HomeMy WebLinkAbout4_22_2003 - Council MinutesAPPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 13, 2003
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
OF A REGULAR MEETING April 22, 2003
The City Council of the City of Orange, California convened on April 22, 2003 at 4:30 p,m. in a
Regular Meeting in the Council Chambers, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, California.
4:30 P.M. SESSION
1. OPENING
1.1 INVOCATION
Given by Pastor Bubba Lipscomb, First Southern Baptist Church
I.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Mayor pro tern Cavecche
1.3 ROLL CALL
PRESENT - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ABSENT -
None 1.4
PRESENTATIONS/ ANNOUNCEMENTS/ INTRODUCTIONS The following
employees received Service Awards:Doug Kokesh -
Public Works; EarleneShackelford - Community Development; John Thompson - Public Works (not
present); John Jordan - Fire,Proclamation declaring the City of Orange
as a Relay for Life Community and declaring May 2, 2003 as Orange Becomes
Purple Day - was presented to Marsha Zembower representing the American Cancer Society. Councilmember Ambriz,
co-chair with Ms,Zembower announced the Relay for Life
will be held May 2 and 3 at Santiago Canyon College to raise funds for the
American Cancer Society.2. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None.3.CONSENT
CALENDAR TAPE 310 All items
on the Consent Calendar are
considered routine and are enacted by one motion approving the recommended action listed on the
Agenda, Any member of the City Council, staff or the public may request
an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion or separate action. Unless otherwise
specified in the request to remove an item from the Consent Calendar, all items
removed shall be considered immediately following action on the remaining items on
the Consent Calendar.3.1 Declaration of City Clerk, Cassandra
J. Cathcart, declaring posting of City Conncil agenda of a regular meeting of April
22, 2003 at Orange Civic Center, Main Library at 101 N. Center Street, Police facility
at 1107 North Batavia, Shaffer Park,PAGE 1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
summarized on Time-Warner Communications and available on the City's
Website www.cityoforange.org, all of said locations being in the City of Orange and
freely accessible to members of the public at least 72 hours before commencement of
said regular
meeting.ACTION: Accepted Declaration of Agenda Posting and authorized its retention as
a public record in the Office of the City
Clerk.3.2 Request Council Confirmation of warrant registers dated April 3 and 10,
2003.ACTION:
Approved,3.3 Request approval of City Council Minutes, Adjourned Regular Meeting April
8,2003 at 3:30 p.m., Regular Meeting April 8, 2003, and Adjourned Regular
Meeting April 15,
2003.ACTION:
Approved.3.4 Consideration to waive reading in full of all ordinances on the
Agenda.ACTION:
Approved.3.5 Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report for the period ending March 31,
2003.ACTION:Received and
Filed,
AGREEMENTS 3.6 Award of Professional Engineering Services Contract in connection with
Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Cooperative Projects with City of Orange
for Whitecap Avenue Storm Drain Improvements (D-147). (A2100.
0 AGR-4262)SUMMARY: The contract authorizes the Consultant to
provide field surveying,geotechnical investigation, engineering reports, and preparation
of plans, specification and cost estimates for the OCSD Cooperative Projects with the City of
Orange for storm drain improvements. The City has entered into a separate agreement
with the same consultant, which will exceed the $30,000,00 threshold for agreements in
a fiscal year.ACTION: Approved a contract with Truxaw and Associates in an amount
not to exceed 22,190.00 and authorized the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute on behalf
of the City.FISCAL IMP ACT: Funds are budgeted and are available in
the Capital Improvement Program in
the
following
accounts:530-
5011-483400-
5337 550-
5011-483400-5337
Drainage Districts Reimbursable
OCSD Total Funds
171,600,
00
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.7 Award of Professional Engineering Services Agreement for Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Projects - Shaffer Street Storm Drain Improvements
Phase II from Culver Avenue to Palmyra Avenue (D-148), and
Shaffer Street Storm Drain Improvements Phase III from Palmyra Avenue to
Almond Avenue (D-149). (A2100.0 AGR-
3923.A)SUMMARY: This agreement authorizes the Consultant to provide
field surveying,geotechnical investigation, engineering reports, and preparation of
plans, specifications and cost estimates for the CDBG Shaffer Street Phase II and Phase III
Storm Drain Improvement Projects. The two projects are being combined into one design
project for economies of scale, The City has entered into a separate agreement with
the same Consultant, which will exceed the $30,000,00 threshold for agreements in a
fiscal year.ACTION: Approved an agreement with Thielmann Engineers in an amount not
to exceed 25,780.00 and authorized the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute on behalf of
the City.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Capital Improvement
