Loading...
1999/12/07ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: MAYOR : Tom Daly PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS : Frank Feldhaus, Lucille Kring, Tom Tait, Shirley McCracken ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: PRESENT: CITY MANAGER : Jim Ruth CITY ATTORNEY : Jack White CITY CLERK : Sheryll Schroeder ASST. CITY CLERK : Ann Sauvageau SR. ASST. CITY ATTORNEY – PROSECUTION : Mark Logan CHIEF OF POLICE : Roger Baker PLANNING DIRECTOR : Joel Fick ZONING ADMINISTRATOR : Annika Santalahti ZONING DIVISION MANAGER : Greg Hastings DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS : Gary Johnson CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER : John Poole TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION MANAGER : John Lower A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 3:00 p.m. on December 3, 1999 at the City Hall Bulletin Board, (both inside and outside the entrance to City Hall) containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of December 7, 1999 to order and welcomed those in attendance (3:18 P.M.). City Manager, James Ruth. This is a scheduled workshop on Code Enforcement and Compliance Procedures requested by the Council to be presented jointly by the Planning Department and City Attorney’s Office. He deferred first to the City Attorney, Jack White. CODE ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES: City Attorney, Jack White. The Council has expressed an interest in understanding the Code Enforcement process and the manner in which code violations and complaints are handled. The process involves a joint effort between the Code Enforcement Division of the Planning Department and Criminal Prosecution Division of the City Attorney’s Office. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager and Mark Logan, Senior Assistant City Attorney-Prosecution will walk the Council through the steps involved in the Code Enforcement process. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. He referred to the brochure submitted (see, Anaheim Code Enforcement – Partners in Pride) illustration many of the services provided by and through the Code Enforcement Division). Theirs is a comprehensive program which is one of the more challenging services municipal government provides dealing with complex issues. However, it is a worthwhile pursuit and an integral part of the City’s other neighborhood involvement processes. He then briefed a slide entitled – “Code Enforcement Process” – (a hard copy of which was also submitted to the Council – made a part of the record). His presentation covered the entire process from receipt of a complaint to its final disposition. Before closing, he reported that Code Enforcement statistics for FY 98/99 were 65,044 complaints received with only 306 criminal prosecutions filed. Anaheim has been a model for other cities code enforcement programs. He then deferred to Mark Logan who will present the criminal prosecutions aspect of the process. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 Mark Logan, Senior Assistant City Attorney-Prosecution. He first emphasized that staff looks at criminal prosecutions for municipal code violations as the “last ditch” effort. Everything else is tried prior to such prosecutions. He then briefed the Criminal Municipal Code Process from the time a case is referred to prosecution for review to its conclusion working from a slide (Anaheim City Attorney’s Office Criminal Prosecution Section – Criminal Municipal Code Process) a hard copy of which was submitted and made a part of the record. Attached to the data was a sheet entitled, Sentencing Options for Criminal Municipal Code Case, which he also briefed. At the conclusion of the presentation(s), questions were posed by Council Members relative to the Code Enforcement and subsequent Criminal Prosecution process which were answered by Mr. Logan, Poole and City Attorney White. Council Member Tait expressed his concern relative to criminal sanctions as opposed to civil actions. City Attorney White explained the value of a criminal prosecution as it related to code enforcement in not the fact that they send people to jail, it is the fact that they have a tool that can be used in the rarest of cases where that is the only way to obtain code compliance. A lot of time and effort is spent by both the Planning Department and City Attorney’s Office short of going through the criminal prosecution process. It is an extremely small percentage of cases that actually end up in the criminal court process and, of those, the judges become convinced it is the only mechanism to get compliance; Council Member Tait. His goal is full compliance as well be he has difficulty with the idea of the threat of criminal prosecution as much as the criminal prosecution itself. He does not think they ought to threaten putting somebody in jail because of zoning code violations. Mayor Daly. The program has a long history and various previous Council Members over the years have enhanced the successful Code Enforcement program which evolved partly because of some of the development that occurred in the 50’s and 60’s which have become difficult to deal with. There are many other problems that stem from lack of maintenance resulting in crime and social problems that cost the City money. He commended Mr. Poole and his staff as well as Mr. Logan and the City Attorney’s Office for the great job they are doing in this area. After additional discussion and comments by Council Members, Mayor Daly thanked staff for the informative presentation. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there were no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 1. 54956.9(a) – Existing Litigation: Name of case : Hinson v. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 80-21-22. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 2. 54956.9(a) – Existing Litigation: Name of case : City of Anaheim v. First World Communications, Inc., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 80-92-81. 2 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 3. SECTION 54957.6: Agency Negotiator : David Hill Name of employee organization : Anaheim Firefighters' Association, AMEA/General Clerical employees, Confidential employees and Management employees Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. (4:00 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of December 7, 1999 to order at 5:30 p.m. and welcomed those in attendance. INVOCATION: Rev. Mary L. Hibbard, from the Anaheim United Methodist Church gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Frank Feldhaus led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PRESENTATION – FLYING “A” CERTIFICATES – COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (CERT) MEMBERS: Presentation of Flaying “A” Certificates to the City of Anaheim Community Emergency Response Team Members who have completed a year-long training program. Mr. Bob Berg, the City’s Director of Emergency Services/Fire Department first gave the background of the program which was instituted to train citizens of Anaheim on emergency services. The program is available to any resident or business. Participants attend classes on a monthly basis throughout the year. On behalf of Fire Chief Bowman, Mr. Berg introduced Rebecca Gonzales, one of the graduates, who, in turn, introduced the 38 other graduates, now members of the City’s Community Emergency Response Team bringing the total of active members to 350 strong. Mayor Daly presented the Certificates and, along with Council Members, personally congratulated each of the recipients. He also thanked Mr. Berg the coordinator of the volunteer program. The Council appreciates all the time and effort City professional staff has put into the program as well as the participants noting that it is a wonderful reservoir of talent that is available if and when it is ever needed. