ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 2022
TELECONFERENCE NOTICE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953, Subdivision (b), the regular meeting included teleconference participation by Council Member Jose Diaz from: 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 7th Floor, Anaheim, CA 92805. This Notice and Agenda were posted at the teleconference location. Public comment on the agenda from this address was allowed pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.3.
The regular meeting of January 11, 2022 was called to order at 3:03 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda, and related materials were duly posted on January 6, 2022.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Harry Sidhu and Council Members Trevor O’Neil, Gloria Ma’ae, Avelino Valencia, and Stephen Faessel (in person). Council Member Jose Diaz (via teleconference). Council Member Jose F. Moreno joined the meeting in person at 3:12 P.M.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Vanderpool, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Robert Fabela announced Closed Session Item No. 01 pertained to two recent challenges by the California Housing and Community Development Department, specifically the City’s transitional housing program/Grandma’s House of Hope and the stadium transaction.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of nine (9) public comments were received electronically prior to 1:00 P.M. related to Closed Session. [A final total of 11 public comments was received electronically related to Closed Session, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official record]. – See Appendix.
Jackie Garibay encouraged City Council to represent Anaheim residents in their opposition to Grandma’s House of Hope. She noted she lives directly behind one of Grandma’s House of Hope’s facilities and noted residents are not friendly with neighbors. She believed Je’Net Kreitner was deceptive and one-sided in her interviews with local television stations and encouraged City Council to fight for residents.
Carlos Garcia reported he lives adjacent to the proposed property for the transitional housing development. He expressed concern regarding the way City Council and the City Manager handled today’s meeting, noting there was little public notification, and encouraged the City to do better in the future. He expressed concern this sets precedent for other organizations to use the State to threaten the City to concede. He encouraged City Council to fight for its residents.
Cheryl Pebley thanked City Council for denying the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the proposed transitional housing project. She advised the uncalled-for letter sent to the City by the State was a slap in the face to the City Council. She expressed outrage that the State overruled the ruling of the City Council. She advised residents are being discriminated against and limits must be set regarding City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
how many transitional homes can operate in any given area. She encouraged City Council to put its foot down and stop the destruction of family neighborhoods.
Pat Pebley advised the only people being discriminated against are the homeowners in the area who are fighting to preserve family neighborhoods. She noted she found the letter from the State highly demeaning and threatening. She advised Anaheim has spent millions supporting the underprivileged and found it interesting that Ms. Kreitner did not mention the other properties City Council has approved in her interview with Channel 4 news. She praised City Council for trying to protect its residents and encouraged them to pursue litigation against the State.
Mary Dragieff reported there are 26 group homes within a half-mile radius of her home and noted residents do not appreciate the neighborhood becoming commercialized. She advised Grandma’s House of Hope is funded by the State and the Health Department. She noted when Ms. Kreitner contacted the State, she threw the residents of the neighborhood under the bus. She inquired how the State can be impartial when it is the one funding the group home and noted she believes a conflict of interest exists. She encouraged City Council to protect the community and fight back for common sense, control, oversight, and accountability over Grandma’s House of Hope and these type of group homes in general.
Shelly Nichols thanked City Council for supporting residents and noted residents felt heard by the City Council. She advised the residents’ goal is to find a balance between the State and the City Council. She encouraged City Council to stand for pausing to understand what is happening with group homes in the City. She volunteered to go door-to-door to obtain an accurate count of group homes in the area.
Paul Kott expressed opposition to the onslaught of group homes in the area. He expressed concern regarding the tenor and content of the letter from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and questioned the legal validity of its intent. He advised if the letter has no validity, the City needs to fight vigorously against it. He advised residents support the City Council and will help the City fight all the way.
Mayor Sidhu thanked those who spoke and noted the City Council is fighting for its residents. He advised it is unfortunate that HCD came to this conclusion. He encouraged residents to reach out to their local Assemblyperson and State Legislators to voice their opposition.
CLOSED SESSION: At 3:25 P.M., Mayor Sidhu recessed to closed session for consideration of the following:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section 54956.9 and/or initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section 54956.9: Two potential cases
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code) Name of Case: Turner Construction Company v. City of Anaheim; et al, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2017 0000956538
At 5:42 P.M., Mayor Sidhu reconvened the Anaheim City Council.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Harry Sidhu and Council Members Trevor O’Neil, Gloria Ma’ae, Jose F. Moreno, Avelino Valencia, and Stephen Faessel (in person).
Council Member Jose Diaz (via teleconference).