Program and available in the
following
accounts:
310-9645-
483400-5380
310-9645-483400-5326 349,000
349,000 CDBG Shaffer Storm Drain
Phase 2 CDBG Shaffer Storm Drain Phase 3 3.8 Agreement with
Caporicci and Larson, Certified Public Accountants, to perform the annual financial audit of
the
City and Redevelopment Agency. (A2100.0 AGR-4263)SUMMARY: A Request for Proposal (
RFP) was issued for audit services, A panel which included 3
Audit Committee Members, the Finance Director, Assistant Finance Director and Internal Audit Manager
reviewed the proposals and interviewed the top 4 candidates. As a result of
the interviews and reference checks, the panel unanimously agreed that Caporicci and
Larson, Certified Public Accountants was the top candidate.ACTION: Approved, and authorized the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement with Caporicci and Larson, Certified
Public Accountants, to perform the annual audit of the financial statements of the
City and Redevelopment Agency for fiscal years 2002-03 thru 2004-05. The agreement
also includes an option to extend
the agreement for two additional terms of one year each,FISCAL IMP
ACT: The
costs for
these audit
services are
as follows:
FY 2002-
03 FY
2003-04
FY 2004-
05 FY
2005-06
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
Funds for the annual financial audit are included in the 2003-04 annual operating
budget of various funds in Account No. 426300 (accounting and auditing services), Funds
for subsequent fiscal year audits will be included in those respective years' annual
operating
budget.3.9 Second Amendment LA Consulting, Inc. for Maintenance Management
System.A2100.0 AGR-
3564.2)SUMMARY: The City currently utilizes the services of LA Consulting for
the purpose of implementing a Maintenance Management System (MMS) for the Public
Works and Community Services Departments, Initial services included an evaluation
of current operations, assistance with the purchase of MMS software and first
year implementation,At this time, staff is requesting to utilize LA Consulting for the first
annual system review, an update of infrastructure inventory and service
level review.Note: Mayor Murphy abstained on this item due to a possible employment
conflict
of interest.ACTION: Approved the Second Amendment to the Consultant Services
Agreement with LA Consulting, Inc. in the amount of $12,360.00 and authorized the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute amendment on behalf of
the City.FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $12,360.00 are available in
account numbers 220-5022-426700-0000 ($8,360) and
100-
5011-426700-0000 ($
4,000) for professional services.3.10 CLAIMS SUMMARY: The following claim(s)
have been received and investigated by the City Attorney's Office and/or the
Risk Manager. After a thorough investigation with the involved departments, it is the recommendation
of the City Attorney'
s Office that the
claim(s) be
denied.a. Philip R. Bollman b. Friendly Donuts ACTION: Denied Claim(s) for
damages
and referred to City Attorney and Adjuster CONTRACTS 3.11 Award of Contract, Bid No.
023-18, Asphalt
Replacement at Fire Station No.2.A2100.0 AGR-4264)SUMMARY:
Plans and Specifications have been completed for Asphalt Replacement at Fire Station No.2. The project
was advertised for bids. Six bids have been received and opened on March 27,
2003, Hardy
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
ACTION: Awarded the contract in the amount of $58,884.00 to Hardy & Harper, Inc.
1312 E, Warner Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92705 and authorized the Mayor and the City
Clerk to execute on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Funds are budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program for the
Water Division and are available in the following accounts:
601-8011-485100-8911 $55,025.00
Pavement Replacement-Wanda Collins 601-5021-481105-4997 $
3,859.00 Municipal Parking Lot Maintenance 3.12 Award of Contract - Bid No.
023-21; Project No. D-142; Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - Shaffer
Street Storm Drain Improvements Phase I from Santiago
Creek to Culver Avenue. (A21000.0 AGR-4265)SUMMARY: The bids were opened
on March 27, 2003. Twelve (12) bidders responded to the invitation for bids. The apparent
low bidder is K.C. Construction
Company of Dana Point, for $379,950.00.ACTION: I) Appropriated $165,
000.00 of unexpended CDBG entitlement funds from Fund 310 to Account
No. 310-9645-483400-5379 (Shaffer Street Storm Drain Phase I)for
project funds shortfall including contingencies and engineering costs, 2) Awarded the contract in the amount of $379,
950.00 to K.C. Construction Company of Dana Point, CA 92624, and authorized the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute on behalf of the City.FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are
budgeted and will be available upon appropriation in the following
account:
310-9645-483400-5379 $ 469,000.00 CDBG Shaffer Storm Drain Phase I QUITCLAIM 3.
13 Quitclaim a portion of an easement
for water pipeline and road purposes near Cannon Street and Mesa Drive. (D4000.
0)SUMMARY: Quitclaim a portion of an old water pipeline
and road easement located near the northwest comer of Cannon Street and Mesa Drive.
