present evidence. The Council may want to open the hearing, receive any
testimony able to be presented tonight by either side and then continue the
hearing at least on the CUP to a later date at which time if there is
additional evidence presented by the applicant, opponents should again have
the opportunity to present opposition at that later date as well. The Council
could also postpone the whole matter and take all testimony at a later date.
Dr. Ommanney. She feels the first issue is whether the Council agrees to
divide the zoning issue from the conditional use and the second is that their
part be heard later and the other side maybe tonight or maybe later.
The City Attorney added maybe tonight and later on both.
Mayor Daly asked to hear from the appellants if they are comfortable with the
request.
Mr. Phillip Anthony, representing the appellants and other concerned citizens,
2157 Pacific Avenue, Costa Mesa. It is hard for them to understand why there
is a need for a continuance. The applicant was before the Planning Commission
545
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL NINUTES - ~YLY 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
for three separate hearings and has had ample notice Of this hearing and
should be totally prepared. They have worked hard to get ready for this
meeting and a lot of people are present, many with children. This affects a
large number of people in the area. They have presented letters and petitions
from over 300 people in stolid opposition. He hates to arbitrarily oppose a
continuance but he has a problem as to why. They have not heard any real
reason. Also, the appeal was against both the zone change and the conditional
use permit.
After further discussion between Council Members and the City Attorney
regarding the request for continuance and the Council's alternatives, Mayor
Daly stated that the public hearing will be conducted tonight and then
continued to a future date as well. They will hear testimony from the
applicant and the opponents.
Dr. Mary Ommanney. Her unfortunate position, because she was so sure she
could present a letter and not do this tonight, she currently has a waiting
room full of patients at the clinic and a group therapy. She does not have
anything to say at this time and is sorry if she misunderstood the procedures.
Mayor Daly asked if she made an effort to notify the other people that she was
going to ask for a continuance; Dr. Ommanney answered no.
Mayor Daly asked if that completed her presentation this evening; Dr. Ommanney
had nothing further to say. She asked if a summary of tonight's hearing will
be available.
City Attorney White answered no. However, an audio tape will be available in
the City Clerk's Office if she would like to review it between now and the
next meeting to which the public hearing is continued.
Dr. Ommanney asked if the continuance would be next week; City Attorney White
asked when she would want the continuance since she has requested it.
Dr. Ommanney asked that it be in two weeks. She then left the Council
Chamber.
Mayor Daly opened the public hearing.
PUBLIC D! SCUSS!ON -
IN FAVOR:
None
IN 0FFO~ITION~
Phillip Anthony. They feel there are very serious problems with
this application right back to the first day it was noticed. It
was referred to as a 24-hour residential recovery home. Not many
realized it was an alcohol rehabilitation program. The Planning
Commission considered it twice with no real opposition present and
asked the applicant to notify the neighbors. The applicant never
did so. Staff subsequently notified some of the neighbors. It
was at the third meeting before the Planning Commission that
opposition was able to be present. The Planning Commission was
trying to make it safe and approve the request on a 4 to 3 vote
with some interesting conditions. They approved the
546
C£t¥ Hall~ ~nahe£~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINIFF~S - ~JLY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
reclassification on a little better vote but it was only done to
facilitate the use. He urged the Council not to consider the item
separately.
Mr. Anthony then referred to his extensive letter dated July 23,
1993, previously submitted to the Council and made a part of the
record which explained the points in detail. He is going to brief
the highlights of the information contained in the letter. The
Council has also received letters and petitions delivered in
several pages totalling well over 300 people writing in
opposition. They are asking the Council to deny both the zone
change and the conditional use permit. There are five strong
reasons why the project is not justifiable and should not be
approved at the proposed location. The five reasons are as
follows.-
1. The 24-hour alcohol rehabilitation use would
not be compatible with and would adversely
affect the surrounding land uses which
includes homes, a nursery school, child day
care, medical offices and elementary schools.