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $4,738,628.18 for the period ending November 22, 1999, $1,921,926.44 for the period ending November 29, 1999 and $3,219,520.94 for the period ending December 3, 1999 in accordance with the 1999-2000 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Anaheim Housing Authority meetings. (5:43 p.m.). Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting. (5:53 p.m.). ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to agenda items. 3 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Craig Holoboski, Attorney. (He first spoke to the CenterLine Project. See comments under that item – A25.). He would like the Council or staff look at the Anaheim power system (Public Utilities) from the st st point of view of the December 31 to January 1 , 2000 time frame. He would like to see Anaheim come off the grid for two days on either side of January 1, 2000 and have the City’s power system independent of the L.A. massive grid. Mayor Daly. The Council will ask the City Manager to respond on the subject of the grid as well as generally regading the extensive Y2K preparations that the Public Utilities Department has made. PUBLIC COMMENTS – AGENDA ITEMS: Public input was received on Item A31 (see discussion under that item). MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of December 7 , 1999. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 – A22 : 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; Mayor Daly offered Resolutions Nos. 99R-237 through 99R-239 , both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A1. 118: Rejecting and denying certain claims filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management. The following claims were filed against the City and actions taken as recommended: a. Claim submit ted by Emma Balderrama for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 8, 1995. b. Claim submitted by Bayview Adjustment Bureau for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 14, 1999. c. Claim submitted by Arden Field for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 28 1999. d. Claim submitted by Hartford Casualty Insurance Company for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 21, 1999. e. Claim submitted by Sophia Hurtado for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 1, 1999 f. Claim submitted by Ernesto Aguayo Montalvo for property damage and bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 14, 1999. g. Claim submitted by Ronald Trent for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 17, 1998. h. Claim submitted by Oliver A. Williams for miscellaneous damages sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 10, 1999. 4 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 A2. 156: Receive and file Police Department Crime and Clearance Analysis Report for Octo ber 1999. Council Member Feldhaus. Although they are happy and proud of the drop in crime rates, he noted from the Police Department Crime and Clearance Analysis Report for October, 1999 that there are two categories in Part I crime that have been escalating – rape and assaults. He is requesting some kind of assessment report including a course of action to stem these particular crimes. Police Chief, Roger Baker. He will be happy to prepare a report and submit it to the Council; Mayor Daly. He will also be looking forward to a report relative to these important categories. He feels it is proper to highlight where there is an increase in certain crimes, but it is also necessary to remind everyone that in most of the major categories, the trends have been downward for a number of years including the current year. 105: Receive and file Anaheim Public Library Board Minutes dated October 6, 1999 105: Receive and file Public Utilities Board Minutes dated September 14, 1999 and October 7, 1999. 105 : Receive and file Mother Colony House Advisory Board Minutes dated September 3, 1999. 128: Receive and file Monthly Financial Analysis for three months ended September 30, 1999. A3. 160: Accept the low bid of Virco Manufacturing Corporation, Torrance, in the amount of $147,976.75, plus applicable taxes, for 1,050 tables and 49 carts for the Convention Center expansion area, in accordance with Bid #5984. A4. 160: Accept the low bid of Logical Design, Incorporated, Sacramento, in an amount not to exceed $356,770, including tax, for AS/400 computer equipment for the Utilities Department, in accordance with Bid #5983. A5. 123: Approve and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute the amendment and related documents to extend the agreement with Public Financial Management, Inc. ( PFM) for consulting services to provide financial advisory services to the Public Utilities and Finance Departments. A6. 123: Approve and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute an agreement and related documents and take actions necessary to implement the agreement with Parsons Engineering Science, Inc. in the amount of $311,194, to provide consulting engineering services in connection with the drilling and equipping of proposed Well No. 51. A7. 123: Waive Council Policy #401, selection of professional consultants, and enter into an agreement with Kimley-Horn Associates to provide modifications to the City’s traffic systems for the Testbed Project. A8. 123: Waive Council Policy #401 and enter into an agreement with Eagle Traffic Control Systems to provide modifications to the City’s traffic systems for the Testbed Project. A9. 175: Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Building Energy Consultants of Arroyo Grande, in the amount of $188,260 for the Euclid Street bridge electric system crossing as part of the I-5 Freeway widening and approve and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions with Building Energy Consultants. 5 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 A10. 164: Approve and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute Contract Change No. 1, in the amount of $60,957.70, in favor of Cornish Construction Company, Inc., for the Sycamore Street/ Claudina Way sewer improvements. A11. 158: Approve a nd authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Acquisition Agreement for the purchase of real property located at 1240 North State College Blvd. for the State College Blvd./SR-91 Freeway Project and authorize the acquisition payment of $1,282 to Harold Rubin, Trustee and Edith Bonin, Trustee. A12. 160: Waive Council Policy #306, regarding the sealed bid and advertisement requirements, and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Orange County Sheriff’s Tactical Training Center, Santa Ana, in an amount not to exceed $75,000, including taxes, for Anaheim Police Officers FX Tactical Training. A13. 160: Waive Council Policy #306 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Ameritech Library Service, Provo, Utah, in the amount of $33,255, plus taxes, for additional 45 software user licenses for the Anaheim Public Library’s Public Access Online Service. A14. 