ACTION: Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Quitclaim Deed to Brian Tran and Traci
Tran, husband and wife, for a water pipeline and road easement that is no
longer used or required, near the northwest comer of Cannon Street and Mesa Drive.FISCAL IMP
ACT: A $302,00 processing fee has
been paid
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
RESOLUTIONS
3.14 RESOLUTION NO. 9691 (S4000.S.4)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange authorizing the Disposition,
Acquisition and Abandonment of Street Right-of-Way without making
General Plan
Consistency Findings,
ACTION: Approved,3.15 Voting Delegate - League of California
Cities SUMMARY: Designate Mayor pro tern Cavecche as the City of Orange's
Voting Delegate at the Special Meeting of the League of California Cities General Assembly
on May 15, 2003, concerning the State Budget and State-Local
Fiscal Reform.ACTION: Approved designation of Mayor pro tern Cavecche as the City'
s
Voting Delegate.MOTION -
Alvarez SECOND - Coontz
AYES - Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Mayor
Murphy abstained on Item 3,9 All other items on the Consent Calendar were approved
as recommended.END
OF CONSENT CALENDAR 4.
REPORTS FROM MAYOR MURPHY - None.5.REPORTS
FROM COUNCILMEMBERS TAPE 325 5.1
Councilmember Coontz - Resolution No. 9726 showing our support for the brave men and women
throughout our nation who are serving in the armed forces and especially from our City
family and local community. (C2500.D)Councilmember Coontz read
the following Resolution No. 9726, which she proposed, stating it was appropriate for
the City to acknowledge support for military personneL WHEREAS, the President
of the United States has deployed men and women of the Armed Forces who live
or work in the County and City of Orange to participate in the ongoing battle against terrorism and
threats to our country; and WHEREAS, approximately 8
employees in the City of Orange are enlisted in the military reserves and can
and have been called upon to serve in the military; and WHEREAS, the men
and women of the Armed Forces are dedicated to defending our freedom with their personal
sacrifices in order for citizens to enjoy the freedoms so often taken for granted; and PAGE
6
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (Continued)
WHEREAS, through this Resolution, the City Council wishes to acknowledge all our men and
women in the Armed Forces and especially those from our local community and extend our
gratitude and offer our support to their loved ones.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orange
supports and appreciates the brave men and women of our community and throughout the nation
who are serving in the Armed Forces and wish them a successful completion oftheir mission and
a safe return home.
RESOLUTION NO. 9726
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange in support of our Military Personnel.
MOTION - Ambriz SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to adopt
Resolution No, 9726.6. REPORTS FROM
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS 6.1 Annual
Report from Audit Committee Chairman. (OR1800.0.27.17)David Sundstrom, Audit
Committee Chairman reviewed the annual report, highlighting the Committee accomplishments for
the past year.MOTION - Ambriz SECOND -
Coontz A YES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor
Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: Received and filed.7.ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORTS TAPE 550 7.
1 Report from the Finance
Director updating City Service fees and revising the Master Schedule of Fees and Charges. (
C2500.J.1.1)The Finance Director reviewed the highlights
of the proposed Master Schedule of Fees, noting these fees reflect actual costs for
providing services. She reviewed proposed new fees, indicating Orange is in line with other
neighboring cities. She also indicated the BIA and the Chamber of Commerce have reviewed the fees. She
recognized Victoria BeatIey, InvestmentlRevenue Officer, for an outstanding job in
coordinating this project.Councilmember Coontz asked that information be
provided at the Community Development counter on what items are supposed
to be included in calculating Planning and Building fees, so citizens are not overcharged.PAGE 7
T---
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Councilmember Alvarez commended the Finance Department on an excellent report, stating he
was glad to see the City looking at this from a business approach.
Mayor pro tern Cavecche suggested that in the future, the City look at possible fees for repeat
visits by the Police Department to residences.
RESOLUTION NO. 9722
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange amending and revising the Master
Schedule of Fees and Charges as authorized by Orange Municipal Code Chapter 3.10.
MOTION - Coontz SECOND -
Alvarez AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION:1) Adopted
Resolution
No, 9722; and 2) Directed the City Attorney to amend all necessary Orange Municipal Code
provisions that are affected by adoption of this resolution.8. REPORTS FROM
CITY MANAGER 8.1 Presentation
of the Second Quarter 2002-03 Budget Report which includes the period July
1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. (C2500.E.4)SUMMARY: This
Second Quarter Report is intended to inform the City Council of departmental performance
for the quarter, including progress toward the achievement of departmental goals
and completion of major capital improvement projects. The report also summarizes the
results of the City's financial operations,The Assistant
City Manager reviewed the Quarterly Report, highlighting department accomplishments for
the quarter; and noted that expenditures and revenues are on target.MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Ambriz A
YES - Ambriz, Alvarez,
Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: Received and filed the
Second Quarter FY 2002-03 Budget Report,9.LEGAL AFFAIRS TAPE
1000 9.1 ORDINANCE NO.