2. The old house on the site is totally
inadequate in both size and configuration for
the 19 residents proposed: 18 alcoholics and
one "house mother".
3. The findings of facts by the Planning
Commission are seriously in error, apparently
due to misleading information presented to the
staff and Commission.
4. The conditions approved by the Planning
Commission in an attempt to protect the
neighbors would be ineffective and virtually
impossible for the City to monitor and
enforce.
5. Approval of this 24-hour alcohol
rehabilitation use would set an extremely bad
and dangerous precedent for this sensitive,
mostly residential area next to Anaheim
Memorial Hospital.
Mr. Anthony's letter (pages 2 through 6) then elaborated in detail
on the concerns related to each of the five reasons most of which
we~ b~ief~d in hig p~gentation. At the conclusion of his
extensive presentation, Mr. Anthony stated that they have asked a
select few of the concerned neighbors to give their first-hand
comments. He also asked for a show of hands of those present in
opposition. There were approximately fifteen.
Council Member Pickler. He understands on the CUP, but sees no
reason why the property should not be reclassified. The Planning
Commission voted 6 to 1 to approve the reclassification and 4 to 3
on the CUP. It is on La Palma and that zoning would seem to fit
in.
547
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULy 27, 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
Phillip Anthony. There is no other CO in the vicinity except for
the hospital and that is a very special use. The surrounding area
nearby is residential. A little CL but no CO. To make it CL
would be reasonable and consistent with the neighborhood.
Carol Larson, Owner/Operator, Sunshine Nursery School, 1035 W. La
Palma. The nursery school is immediately adjacent to the subject
property on the west side. Her license is for 40 children and
they normally have 30 to 40 children on weekdays 2 to 6 years of
age. A proposed alcohol rehabilitation home right next door would
not be compatible with a nursery school. If allowed to go in, it
would be a threat to her nursery school children and their
families and would very shortly destroy her business. The
Planning Commission was given misleading information and easy
promises by the applicant. The worst of these claims was there
would be no threat to the children because the alcoholics would be
away at work or treatment. That is not true. The children are at
the school Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. The
hours would overlap and the alcoholics would be coming and going
from the home. She questioned who is going to make sure that all
the alcoholics are gone all day, every work day. It is not the
right place for this use. For the sake of all in the surrounding
area, she urged the Council to vote to deny.
Bernadeen Scholl, 1665 Ord Way, Anaheim. She is the property
owner of all the adjacent land around the proposed site (the
parking lot next to the guidance center parking lot, the nursery
school and the adjoining duplex). She was not notified before by
the City or would have been present to appeal. She is suggesting
that the Council not allow the use. It is an unprofessional use
and an unprofessional way of caring for alcoholics. It is
substandard living. Nineteen people and with two bathrooms is not
good living. It will be creating a slum. It is a bad influence
in the neighborhood and setting a precedent for bad care in the
City. The people are in need of care, but in looking at the
surrounding area, it is very professional. There will be no State
supervision and one person as a caretaker is not adequate.
Psychological guidance is fine, but as a live-in care center, that
is not the way they should go in Anaheim.
Kathleen Burton, 834 S. Cornwall, Anaheim. Her daughter presently
attends Sunshine Nursery School. In the Summer of 1992, she took
parenting classes at the Psychological Guidance Center and felt
manipulated. The classes were of no help to her. She felt pushed
to continue. When she asked Dr. Ommanney (who was present
earlier) i£ ~h~ ¢0uld r~¢0mm~nd ~00k~ on ~h~ ~u~j~¢~ so she ¢0uld
continue on her own, Dr. Ommanney ignored her and told her she had
to continue and was subsequently billed for three months without
taking any classes. They were trying to keep the people there in
order to continue the parenting classes.
Wes Ishi, 1102 N. West Street, Anaheim. They are two doors down
from the proposed recovery house and have been living there for 35
years. His parents have owned the property for over 40 years.