108: Deny the application to operate three additional (5 total) billiard tables at 735 North Anaheim Blvd., Adriatic Inn, based on the recommended findings. Submitted was report dated December 7, 1999 from the Planning Department/Code Enforcement Division recommending that the subject application be denied based on findings 1 – 3 as listed in the report. Council Member Kring requested a staff report from the Code Enforcement Manager. th John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. Briefed the data contained in the December 7 report noting that the owner of the Adriatic Inn, John Marovic has requested a Pool Room Permit for three additional billiard tables to make a total of five tables at the subject location. Staff has surveyed the area surrounding the location and all those surveyed were opposed with only one exception. He also referred to letter dated November 7, 1999 from the East Anaheim Neighborhood Council expressing opposition. The Police Department has recommended denial as outlined in memo dated October 14, 1999 from Lt. Mike Hannan noting that the crime rate in the area is 213% above average. Sgt. Sutter of the Police Department is present if there are any questions. Sgt. Sutter, answering Council Member Kring, reported on the crime statistics in the area stating further, it does not make sense to add more pool to a location where there are already problems. He noted that the Police average three to four calls a month to the business. Council Member Feldhaus questioned why the item was on the consent calendar ; John Poole. Generally it is not a consent calendar item. City Attorney White. No public hearing is required for a Pool Room Permit. In the past, such permits are a non-consent-calendar item but acted upon separately. However, procedurally and legally, there is nothing wrong with it being on the consent calendar ; Council Member Kring. It does not give the applicant time to state his side. City Attorney White. The applicant has the opportunity to present his reasons to the Council why this application should be approved. He does not know if the applicant is present. (Mr. Poole indicated that Mr. Marovic was present). Council Member Kring . If the applicant is present, he did have an opportunity to speak for three minutes under the Public Comments portion of the agenda but apparently he chose not to do so. However, she would still like to give him that opportunity and would like to reschedule the matter. 6 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 Mayor Daly. He is ready to deny the application tonight based on the Police Department’s recommendation. They have staff’s recommendation, the procedure has been fair, and as far as he is concerned, the situation is “cut and dried.” Council Member Feldhaus . Code allows two pool tables and if more than two, the applicant should apply for a CUP ; Council Member Tait. He asked for clarification on the issue. John Poole. If there are more than two tables, it requires a Pool Room Permit. City Attorney White. If the applicant wants to conduct a pool hall as the permitted primary use on the property, it would be a conditional use that would require a Public Hearing and a CUP. Under the code, a business, by right, can have two pool tables as an accessory use to a restaurant and bar. With a third pool table, it meets the definition of a pool room and requires a Pool Room Permit which does not require a public hearing. If the applicant wanted to conduct a business primarily composed of pool tables without the restaurant, he could apply and get a Public Hearing for a conditional use assuming that a pool hall is a conditional use in this zone. He does not know if it is or not. Mayor Daly. If the Council wants to have Public Hearings on these matters, it is their prerogative. In this case, the applicant had an opportunity to speak and he did not do so. At the conclusion of the consent calendar, this item was approved as recommended thereby denying the Pool Room Permit. A15. 123: Approve and authorize the Chief of Police to execute the lease agreement with J.R. Enterprises, a California Limited Partnership, dba Beach- Lin Plaza, for rental of the Police Department’s “West Resource Center” facility, located at 2960 W. Lincoln Ave., Unit L, in the amount of $200 a month. A16. 123: Approve agreements for police rotational towing service with Action/Southland Towing, Anaheim-Fullerton Towing Company, Brookhurst Motor, Inc., Metro Pro Road Services (Ben’s Towing), Country City Towing, Dubois Towing, Orange County Towing Service, Inc. and MNP Automotive ( Caldwell’s Towing). City Manager Ruth. Staff is requesting that MNP Automotive ( Caldwell’s Towing) be deleted from the proposed subject agreements since the company did not meet City requirements as an acceptable site. He clarified , the recommendation is to approve all with the exception of MNP Automotive. Council Member Feldhaus then posed a line of questions for purposes of clarification which were answered by Sgt. Greg Maddux relative to the process and qualifications for a towing company to be on the rotational list. A17. 153: Approve and authorize the Human Resources Director to execute the amended and restated City of Anaheim Flexible Compensation Plan Document and Summary Plan Description. A18. 123: Approve an amendment to the current agreement with Rancho Santiago Community College District for reimbursement of Fire Department training activities. A19. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 237 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim certain real properties or interests therein. 7 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 A20. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 238 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim certain real properties or interests therein. A21. 182: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 239 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the conveyance of the City owned property at 1633 S. Jeffrey to the Anaheim Housing Authority and making certain findings in connection therewith. Council Member Tait . To be consistent, he is again going to vote note on the Jeffrey-Lynne issue. (At the conclusion of the consent calendar, Council Member Tait registered his No vote on this item.) A22. 114: Adopt proposed Council meeting schedule for calendar year 2000. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to continue this item for one week based on some questions and ideas that have emerged. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 99R-237 and 99R-238, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None ABSENT: MAY OR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 99R-237 and 99R-238, duly passed and adopted. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 99R-239 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBE RS : Tait ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 99R-239, duly passed and adopted. APPOINTMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY VOCTOR CONTROL DISTRICT BOARD OF A23. TRUSTEES : Re-appoint George H. Edwards to the Orange County Vector Control District ( OCVC) Board of Trustees for a 2 or 4-year term. Submitted was letter dated November 30, 1999 from Robert Sjogren , District Manager of the OCVC District recommending re-appointment of Mr. George Edwards (or a successor) to the Board noting that Mr. Edwards, since he was appointed in 1998, has attended 23 of the 23 meetings held, having been an active participant on the Board. Mayor Daly. He noted the recommendation but also reminded the Council that the Council has the ability to appoint one of its own members to the Board as well as any citizen of the City. Mr. Edwards wishes to continue serving and has had 100% attendance at Board meetings. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to reappoint Mr. George Edwards to the OCVC District Board of Trustees for a period of two years. Council Member Kring seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL REORGANIZATION – SELECTION OF MAYOR PRO TEM : A24. Council, by motion, appoints one Council Member to serve as Mayor Pro Tem for one year. (Continued from the meeting of November 16, 1999, Item A36). 