12-03 (FIRST READING) (A3100.0 ANX 3-0R-2)An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange approving Zone Change No. 1216-02 to
allow the prezoning of Annexation Areas 3-0R-2, 3-0R-3, 3-
0R-4, 3-0R-5, 3-0R-7, 3-0R-8, 3-OR-
9, 3-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
9. LEGAL AFFAIRS (Continued)
MOTION - Murphy SECOND -
Coontz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved that Ordinance
No. 12-03 be read by title only and same was set for second reading by the preceding
vote.10. RECESS
TO THE MEETING OF THE ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 11. RECESS
TO CLOSED SESSION The City
Council recessed at 5:10 p,m.Note: There
was no Closed Session.a. Conference
with Legal Counsel - Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.
9(b). (one potential case).b. 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.7:00 P.
M. SESSION 12. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Rick Cryder, address
on file, asked that Yorba Park be opened and a decision be made on a proposed dog park.
13.PUBLIC HEARINGS
TAPE 1250 13.1 APPEAL
NO. 490-03, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2417-02,ADMINISTRATIVE
ADJUSTMENT 03-4, THE ELI HOME, INC.: (A4000.0 APP 490-
03)Time set for a public hearing to consider an appeal by the Eli Home, Inc., of the
Planning Commission's denial on March 17, 2003 of Conditional Use Permit 2417-02
and Administrative Adjustment 03-4 to allow additional development of a .42 acre lot by
constructing a two-story Craftsman Style building comprised of two apartment units (combined total of 3.
398 sq. ft.); a two-story addition to the existing 2,047 sq. ft. residence (a combined total of 3,
819 sq. ft,) and a five car 1,102 sq. ft, garage with a 724 sq. ft. studio apartment above;
and the demolition of a 256 sq. ft. storage unit along the north side of the property,
The development will be used exclusively for transitional housing for The Eli Home, Inc. clients.
The property is located
at 655 South Glassell Street.Note: This project is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA
Guidelines Section
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
THE APPELLANT STATES THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR THE APPEAL:
I) The Planning Commission stated the project would be overbuilt. The property is zoned R-
3,The project is within zoning
requirements.2) The Plaming Commission raised issues of number of parking spaces, The Eli
Home designed parking spaces as to the requirements stated by the City of Orange
staff.3) The Planning Commission raised issues of design, The Eli Home worked diligently to
win the approval of the City Design Review
Committee,4) The Planning Commission raised issues of a required rear setback. The Eli Home
project meets and exceeds setback requirements, The required rear yard setback is 10 feet. The
Eli Home project has a 20 ft. rear yard
setback.5) The Plaming Commission raised issues of safety. The Eli Home project received
approval from both the City of Orange Fire and Police
Departments.6) The Planning Commission stated there are too many of these shelter facilities in the
area.They suggested that we find somewhere else to go. The Eli Home has received State
of California grant funding specific to this property to provide additional desperately
needed transitional housing and bed
space,"Staff
Report The Community Development Director reviewed the proposal, outlining the
Plaming Commission concerns which included the intensity of building mass and bulk relative to
other structures in the neighborhood, the size of the lot and the overall location of the site,
adverse impacts by the number of people that could potentially live in the facility, and access
onto Orange Street. She then reviewed the appellant's responses to each of the
Planning Commissions'
concerns.Council
Ouestions In response to questions by Councilmember Alvarez, the Community Development
Director pointed out that this structure is part of the Old Towne District, but not individually listed on
the historic
registry.Mayor pro tern Cavecche asked about access onto the property from Orange Street rather
than Glassell
Street.The Public Works Director explained there is no ideal access, either from Glassell or
Orange.However, from an engineering standpoint, the best access is off of Orange, as Glassell is
an arterial highway with approximately 28,000 vehicle trips per day along that portion and
is designed with a right turn only lane traveling north, which would require anyone exiting
onto that street to have to immediately weave into another lane for through traffic. He pointed out
the existing driveways on Glassell are narrow, probably 12 to 14 feet. He did agree that Orange is
a narrow street without a sufficient radius to allow a turn around with vehicles parked along
the
street.PAGE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilmember Coontz asked about a different design for the driveway, suggesting perhaps a
half circle driveway off of Glassell.
The Public Works Director stated a wider driveway would be better, but still not ideal.
Councilmember Coontz stated Orange Street is an historical entrance to Hart Park, and there is
never enough parking in the area, especially during events at the Park Orange Street is very
narrow and suggested there needs to be other ways to accommodate better access to the project.
She asked how the present house, the Watson House, was determined to be not contributing to
the Historic District.
The Community Development Director reported the determination was based on the survey data
that went into the establishment of the Historic District at that time. All properties were
surveyed, and it was probably based on the age of the property, which was less than 50 years old
at that time.
Councilmember Coontz stated there are different ways to look at historical significance which is
very often based not only on architecture, but also on the importance of the individual who
owned the house and Mr. Watson was a very important person in the City of Orange's history.