The property has somewhat declined over time. He does not know
how a 24-hour alcohol recovery facility could help. The crime
rate has gone up. It would not help the neighborhood. He fears
548
City Ha].l~ .~ahe£m~ Californ£a - COUNCIl., NINUT~S - ~TULY 27~ 1993 - 5~00 P.N.
for the children and the safety of his folks. He does not think
it is a good idea.
John Polentz. He represents the two medical buildings east of the
subject property. He also represents eight professional medical
doctors, dentist, etc., one of which has been on site for 30
years. He has two of those representatives with him. The mission
statement of Anaheim is, "working together to serve". He
questioned what use this would serve. This is a very emotional
issue for everybody. They have a lot at stake - their
livelihoods, property values, the many years they have been
located around the subject site. During his presentation, he
noted that directly across the street from the subject property is
a liquor store which does not make sense. He then elaborated on
the many things they have done over the years to improve and
maintain their property as well as the surrounding community
including ongoing graffiti cleanup. He hopes the Council will
consider this and the mission statement for the City working
together to serve. They are all involved in this for the long
haul.
Diana Hudson, 844 N. Resh, Anaheim. Her son goes to the Sunshine
School and is four years old. The recovering alcoholics will be
there 24 hours a day next to their children. The children are the
future. They are supervised by women. If one of the people from
the home comes over and wants to abuse these women, they do not
have any type of protection but will have to deal with the
situation. One person supervising nineteen people is not enough.
At the school, one person supervises twelve children. She lives
three blocks away. Her husband's family has owned the home for 40
years. She sees this as a decline of property values for her home
and the whole area. She works in the medical field. There is
also a big liability factor they should address. It is an
emotional issue. She went out and got signed petitions. She
explained the situation to everybody. Dr. Ommanney should have
stayed and listened to all their concerns.
There were no additional speakers at this time.
City Attorney White. He recommends that the public hearing be continued two
weeks, but no further than that date. All the testimony given tonight need
not be repeated at that hearing because it is all part of the record of
tonight's hearing. If there is any new and different testimony, the opponents
would have an opportunity to present that at that time as well.
Mr. Anthony confirmed for the Mayor that they understood the procedure.
MOTION: Council Member Daly moved that the entire matter, the
reclassification and the conditional use permit, including the public input
portion be continued two weeks to August 10, 1993. Council Member Simpson
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Cl: COUNCIL COMMENTS:
114: DISCUSSION - JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION:
City Clerk Sohl announced the scheduled joint meeting with the Planning
Commission next Tuesday, August 3, 1993. It would be appropriate to adjourn
this meeting to 2:00 p.m., August 3, 1993. She asked if there were any items
549
C£t¥ Hall~ Anahe£m~ Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - ~-ULY 27~ 1993 - 5:00 P.M.
the Council would like added to the agenda as topics of discussion. Another
alternative, since the Council did not hold a workshop today regarding the
fire hazard issue, that could be held next week and the joint meeting
rescheduled.
Mayor Daly. He prefers to keep the joint meeting as scheduled with the
Planning Commission and perhaps Fire Chief Bowman's presentation could be
heard following the joint meeting.
It was determined that the joint meeting with the Planning Commission would be
held with thus far three topics set for discussion and any others the Council
might have, followed by an approximate one-half hour workshop session with
Ch ie f Bowman.
Council Member Feldhaus. He would like to sit down with the Council, City
Manager and Community Redevelopment Commission regarding Council policy
relative to retail sales in industrial zones.
After a brief discussion, it was determined that the topic of retail sales in
industrial zones would be an appropriate one for discussion at the joint
meeting with the Planning Commission next week; Mayor Daly asked that staff
put together any relevant details on what the trends have been on retail uses
in industrial zones.
ADJOURNMENT: By General Consent the Council adjourned to Tuesday, August 3,
1993, at 2:00 p.m., for a joint meeting with the City Planning Commission.
(7:58 p.m.)
LEONORA N. $OHL, CITY CLERK
55O