8 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 Mayor Daly noted that this matter was continued from their last meeting (11/16/99) to this date for full Council action. Council Member Kring . In the spirit of the position being rotational, she is nominating Council Member Tait. Council Member McCracken . She nominated Council Member Feldhaus in the spirit of the fact that the position has major responsibilities that go with it. It is a position that represents the City in a number of ways. In reviewing her calendar, from January to December, she has attended 150 ribbon cuttings attesting to the fact that a great deal of time is required of the position. The representation is not by City staff or the City Manager; an elected official is expected to attend. Council Member Feldhaus . He thanked Council Member McCracken but he has thought about the matter and his schedule is full. He does not think he could do justice to the position for perhaps the same reasons as other Council Members. He thereupon nominated Council Member/Mayor Pro Tem McCracken for another year. Council Member Kring . She reiterated that she believes the position should be rotational and everybody should have the opportunity to serve as Mayor Pro Tem. She is aware that Council Member Tait has not attended a lot of events but if given the responsibility, he will attend the necessary events. She th th emphasized that the position needs to be rotated and this will be Council Member Tait’s 5 or 6 year on the Council. Mayor Daly. Council Member Feldhaus was nominated but has declined. He asked Council Member Tait and Council Member McCracken if they would be willing to serve as Mayor Pro Tem if so appointed; they answered, yes. A vote was then taken on the nominees in the order in which they were nominated. Council Member Tom Tait - Ayes: Kring, Tait. Noes: Feldhaus, McCracken, Daly. Council Member Shirley McCracken – Ayes: Feldhaus, McCracken, Daly. Noes: Kring , Tait . Council Member Shirley McCracken was thereupon re-appointed Mayor Pro Tem for one year. CENTERLINE PROJECT - LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: A25. Submitted was a four- page staff report dated December 7, 1999, with attachments, from Gary Johnson, Director of Public Works and City Engineer recommending the following: (1) that OCTA adopt one of the following alternatives relative to the Orange County CenterLine project: a) defer any further engineering of light rail (including any initial segment decision) until further evaluation and clarification of technology and funding options are considered OR, b) “No Build” Light Rail anywhere in the County of Orange (including the proposed Costa Mesa/Irvine segment.) Recommendation (2) regardless of the option selected, that OCTA be requested to continue to allocate funding to implement cost-effective ways to improve mobility – see a) through d) listed on page one of the staff report. The following people spoke to this item under items of Public Interest at the beginning of the meeting. Comments are summarized: Michael Holoboski, 2063 W. Romneya, Anaheim. He is in favor of the light-rail transit project especially considering the projected population expansion by 2030. Anaheim needs to take a different direction 9 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 regarding public transportation. It does not specifically have to be the proposed plan. There are many alternatives. He broached some possibilities. It is necessary to look toward the future. Craig Holoboski, 2063 W. Romneya, Anaheim. He is in favor of the light-rail project. He urged the Council not to reject the whole idea. This is the future of Anaheim. He suggested that they look at a system similar to San Francisco’s approach to public transit. Ben Bay (former Anaheim Mayor and Council Member). He is present to reiterate what he said about a month ago on the same subject, the light rail project as it stands is a very bad one and would never succeed in solving the problem it is intended to solve. He believes strongly that is should be stopped. It should have been just a study but it has turned into a “political movement”. He hopes the Council votes along with Santa Ana and Orange in saying ‘no” to the plan. He also offered his recommendations in lieu of the plan. Paul Bostwick, 1411 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim. The last two years he has been honored to serve the City on the OCTA Citizen’s Advisory Committee and the Light Rail Subcommittee. During that period, the Committee looked at the plan and argued techniques but in the end, the Committee could not come to an agreement as to a type of system and the routing. He believes it needs more study. He is admonishing the Council, if they vote on the issue, that they vote to keep it open for discussion and to look into the future. They cannot continue to keep taking land from private individuals to widen streets and freeways. It is necessary to look at some type of alternative transportation whether it is busses, light rail or other means. Linda Lee Grau, 24 Morning Dove, Irvine. She spoke on the individual’s inalienable right to travel and the right to choose their mode of travel. She also had with her a gasoline powered “go-ped” to demonstrate the divergent means of travel one may use. Irv Pickler , 2377 Mall Avenue, Anaheim (former Anaheim Council Member). He also sat on the OCTA Citizen’s Advisory Committee. He believes rejecting the CenterLine Light-Rail plan completely would be the wrong thing to do. He suggested it be sent back to the OCTA and have them work on it further. It is necessary to consider all modes of transportation and alternative designs. He urged the Council not to “just say NO” but refer the matter back to OCTA and let them continue working on a plan. John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager. In his extensive presentation, he briefed the detailed staff report noting that neither of the two alternatives laid out in the report (see above) endorses the proposed project. He also referred to and recounted the presentations previously made to the Council in workshop sessions (see minutes of August 17 and October 5, 1999). Following his presentation, questions were posed by Mayor Daly and Council Member Tait relative to a projected increase in bus service which were answered by Mr. Lower. Mayor Daly noted that the Chief Executive Office of OCTA (Orange County Transportation Authority), Lisa Mills, was present along with Bill Hodge and Jose Solorio. He offered Ms. Mills the opportunity to comment if she wished to do so at this time. Ms. Lisa Mills, Chief Executive Officer, OCTA. She first clarified some of the comments where the Council had questions. They have not increased the bus system by 25% as it relates to the major investment study. They did about 3% a couple of years ago. Now they are up to about 5% and are planning about a 40% increase over the next 20 years. The bus system is growing significantly. If the Council today decides to defer action on the first recommendation, she believes they have all received a letter today relating to technology. Supervisor Coad is very interested in the technology issue as well. She then explained some of the systems they are investigating and will be continuing to do so at the technology symposium to be held in March. She is present tonight to hear the Council’s comments and concerns. They are open and willing to study other options. She also reported for Council Member Tait 10 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 that they have been studying light rail in Orange County for approximately 10 years and have spent approximately $10 million on the subject of light rail since 1988-89 to the present including the current effort. Also at the request of the Mayor, Ms. Mills elaborated on the present bus system and ridership, plans for future bus expansion, funding, etc., and subsequently answered additional questions posed by Council Members McCracken and Feldhaus. Council Comments (summarized): Council Member Feldhaus . He has been steadfast in his opinion that the light-rail system is probably 15 to 20 years ahead of its time. It is light rail but a heavy burden on taxpayers. He does not want any more (City) money spent on the project. He sees the ridership on busses expanding in the City. He reiterated , he does not want to see City staff spending any more time and resources to continue the study or to perpetuate what he considers to be premature. Council Member Kring . She concurs that enough time and money has already been spent. She has always been clear that she is opposed to the project. They received a packet of