In response to questions by Mayor Murphy, the Public Works Director explained some of the
traffic problems around Orange Street. Road width on Orange is more of a problem than
volume. At LaVeta and Orange, there is also significant queuing of traffic, which would make it
difficult to get out of that intersection, especially during morning hours, Also, access off of
River Street onto Glassell, would be better than a driveway, but it still creates problems turning
north onto Glassell and then having to weave over to get out of the right turn only lane on
northbound Glassell. Adding more traffic in that area is not a good situation, He reiterated that
there are difficulties on both streets, but using Orange Street is the lesser of the problem areas.
Mayor Murphy pointed out that while personally driving down Orange Street, the street was not
wide enough to accommodate parked cars and two way traffic; and expressed concern with a
project contributing to an already bad traffic situation on Orange Street.
Councilmember Coontz suggested access could be made available from both Orange and
Glassell, instead of an either/or situation; and pointed out there is a senior housing facility
directly across the street on Glassell, and many of those residents have cars and turn out onto
Glassell.
Councilmember Ambriz asked about the amount of additional traffic being generated; and noted
the difficulty in people accessing Hart Park from Orange Street, which probably needs to be
addressed in the future for the whole neighborhood.
PAGE 11
T---
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
The Public Works Director noted there is no hard data on this type of land use, but they would
expect traffic generation of approximately 45 to 66 trips per day, Presently, it is about 25 trips
per day.
MAYOR MURPHY OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 2240
Mayor Murphy clarified that public comments need to be directed to land use issues, and not on
the operational aspects of the facility. He stated the Council had received all correspondence on
the project and it will be placed into the record,
Kim Tulleners, Program Director for Eli Home, 301 E. Grove, reviewed the proposal, stating the
proposed expansion will accommodate 9 families plus a live-in caretaker, with a maximum
of28 persons. She indicated they have met the R-3 zoning requirements and
parking requirements;and they are willing to work with the City and the neighborhood to design a project that
will fit into the neighborhood, She stated visitors are allowed upon request, but they have
to
be scheduled.Mr. Bob Cerenic, Assistant Director, Eli Home, addressed traffic impacts, noting
that many residents rely on public transportation and do not own vehicles. They also have access to
a van shuttle and the shuttle stops will take place on Glassell Street. He stated they
have done everything in good faith to make sure the project fits within the design concerns and
are also willing to construct a display honoring the original Orange family who occupied the
home, With regard to a time frame for grant funding, he stated they have already missed the deadline
for an April 11th State grant, but they have applied for an extension until August 1 ", but have
not heard if that extension has been granted, He also argued that a CUP is not required as
they are protected by the Federal Fair
Housing Act.The City Attorney stated he had spoken with an attorney representing the Eli Home, noting
it is probably too late to argue the point that a CUP is not needed, especially after moths of
review by City staff and various reviewing bodies; and the Eli Home is currently operating under
a CUP.With regard to the issues raised by the Eli Home, he stated the Fair Housing
Act prohibits discrimination, and he was not able to find any discrimination against the Eli Home in
any City record, Also, this development does not fit the definition of an apartment project, and
if this were an apartment project, it would still be subject to the Old Towne
Design Guidelines.The following people spoke in favor of the appeal. Their comments included: this is
a good design for the land use; many residents do not own vehicles, which limits the traffic
impacts; this is a good location as it is close to a bus stop and a park; they are good neighbors; a
redesign of the project would be expensive; and there are other multi unit complexes in
the area.Richard McFarland, Board of Directors of Eli Homes, 301 E. Grove
Ave. Orange Donald Reunie, 9852 W, Katella,
Anaheim, Architect Lorn Galloway, 301
E. Grove Vicki Woods, 704
E. Maple
PAGE
12
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
William Brown, 420 S. Euclid, Anaheim
Leon Alexander, 2199 Timbergrove Lane
Leo Deterding, 7655 Silver Dollar Lane., Anaheim
Reina Schmitz, 1516 N, Sycamore, Santa Ana
Tom Tait, 795 Dove Tree, Anaheim
Denise Duncan, 301 E. Grove
Richard Reed, 300 N, Rampart #34
Morgan Green, 1289 N. San Remo
Richard Chavez, 1245 E. Lincoln, Anaheim
Vickie Arsi, 301 E. Grove
Mathew Cunningham, 435 E. Riverview Ave.
Councilmember Alvarez left the dais at 8:20 p.m. and returned at 8:25 p.m.