Invocation: Pastor Oona Casanova, Anaheim First Church of the Nazarene Flag Salute: Council Member Gloria Sahagún Ma'ae
Presentation: Recognizing the 2022 Anaheim Beautiful Holiday Lights Contest Winners Anaheim Beautiful President Lori Dinwiddie provided a brief overview of the organization and thanked City Council for hosting the annual contest. She presented highlights of each of the 13 winning properties.
Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later date):
Recognizing January 11, 2022, as Human Trafficking Awareness Day Anaheim Police Department Sgt. Juan Reveles thanked City Council for their continued support for ending Human Trafficking.
Council Member Moreno thanked Sgt. Reveles for his work and advised residents that City Hall is lit up in blue in recognition of Human Trafficking Awareness Day. He encouraged the City Manager to keep City Hall lit blue all month.
Recognizing January 17, 2022, as Martin Luther King Jr. Day Recognizing January 27, 2022, as World Holocaust Remembrance Day At 5:57 P.M., Mayor Sidhu called to order the Anaheim Industrial Development Authority (Special Meeting), the Successor Agency to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, and the Anaheim Housing Authority (in joint session with the City Council).
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS:
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported staff requested the continuance of Public Hearing Item No. 21 to January 25, 2022, at 6:30 P.M. and encouraged the public to visit www.anaheimredistricting.org to view all submitted draft district maps.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearing):
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of one (1) public comment was received electronically prior to 1:00 P.M. related to City Council agenda items and matters within the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Council. [A final total of 1 public comment was received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official record]. – See Appendix.
Prior to receipt of public comments, an outline of rules for public comments and a brief decorum statement was provided by Ms. Bass.
Mark Richard Daniels expressed concern there were four fentanyl-related deaths in the City. He encouraged City Council to help address the crisis, especially for the Anaheim youth.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
R. Joshua Collins encouraged City Council to put their trust in God and he expressed disappointment regarding the City’s choices regarding the sale of Angel Stadium. He encouraged City Council to support walk-in shelters, affordable housing, and other alternatives to shelters. He noted CityNet is not always effective and he hoped the City would look for additional assistance.
Bob Donelson requested the City make the legal costs it has incurred defending the sale of Angel Stadium public for transparency.
Bryan Kaye expressed concern City Council would not communicate with him regarding his concerns.
Joel Yesowitch reported he has an issue with feral cats in his apartment building and requested City Council’s assistance.
Cecil Jordan Corkern reported he has been working on the security reports for Disneyland and requested City Council review them.
CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE: None
At 6:18 P.M., Mayor Sidhu recessed the Anaheim City Council, the Successor Agency to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, and Anaheim Housing Authority.
At 6:29 P.M., Mayor Sidhu reconvened the Anaheim City Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR: At 6:29 P.M., the consent calendar was considered with Council Member Diaz pulling Item No. 12, Council Member Moreno pulling Item No. 15, and Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil pulling Item No. 17 for separate discussion and consideration.
MOTION: Council Member Faessel moved to waive reading of all ordinances and resolutions and adopt the balance of the consent calendar, in accordance with reports, certifications, and recommendations furnished each City Council Member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Ma’ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members O’Neil, Diaz, Ma’ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES – 0; Motion carried.
6. Receive and file minutes of the Library Board meeting of October 11, 2021 and the Public Utilities Board meeting of November 17, 2021.
7. Waive Council Policy 4.1 and approve the agreement with Chuck Schroth dba JSM Support Services, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 annually, to manage and provide the deployment and maintenance of law enforcement investigative technological platforms for a one year period, with up to two consecutive one-year renewals; and authorize the Chief of Police to exercise the renewal options and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement.
8. Waive Council Policy 4.1 and approve the agreement with Savage Training Group, in an amount not to exceed $53,600, for training services; and authorize the Chief of Police, or his designee, to administer the agreement and execute any amendments under the terms and conditions of the agreement.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
9. Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in the amount of $295,000, for the Arterial Sidewalks Removal and Replacement at Various Locations – Phase 6; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract and any other related documents, and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15301, Class 1, and 15302, Class 2, of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the escrow agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
10. Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Baltazar Construction, Inc., in the amount of $379,363, for the Concrete Facilities Removal and Reconstruction - Citywide Phase 7 Project; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract and any other related documents and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15301, Class 1, and 15302, Class 2, of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the escrow agreement pertaining to contract retention.