letters from Anaheim residents stating that the CenterLine project is a bad deal and asked that the Council not support it. She has never heard anyone say this is a good idea and will use the system. As stated in the Chamber of Commerce letter (see letter dated November 18, 1999), once a bus system is put in place and it does not work, it can be changed but with a project like the CenterLine requiring infrastructure, that cannot be done. She would like to see the Measure M money go back on the ballot for the citizens to decide. If the money were given back to each City on a pro-rated basis, Anaheim would receive about $30 million which could then be spent on the City’s needs. She is going to agree with staff and vote “No Build” on the CenterLine project. Council Member Tait . Staff cites a study done by Johnathan Richmond at Harvard University where he reviewed all light-rail systems in the United Stated and concluded, “In no case has new rail service been shown to have had a noticeable impact upon highway congestion or air quality.” For that reason more than any other, he believes they should stop the light-rail project. The bottom line is, light rail will not work in Orange County and because of that, they should vote no. For the same reasons it has no merit today it will not have any merit five months from now. Mayor Daly asked what about in five or ten years ; Council Member Tait answered that it won’t work then either. Mayor Daly. They are running out of options with roads and concrete. The Santa Ana Freeway will be 14 lanes wide in some places when the I-5 project is completed. He believes in 7 to 10 years that freeway will again be congested. Major roadwork for Anaheim is about 95% completed leaving busses and rail. A dramatic expansion of the bus system is occurring thus leaving the rail alternative. He favors keeping options open. He believes there is a lot of disagreement about the technology and alignment of the CenterLine project and whether it should be at grade or elevated. With Anaheim being one of the biggest cities in Orange County and California, to foreclose the possibility forever is unwise. Anaheim needs to be at the table finding solutions and looking at the best technology. He reiterated , he favors keeping their options open and staying in the discussion. It is unlike Anaheim to walk away from a regional discussion. He has heard from a number of citizens who are in support and just tonight heard from citizens who feel the same way. He is going to ask the Council to support the first of staff’s recommendations – to defer action at this time (see item 1. a) of Staff Report of December 7, 1999). Before concluding, he gave extensive input relative to systems in other parts of the country as well as the State noting in particular the success of the BART System in San Francisco and the rail system in the City of San Diego, the latter, in his opinion, being a lot like Orange County. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to defer action on the CenterLine project at this time which is one of the recommendations of staff in report dated December 7, 1999 and, further, that staff be mindful of everything that was said this evening. 11 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 Before further action was taken, Mayor Daly continued that it is clear the Council is split on the issue and that there are five opinions. Anaheim is the biggest city in Orange County with more people and jobs than any other city at the table and the reason he is making the recommendation. He clarified/reiterated his motion is to defer action and ask staff to keep in mind everything that has been said. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Tait stated he is going to vote against the motion. If he thought light rail would ever work to relieve congestion in Orange County, he would support it. He does not believe it will and there are studies to support that. Busses work. For that reason, he is going to vote against the motion and would like to follow up with a motion of “No Build”. (Council Member Kring seconded the proposed motion; however, the motion on the floor needed to be acted upon first.) Council Member Feldhaus . The Mayor needs to incorporate in his motion his ( Feldhaus’) premise that there be no more City staff time or resources involved in further studies. He is not going to tell OCTA what they should or should not do. The Mayor said Anaheim streets are 90% built out right now. He asked if that meant that the City Engineer should stop asking for money from developers for street widening. Mayor Daly. He thinks the Council needs to talk about the City’s future transportation projects. He will incorporate the concerns of Council Member Feldhaus regarding staff time into his motion because he feels it is a good point. Council Member Tait . OCTA is still asking for their opinion and he feels they need to tell OCTA whether or not to spend more money on light rail. It is still taxpayer dollars that are involved. OCTA is asking the City’s opinion, they can give it, then OCTA can/will do what they want. Council Member Kring . There have been many cities that say it is not going to work. With a train coming down City streets, everyone has to stop also causing more pollution. Orange and Santa Ana have the right idea (recommended “No Build ” ) and they are large cities. Council Member McCracken . Twenty-five years ago she heard the same arguments about busses. The same was true of the BART system in San Francisco and now it has expaned all the way to Livermore. Looking 25 to 30 years into the future, it is necessary to do some planning. Points and counter points were made in further discussion/debate between Council Members McCracken and Kring including additional comments by Mayor Daly and Council Member Tait. Mayor Daly. He feels it is a good idea to ask Gary Johnson and City Manager Ruth to put together a workshop in the coming months on transportation projects and priorities in advance of the next budget cycle including the freeway interchanges, the 57 freeway extension and other changes being contemplated that should be priorities for Anaheim. Council Member Feldhaus . Council Member Tait mentioned that OCTA is asking for their opinion. He th noted recommendation 2. in the December 7 staff report. If he is going to give OCTA his opinion, he would change the language by staff to read as follows: “Regardless of the options selected, request OCTA to allocate funding to timely impelment , predicated on verifiable cost efficiency and justifiable, the following as cost-effective ways to improve mobility.” It is a caveat he feels needs to be put in any motion of deferral. Mayor Daly. He will incorporate all of that into his motion. Mayor Daly. The motion on the table now is to defer any further engineering of light rail for Anaheim until further evaluation and clarification of technology and funding options are considered and also 12 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 including the staff recommendation which listed various investments in projects that OCTA should consider (Item 2., a) through d) in the 12/7/99 staff report), and additionally including all the language suggested by Council Member Feldhaus ; Council Member Feldhaus clarified, he does not want any more Anaheim staff time or resources spent in this further study. Council Member Kring . That being the case, he ( Feldhaus) is going to shackle OCTA and tie their hands. It is not going to be feasible and is not going to work. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion and carried by the following vote : Ayes – Feldhaus, McCracken and Daly. Noes – Kring, Tait. MOTION. Council Member Tait moved to approve the following alternative recommendation by staff: “No Build” Light Rail anywhere in the County of Orange (including the proposed Costa Mesa/Irvine segment). Council Member Kring seconded the motion. MOTION FAILED TO CARRY by the following vote : Ayes – Kring, Tait. Noes: Feldhaus, McCracken, Daly. YEAR 2000 INVESTMENT POLICY : A26. Approve the Year 2000 Investment Policy as recommended by the City Treasurer in her report of December 7, 1999 attached to which was the Investment Policy (effective January 1, 2000). City Treasurer, Charlene Jung briefed the subject report and recommendation and subsequently answered questions posed for purposes of clarification. MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to approve the Year 2000 Investment Policy as presented by the City Treasurer effective January 1, 2000. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ITEMS B1 – B6 FROM THE ZOING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 18, 1999 – DECISION DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1999 INFORMATION ONLY – APPEAL PERIOD ENDS DECEMBER 9, 1999: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 175 B1. 179: CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061 (B)(3)} Owner: Jon F. Cocca, 931 S. Texella Court, Anaheim, CA 92804 Location: 931 South Texella Court, property is 0.21 acres located at the terminus of Texella Court having a frontage of 80 feet on the west of Texella Court and a maximum depth of 142 feet. Waiver of minimum side yard setback (5 feet required ; 4 feet proposed), to construct additions to an attached garage and residence in the RS-7200 zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Adjustment No. 175 approved, ZA Decision No. 99-39. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 176 B2. 179: CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061 (B)(3)} Owner: Goldstone Holdings LLC, 32685 Caspian Sea Dr., Dana Point, CA 92629 Agent: Jeff A. Cox, 821 North Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85004 Location: 511 North Brookhurst St., property is 2.13 acres located on the corner of Brookhurst St. and Crescent Ave. Waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (192 required; 179 13 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 proposed), to permit the establishment of a 7,711 square foot medical office within an existing 44,192 square foot 3-story office building in the CL (Commercial Limited) Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Adjustment No. 176 approved, ZA Decision No. 99-40. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 178 B3. 179: CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061 (B)(3)} Owner: Monica Pierson and Malcolm Pierson, 1819 N. Cymbal Way, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: Landmark Remodelers, Jerry Lutjens, 19953 Valley Blvd., Walnut, CA 91789 Location: 1819 North Cymbal Way, property is 0.12 acres having a frontage of 53 feet on the west side of Cymbal Way, having a maximum depth of 100 feet located 90 feet north of the centerline of Budlong St. Waiver of maximum lot frontage (35% permitted; 38.4% proposed), to construct a 321 square foot family room addition and fireplace to an existing single-family home in the RS-5000 (SC)(Residential, Single-Family; Scenic Corridor Overlay) Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Adjustment No. 178 approved, ZA Decision No. 99-41. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 179 B4. 179: CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061 (B)(3)} Owner: Kilroy Realty Corporation, 184 Technology Dr., Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92618 Agent: Associated Builders and Contractors, 5109 E. La Palma Ave., Suite A , Anaheim, CA 92807 Location: 5109 East La Palma Ave., property is 9.33 acres located at the northeast corner of La Palma Ave. and Kellogg Dr . Waiver of minimum number of required parking spaces (623 feet required; 584 feet proposed), to establish an industrially-related training facility within an existing office and industrial complex. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Administrative Adjustment No. 179 approved, ZA Decision No. 99-42. VARIANCE NO. 4378 B5. 179: CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 3 Owner: Ly K. Le- Phan, 250 South Peralta Way, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: James Ramo, 6737 Dos Rios Rd., Downey , CA 90240 Location: 250 South Peralta Way, property is 1.0 acre having a frontage of 183 feet on the east side of Peralta Way, maximum depth of 214 feet located 539 feet south of the centerline of Peralta Hills Dr . Waiver of permitted encroachment into required yards (3 foot high fence permitted in the front yard; 6 foot high wall proposed) to construct a 6 foot high wrought iron/block wall fence and gate within the required front yard of a single-family residence. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4378 approved, ZA Decision No. 99-43. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4164 B6. 179: CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Owner: E.E.S.A., Post Office Box 931025 , Los Angeles, CA 90093-1025 Agent: James Stavropoulos, 3330 W. Lincoln Ave., Anaheim, CA 92801 14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 Location: 3330 West Lincoln Ave., property is .64 acres having a frontage of 155 feet on the south side of Lincoln Ave., maximum depth of 180 feet located 362 feet west of the centerline of Westchester Dr. to permit the sales of beer and wine for on-premises consumption within an existing restaurant (Omega Family Restaurant). ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 4164 approved for one year, ZA Decision No. 99-44. Council Member Feldhaus posed questions for purposes of clarification which were answered by the Zoning Administrator, Annika Santalahti. She confirmed that the applicant was fully aware of all the conditions that must be met even though the CUP was approved for one year. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION: B7. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5708 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 98-99-12) ( CH (Commercial, Heavy) to CL (Commercial, Limited) zoning at 100, 200 and 220 N. Beach Blvd.) (Informational item at the meeting of May 18, 1999, Item B11.) B8. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5709 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 98-99-14) ( RM -1200 (Residential, Multiple – Family) and ML (Limited Industrial) at 600 to 626 N. Brookhurst St.) (Informational item at the meeting of August 24, 1999, Item B2.) Council Member Feldhaus . He does not have a problem with the reclassification but is concerned about potential traffic impacts which he briefed; Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. This is implementing a previous approval for a commercial retail center approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed it as well. This is simply implementing an existing requirement. Mayor Daly. He asked staff to respond to some of the issues raised by Council Member Feldhaus and submit a memo to the Council ; Joel Fick, Planning Director. Staff will submit an informational memo and in particular comment on the traffic issue. B9. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5710 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-01) (CG (Commercial, General) to CL (Commercial, Limited) at 624 to 636 W. Orangewood Ave.) (Informational item at the meeting of August 10, 1999, Item B3.) B10. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5711 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING (RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-02) ( RM-1200 (Residential, Multiple-Family) and RS-A-43 ,000 (Residential/Agricultural) to OS (Open Space) at southeast corner of Orangewood Ave. and Haster St./Ponderosa Park) (Informational item at the meeting of August 10, 1999, Item B4.) SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND ( SLESF) – CITIZEN’S OPTION D1. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) INITIATIVE : To consider the expenditure plan for funds in the 15 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 amount of $680,168.99 received by the City of Anaheim Police Department as a result of Assembly Bill 3229 – Citizen’s Option for Public Safety (COPS) Initiative. Submitted was report dated December 7, 1999 from the Chief of Police, Roger Baker recommending, after a Public Hearing, that the Council approve the Police Department’s Expenditure Plan for the FY 99/2000 SLESF award from the State budget. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone was present who wished to speak to the proposed subject expenditure plan; there being none, he closed the Public Hearing. Council Member Feldhaus noted a discrepancy in one of the column totals on the Expenditure Plan Sheet which he believed was a typographical error ; Mayor Daly. He noted Police Department staff was present who will take note of the discrepancy. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to approve the Police Department’s Expenditure Plan for the FY 99/2000 SLESF award from the State budget. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News : November 25, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 99-2A : D2. 176: In accordance with application filed by William Lyon Homes, Inc., 4490 Von Karman Avenue, New Port Beach, CA 92660, a public hearing was held on the proposed abandonment at the southwest corner of Ball Road and Knott Avenue pursuant to Resolution No. 99R-225 duly published and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News : November 25, 1999 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet : November 25, 1999 Posting of property : November 24, 1999 Report of the City Engineer dated October 26, 1999, was submitted recommending approval of said abandonment. At their meeting of November 16, 1999, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 99R-225 declaring its intention to vacate certain public streets, highways and service easements and setting a date and time to consider the subject abandonment. Natalie Meeks , Civil Engineer, Public Works. The proposed abandonment of the electrical easement will allow for the property to be redeveloped. New electrical easements are being dedicated for the electrical facilities. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak; there being none, he closed the Public Hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION : On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council determined that the proposed activity fall within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, Categorically Exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 99R-240 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 16 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 RESOLUTION NO. 99R-240 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM VACATING AN ELECTRICAL EASEMENT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BALL ROAD AND KNOTT AVENUE. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 99R-240 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/CO UNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 99R-240, duly passed and adopted. ABANDONMENT NO. 99-13A : D3. 176: In accordance with application filed by American National Properties, Inc., P.O. Box 10077, Santa Ana, CA 92711-0077, a public hearing was held on the proposed abandonment of certain unimproved right of way (commonly called Grove Street) for public street purposes located adjacent to and northerly of the Riverside Freeway ( SR91) between Kraemer Blvd. and Tustin Avenue and located southerly of 3362 E. La Palma Avenue pursuant to Resolution No. 99R-226 duly published and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News : November 25, 1999 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet : November 25, 1999 Posting of property : November 24, 1999 Report of the City Engineer dated October 21, 1999, was submitted recommending approval of said abandonment. At their meeting of November 16, 1999, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 99R-226 declaring its intention to vacate certain public streets, highways and service easements and setting a date and time to consider the subject abandonment. Natalie Meeks , Civil Engineer, Public Works. This proposed abandonment would clear the title for the redevelopment of the property. The right-of-way is located north of the 91 freeway. It was offered for dedication and accepted by the City for development. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak; there being none, he closed the Public Hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION : On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council determined that the proposed activity fall within the definition of Section 3.01 Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, Categorically Exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 99R-241 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 99R-241 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM VACATING CERTAIN UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY (COMMONLY CALLED GROVE STREET) FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND NORTHERLY OF THE RIVERSIDE FREEWAY ( SR91) BETWEEN KRAEMER BLVD. AND 17 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 TUSTIN AVENUE AND LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF 3362 E. LA PALMA AVENUE. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 99R-241 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 99R-241, duly passed and adopted. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 369 D4. 1 79/155 : AND RECLASSIFICATION NO. 99-00-08 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF 12a. AND 12c. INITIATED BY : City initiated (Planning Department) LOCATION: 101-311 North Beach Boulevard and 3001-3021 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is 16.6 acres located at the northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue. General Plan Amendment No. 369 City initiated amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan re-designating these properties from the Medium Density Residential and General Commercial land use designation to the General Commercial land use designation. Reclassification No. 99-00- 08 To reclassify the northerly portion of subject property from RS- A-43,000 (Residential/Agricultural) and the CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone to CL (Commercial, Limited) Zone. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: GPA NO. 369, recommended adoption of Exhibit A to City Council ( GPA99-182) (6 yes votes, 1 vacant seat). Reclassification No. 99-00-08 ( PC99-183) granted unconditionally. Approved request for City Council review of 12a and 12c. Approved Negative Declaration Set for public hearing due to GPA 369, Item B7 at the November 2, 1999 Council meeting. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in North County News : November 25, 1999 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet : November 25, 1999 Posting of property : November 24, 1999 Joel Fick , Planning Director. This is one of the housekeeping items the Council routinely sees and implements one of the Community Planning Program recommendations previously approved by the Council. No new development is proposed as part of the development. It is bringing the existing General Plan and zoning into conformance. He clarified for the Mayor that it does conform with the Redevelopment vision for the area. Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak; there being none, he closed the Public Hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – NEGATIVE DECLARATION : On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received 18 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Daly offered Resolution No. 99R-242 and 99R-243 for adoption approving Reclassification No. 99- 00-08 and General Plan Amendment No. 369, Exhibit “A” respectively. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 99R-242 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. RESOLUTION NO. 99R-243 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 369. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 99R-242 and 99R-243 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 99R-242 and 99R-243, duly passed and adopted. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: C1. City Attorney White stated there were no items to report. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C2. Council Member Tait : This is an urgent item. He referred to recent newspaper stories about the 91 expressway private toll road that runs through Santa Ana Canyon and its proposed sale financed by Caltrans from one private company to another. There has been no staff or public scrutiny as to how it affects people who travel on the free portion of the 91. He asked staff if they have seen any documents and also to advise what can be done. Gary Johnson, Director of Public Works and City Engineer. Because the City has no direct approval rights, the City has not been asked for its position on the transaction. Caltrans entered into a settlement agreement with the CPTC (California Private Transportation Company) in order to allow for the financing to proceed. Caltrans has not released that agreement and he has not been able to get a copy although he has requested it. He is not sure why they have not released it. In discussion with OCTA (Orange County Transportation Authority) they indicated their role as an agency was to monitor the transaction because part of the settlement refunds some money to OCTA that was advanced to CPTC and some interest on that money. Today, the Riverside Transportation Authority, on their agenda, is planning to take some legal action to stop the sale of the bonds this Friday. It is the only information staff has available at the moment. Council Member Tait . He is not sure what they can do but if there is anything that can be done to look at the transaction and analyze it before the sale takes place, he would like to do so. If that means joining Riverside in their efforts, they should do that. Gary Johnson. The only documents readily available are the transactional documents for the bond sale only on the financing package and does not tell much about other aspects. They will continue to try to get a copy of the settlement agreement and provide it to the Council. 19 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 City Attorney White. His knowledge of this is what he has read in the newspapers. It may be that before the next Council meeting, this transaction will be concluded, at least the bond sale. By next Tuesday, it may be too late if they do get the documents between now and then, to take any type of action. Because this item is not on the agenda tonight, if they wish to take any official action, the Council will have to waive the Brown Act by a 4/5’s vote. MOTION. Council Member Tait moved to waive the 72-hour posting provision of the Brown Act finding that the need to take action on the proposed subject transaction is necessitated before the next scheduled Council Meeting and incorporating the finding as articulated by the City Attorney that the Council has expressed an interest in considering this item which was not known at the time the agenda was prepared. Council Member Kring seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Tait . He asked that staff by any means they deem necessary attempt to get the related documents before the bond sale so that they can be reviewed before that proposed sale. City Attorney White. The Public Records Act provides that when a request is made for public documents, the public agency has 10 days in which to respond in which case they may not get the documents until after the sale is concluded; Council Member Tait. He is asking that they try to obtain the documents by whatever means necessary. Mayor Daly. His perspective is that a State highway is involved and that the approval of the transaction must come from State government. State officials have reviewed this transaction; their review and approval is required. Their are State Legislators now serving Anaheim whose district(s) encompass that road. He is not as comfortable having Anaheim staff trying to pursue this as he is the professionals that have the responsibility to do their job. The Council needs more information. This has such an unusual background wherein the State 10 years ago awarded a franchise and is now allowing the franchise to change hands. It is also a sensitive issue. Council Member Tait . Working through the State Legislators might be a path staff would take. Rather than one Council Member he would rather have the entire Council involved. He then reiterated what he would like to see done and, after additional discussion, made the following motion: MOTION. That staff be empowered to request documents to ascertain whether the proposed transaction makes sense and that it be accomplished by whatever means possible. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, a gentlemen from the audience approached the podium. Mr. Wade King. He lives in Orange. He would like to suggest that the Council, as a part of the motion, instruct staff to contact State Senator, Joe Dunn, Chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee. He is certain that Senator Dunn is interested and can provide the documents being requested. Council Member Tait thereupon amended his motion to include contacting State Senator, Joe Dunn, Chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee to assist in obtaining the requested documents. Mayor Daly accepted the amendment in his second. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member McCracken : She thanked her colleagues and members of staff and the community for the many expressions of sympathy on the passing of her mother. Council Member Kring: (1) She thanked anybody involved with the dedication of the Veteran’s Memorial on Saturday, December 4, 1999. She encouraged everyone to visit the memorial on the Anaheim Museum grounds. (2) She referred to the Beck Report which was submitted a few months ago when the Council discussed Strategic Options relating to the Utilities. (See minutes of August 10 and August 24, 1999.) At the time, 20 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, DECEMBER 7, 1999 they were promised staff would work with the unions and look at ways to save money. She would like to get a status report relative to the savings that were indicated could be accomplished in the area of $3 million; City Manager Ruth reported that staff is working on the report as they speak. Council Member Feldhaus: (1 ) He asked that Planning Commission compensation be agendized for discussion at the next Council meeting. (2) Relative to the Charter Review Committee Public Hearings, he noted that none were scheduled in west Anaheim and asked that an additional hearing be scheduled in the west Anaheim area. (Two already scheduled – January 5, 2000 in the Council Chamber – January 6, 2000 at the Anaheim Hills Community Center.) Mayor Daly. He agrees and asked staff to work with the Charter Review Commission relative to a third Public Hearing. City Attorney White. The Committee’s next meeting will actually be the first of those public meetings (January 5, 2000). At that meeting, they can discuss scheduling an additional Public Hearing in the west end of Anaheim later in January. Although that meeting will not be listed on the brochure that has been printed (and in the process of being mailed), it can be publicized through other means. Mayor Daly : He wants to add his thanks to those involved in the Veteran’s Memorial project especially the committee who worked to oversee the composition. He has heard nothing but positive comments from citizens who are impressed with the monument itself and its location. ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the Council Meeting of December 7, 1999 was adjourned. SHERYLL SHROEDER CITY CLERK 21