The following people spoke in opposition to the appeal. Their comments included: Orange
Street is too narrow to accommodate any more traffic; 2-story garage is too big for
the neighborhood; too much traffic in the general area; not consistent with Old Towne design;
loss of historical value of the original home; those in favor of the project do not live in the
area;conditions imposed from existing CUP have not been followed; this is part of the
historical Nutwood Place neighborhood; inconsistencies with CEQA findings; and Old Towne is
already over
built.Norman Baker, 621 S. Orange
St.Jeff Banner, 604 S, Orange
St.Janet Crenshaw, 400 Bock N, Shaffer, Chairman
ofOTPA Chris Lopez, 629 S. Orange
St.Michael Stastny, 649 S. Orange
St.Laree Lopez, 629 S, Orange St. (submitted
map)Lorrie Stastny, 649 S. Orange
St.Julie Banner, 604 S. Orange
St.Ann Seibert, 340 S. Olive
St.Councilmember Coontz pointed out the Council is always careful about developments that
are federally funded and what the long term aspects are; and look at the possibility of what
these projects will be like at the end of the
term.The Council recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 TAPE
5370 The Appellant addressed some of the concerns that were expressed. Overparking in the area
is not a result of their presence, but rather an existing condition; the characteristics oftheir
families are different, and there are not many vehicles at their facility; they will use regular trash cans
on PAGE
13
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
both Orange and Glassell, and not dumpsters; they plan to be there long term because with
grant funding, they will be able to own the property; any overcrowding issues should be
addressed through normal City policies; and they have designed the project to compliment the
neighborhood,
MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 5640
The Community Development Director reviewed the CEQA findings, noting that staff found the
project to be exempt. With regard to cumulative impacts, both CEQA and local guidelines
discuss that, especially as it relates to the Historic District This is an ongoing analysis being
done at the stafflevel.
Councilmember Coontz asked for clarification on the CUP process,
The City Attorney explained a CUP is required to address other types of uses not normally
allowed in a particular zone, which may create some type of impact; and then conditions are
imposed to mitigate those impacts. He explained that a CUP does go with the land, and if the Eli
Home were sold, another facility could operate under the same CUP. However, if the use
changed, then they mayor may not be required to have a CUP, He also stated it would be
inappropriate for the City Council to consider how many types of these uses there were in the
Old Towne area. In that respect, Federal Law would supercede a CEQA issue. It is not relevant
to consider the types of families in this facility;
It was pointed out this CUP will supercede the existing CUP.
Council Comments TAPE 6000
Councilmember Coontz stated it is important for any developer to realize there are choices on
where they should develop and to know what the existing conditions are and the traffic and
residential character of the neighborhood, She supported the Eli Home in their original purpose,
and told them initially that if they want to expand in the future, they have to be very careful, in
this particular site, in dealing with the neighbors. She read through the Minutes from the original
hearing for the existing CUP, where it was emphasized by the Council, and recommended
strongly, that the Eli Home keep in touch with their neighbors at all times so the neighbors would
know what is expected for the future. She was concerned that the Eli Home has not kept in touch
with the neighbors, because of the issues that have been brought up. She has supported other
facilities, such as House of Hope, but those facilities worked very closely with their neighbors in
resolving issues.
Councilmember Alvarez stated when the Eli Home came to this site originally, the neighbors did
not express their concerns, and he wished he had heard these comments two years ago. He has
learned a great deal about group homes and facilities such as this one. He noted this is an infill
development, but so are a lot of other projects on Glassell; and noted the applicant has met
certain requirements. He would like to see access from Glassell, but understands the problems
PAGE 14
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
with that. He did not think this facility would add many cars, because of the type of families that
live there. This project probably would not impact the neighborhood any more than the existing
apartments on Glassell. This is actually an ideal site for a facility such as this - close to a church,
a park and hospital services, He suggested certain changes to the project, such as eliminating
the detached garage unit and attaching it to the home and incorporating it into the design
of the project; that the setback on Orange Street be greater with more development at the center
of the property, which would create a softer scape off of Orange Street; change the parking
scenario; and eliminate the caretaker unit to reduce the bulk and mass. With these types of
changes, he could support the project.TAPE
6690 Councilmember
Ambriz pointed out this development is allowed in the R-3 zone, the lot
coverage is less than what is allowed, and the applicant has exceeded parking requirements, He
stated this is a doable project, but there are issues and concerns to be worked out.
Councilmember Coontz expressed concern with the proposed buildings - that there does not seem
to be any cohesiveness with the project, that the buildings are strung out and need to be brought
back in, She asked if the configuration of the project could be changed to consider access
off Glassell. She noted the Design Review Committee did the best they could with the design;
suggesting that the order of the DRC and Planning Commission review may need to be reversed,
because the size of the building is under the Planning Commission review and that should
come before the design aspects.Mayor
pro tern Cavecche stated the program is a tremendous asset to the City, but the City Council
needs to look at the project strictly from a land use issue. She stated this type of use on Glassell
Street would be appropriate, but this lot goes into a very special historic district along Orange
Street and the impact to the existing neighborhood has to be considered. She expressed concern
that the entire design of the project - pushing it onto Orange Street, was probably driven by the
Glassell Street traffic impacts. She also agreed the garage unit is too big and bulky for Orange Street,
but not for Glassell. The part of the project facing Orange negatively impacts the neighborhood, and
she can not support that.TAPE2-105
Mayor
Murphy agreed with many of the concerns expressed by the Council. The quality of the service
provided by this facility is commendable, but a decision can not be made based on the need
and service of this home, He agreed the bulk and mass needs to be reduced and suggested shared
access between Glassell and Orange.MAYOR
MURPHY REOPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING Mayor
Murphy asked the Appellant if they would be willing to consider a continuation and send this
project back to the Planning Commission with specific recommendations from the Council,then
returning to the City Councilor did the Appellant want a definite decision at this time.The
Council recessed at 9:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:57 p.m,PAGE
15 T
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Mr. Michael Galloway, representing the Appellant, agreed to a continuance to go back to the
Planning Commission with recommendations from the Council, but requested the process be fast
tracked.
MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING TAPE 2 -290
The Council provided the following suggestions:
Flip flop the parking location, which would place the parking garage immediately adjacent to
the middle building.
Eliminate the care taker unit.
On Glassell Street, there is an entrance asphalt patch; it was suggested to have staff find the
room to create a parking pocket so as not to disrupt the traffic on Glassell. The van used to
pick up residents and make deliveries will stop on Glassell Street and not Orange Street.
Fencing - screenfencing on the east property line; or somehow create a screen wall similar to
what was done at the Palmyra senior housing project at Palmyra and Glassell.Orange
Street should be treated as a frontage because it has been used as a frontage for years;it
should be thought of in relation to the other homes on the street, maybe with landscaping,to
be complimentary to the neighborhood.On
Orange Street, there needs to be a setback with landscaping; it should not be just asphalt,because
all along the street are residences with frontages.Provide
access the whole length of the development from one end to the other; from Glassell all
the way across.The
project is stretched out to a point that doesn't make sense and it needs to be pulled together.
The Watson House, which was supposed to be kept as it is, can not be seen any more.
Concern expressed about using a very large piece of property in a logical way.The
screening along Orange Street should incorporate architectural ideas from the park, such as
river rock.The
Applicant shall work with City staff to determine how to mitigate traffic on Orange Street.
Look
at possible shared access from front to back of property; with access off of Glassell as well.
There is 15 feet of width from the side of the proposed new building to the wall; and 15
feet of width on the existing structure as well. The applicant is proposing a 12 foot wide driveway
along the north side from the parking area to Orange Street.It
looks like 3 separate buildings - needs to be more cohesive. This needs to be considered if another use
comes in later.Staffis to
work with the applicant.Council noted
they have to look at not only the current use, but the potential uses once the property is
built and in place. Looking at a possible 40 trips per day from an apartment standpoint is
the measure that needs to be considered, in the event this use were to leave and another use
came in.PAGE 16
I-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Council Action
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Murphy AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved to direct
this project back to the Planning Commission, without prejudice, with comments to be
incorporated from the Council.13.2 ORDINANCE
NO. 3-03 - STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE (A2500.0)Time set for
a public hearing to consider the adoption of Ordinance No. 3-03 amending Titles 16 and 17
of the Orange Municipal Code deleting the Staff Review Committee and substituting the Community Development
Director as the initial reviewing body for various land use applications. The
proposed ordinance would eliminate the formal Staff review Committee SRC) that
is currently subject to the Brown Act. An informal staff review committee would be established by
Administrative Policy. The initial reviewing body for various land use applications would
be the Community Development Director after consultation with the staff review committee
as designated by the City Manager.The Community
Development Director provided a report. The City Attorney noted a correction to the
Ordinance had been provided to the Council.Council Ouestions
In response
to questions from Councilmember Alvarez, the City Attorney explained the Brown Act was
changed about three years ago to include any committee formed by Council action;which is
why the Staff Review Committee is subject to the Brown Act regulations.In response
to questions from Mayor pro tern Cavecche, the Community Development Director explained the
Ordinance stipulates that recommendations will come from her but in consultation with the
informal Staff Review Committee. The Committee will probably meet the same time with the
same people, but they will not be open public meetings and not subject to the Brown Act; but
rather a chance for staff to review the details of the projects informally. This will allow individual members
of the Committee to also meet without Brown Act regulations.Councilmember Coontz
stressed the importance of the informality; as the City has a history of dealing very
positively with the development community, and this change will assure that continues.MAYOR
MURPHY
OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING THERE BEING
NO SPEAKERS, MAYOR MURPHY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING PAGE 17
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Council Action:
ORDINANCE NO. 3-03 (FIRST
READING)An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Titles 16 and 17 of
the Orange Municipal Code deleting the Staff Review committee and substituting the
Community Development Director as the initial reviewing body for various land use
applications.MOTION - Alvarez
SECOND - Ambriz AYES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche Moved that
Ordinance No. 3-03, with corrections by the City Attorney, be read by title only and same
was set for second reading by the preceding vote.14.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT TAPE 820 14.
1 Request for the permanent installation of speed humps on Pampas Street between Lincoln
Avenue and Brentwood Avenue and Brentwood Avenue between Pampas Street and
GIassell Street (S4000.S.6)SUMMARY:
Speed humps were installed for a three-month trial basis on Pampas Street and
Brentwood Avenue. The City Traffic Commission recommends their installation be made
permanent.
The Public Works Director reviewed the proposal, noting this was the first speed hump proposal
to make its way through the entire process as part of the Residential Neighborhood Traffic
Management Plan; and that all criteria had been met.
In response to Council questions, the Public Works Director explained there is no indication of
cut through traffic in this area; the request is for 2 speed humps on Pampas and 3 on Brentwood;
that one of the humps became dislodged during the trial period; and that the initial request was
initiated several years ago during the hiatus of speed humps.
Council indicated they would have liked a map showing the exact locations of the speed humps.
Public Comments
The following people spoke in favor of installation of speed humps.
Diana Letherman, 2724 N. Pampas - indicated a significant decrease in traffic and speed.Stacy
German, 2723 N. Pampas - noted this will help to reduce the cut through traffic from the employees
at Volt.Richard Clark,
501 W. Brentwood PAGE 18
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
14. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT (Continued)
Scott Peterson, 424 W. Crystal View - this may increase traffic on other streets and speed humps
may have to be installed on surrounding streets The
following people spoke in opposition to the installation of speed humps:Sid
Mackin, 411 W. Crystal View - the speedhumps will divert traffic to other streets.James Dunlap,
2586 N. Pampas - his wife experiences back pain when driving over the speed humps; and
she also has to use the street in her electric wheelchair to avoid obstacles along the sidewalk.
Joshua Dunlap, 2586
N. Pampas - submitted petition of residents opposed to the speed humps Council Ouestions Councilmember
Alvarez
asked about
the costs of the speed humps. The Public Works Director indicated it costs approximately $
500 per hump, and there are five speed humps proposed on these streets. The humps
are 12 feet long with a maximum height of2.5 inches.Councilmember Ambriz asked about
any future plans for Crystal View or Brookshire Streets.The Public Works Director
indicated the residents on these streets can go through the same process to request the
speed humps. Staff will assist them in identifYing the residents that need to be polled and
provide petition forms, but the area would have to meet all the criteria.Mayor Murphy pointed out
the process has always been one of achieving signatures prior to doing the temporary installation.
Councilmember Coontz stated there
always seems to be a speeding problem on long streets.Mayor pro tern Cavecche
asked about traffic volumes; the petition which was submitted and those residents who were
not within the survey area; and the dimensions of the speed humps.She also pointed out
the possibility ofresidents on other streets coming forward if they see traffic diverted onto their streets.
The Public Works Director
indicated there was some variation in traffic volume, but it was substantially the same with
the speed humps. He also stated there were 74 properties notified of the original request and
they were also all notified of the Council meeting. The speed humps will leave 36 inches
of clearance at each curb for ADA requirements and the permanent humps will be feathered into
the existing pavement better than the temporary ones.Councilmember Alvarez expressed concern
on the cost of the speed humps given the current budget constraints.Mayor Murphy
pointed out
it is the City's policy to pay for them and suggested the Council can look at that policy
in the future as more of these requests are received.PAGE 19 Tn-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 2003
14. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT (Continued)
MOTION" Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez AYES -
Ambriz, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche ACTION: I)
Approve the installation of permanent speed humps to replace the temporary speed humps on
Pampas Street and Brentwood Avenue; 2) Approve the installation of a third speed hump on
Brentwood Ave. adjacent to 501/511 E. Brentwood Avenue; and 3) comments to be noted about
the dimensions of the speed humps in terms of the width allowing for access on the streetscape.Off
Al!
enda Item Councilmember Coontz
asked about the R-3 zoning on Orange Street, that it does not seem possible
to include R-3 considerations on those lots; and asked that this issue be looked at.
15. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION - Alvarez SECOND -
Ambriz AYES - Ambriz,
Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Coontz, Cavecche The City Council
adjourned at 10:55 p.m. to an Adjourned Regular Meeting, April 29, 2003 at 5:00 p.
m. in Weimer Room to consider FY 2003-2004 Revenues/Expenditures Fund Balances and acquisition
of real property located at 105,125,145 and 164-180 South Water Street from the
Orange County Fire Authority and approval of an amended cooperation agreement with the Orange
Redevelopment Agency relating to the sale of 164-180 south Water Street to the Orange
Redevelopment agency.
The next Regular Council meeting is May 13, 2003.
aff'-(-(~(-4' #'~CA~SANDRAJ.
THCART, CMC CITY CLERK
1jl~lI
MAYOR PAGE
20