11. Approve Design-Build Master Agreements for Electric Projects with prequalified Design-Build Entities, each in a not to exceed award amount of $3,000,000 per work order package, plus change order authorization in an amount not to exceed 10% of the work order package price for a five-year term with an extension of up to 12 months, as necessary, to complete outstanding work order packages in progress; authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute the agreements and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreements; authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the agreements, as long as such changes are determined to be de minimis by the City Attorney; and determine that the projects to be performed under the agreements shall be categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, Sections 15301, 15302, 15303, and/or 15304 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (Asplundh Construction, LLC; EE Electric, Inc.; Hampton Tedder Electric Co.; Hot Line Construction, Inc.; Parkia, Inc.; Southern Contracting Company; Tri-Technic, Inc.; and such other prequalified design-build entities).
13. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM which certifies that the City Council has authorized the project list submittal for Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021 (CRRSAA) funding through the Orange County Transportation Authority 2021 Pavement Management Relief Funding (PMRF) Program and amend the budget for the fiscal year accordingly (acceptance of funds in the amount of $1,037,763; Knott Avenue Rehabilitation Project from Ball Road to Orange Avenue).
14. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Director of Public Works or designee to submit two improvement project grant applications to the Orange County Transportation Authority for funding under Project O - the Regional Capacity Program under Measure M2 on behalf of the City of Anaheim, and if awarded, authorize the acceptance of such grant on behalf of the City and amend the budget for the fiscal year accordingly (grants funds in the total amount of $5,550,000; Lincoln Avenue Street Widening Project from East Street to Evergreen Street and Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard Intersection Improvements Project).
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
16. ORDINANCE NO. 6522 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 18.040.020 (Intent of Individual Zones) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to clarify that the “RS-4” Single-Family Residential Zone may be used to implement the Corridor Residential General Plan Land Use Designation for projects with proposed densities that are no greater than 13 dwelling units per acre (Development Project No. 2019-00139).
ORDINANCE NO. 6523 (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 (Development Project No. 2019-00139) (910 South Western Avenue) [Reclassification No. 2019-00325, reclassifying the subject property from the “T” Transition Zone to the “RS-4” Single-Family Residential Zone].
Determine that the Project qualifies for a Class 32 – In-Fill Development Project Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Sections 21000-21189.57) as set forth in Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000-15387).
18. Approve minutes of the City Council meetings of April 27, 2021 and May 11, 2021.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
12. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the submission of a grant application and the acceptance of a grant on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Bureau of Justice Assistance Fiscal Year 2021 Connect and Protect: Law Enforcement Behavioral Health Responses Grant, authorizing the Police Chief or his designee to execute all required grant documents, and increasing the budget for Fiscal Year 2021-22 accordingly (grant funds in the amount of $550,000; FY 2021/22 budget amendment increase in the amount of $398,287).
Police Chief Jorge Cisneros reported the item is a Law Enforcement Behavioral Health Grant in the amount of $550,000 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. He advised the grant would cover the funding for two (2) Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) Officers and a contracted project evaluator. He advised the two HOT Officers would assist with cases where there is mental illness and a criminal or safety nexus. He noted the Anaheim Police Department (APD) would work with the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA), CityNet, the City’s contracted homeless service provider, and the contracted project evaluator to evaluate the Community Care Response Team (CCRT) project.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Diaz thanked Police Chief Cisneros for being creative in finding funding sources for the program.
In response to Council Member Diaz’s inquiries, Police Chief Cisneros explained Peace Officer Standards and Training Program (POST) requires peace officers to go through 24 hours of Perishable Skills Training in a 24-month period to continue their POST certification. He advised APD requires their officers to go through 100 hours of training per year.
Council Member Diaz expressed his pride for APD. He noted one of his reasons for running for office was to help residents and this is a perfect example.
MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the submission of a City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
grant application and the acceptance of a grant on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Bureau of Justice Assistance Fiscal Year 2021 Connect and Protect: Law Enforcement Behavioral Health Responses Grant, authorizing the Police Chief or his designee to execute all required grant documents, and increasing the budget for Fiscal Year 2021-22 accordingly (grant funds in the amount of $550,000; FY 2021/22 budget amendment increase in the amount of $398,287), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno congratulated Police Chief Cisneros for successfully pursuing the funds for the program and for his progress in de-escalating APD.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiries, Police Chief Cisneros explained that part of the requirement of accepting the grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance is to have a contracted project evaluator. He confirmed the grant does require a 20% match from the General Fund for the first two (2) years and a 40% local match for the third year. He estimated $600,000 of City funds would be needed over the next three (3) years.
Council Member Moreno clarified for the record that this item commits future City funds and expressed support for the item.
In response to Council Member Faessel’s inquiry, Police Chief Cisneros clarified that Be Well OC would be included in the overall mission of the CCRT but noted the agreement with Be Well OC was not complete when the grant was approved so they were not included in the staff report.
MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the submission of a grant application and the acceptance of a grant on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Bureau of Justice Assistance Fiscal Year 2021 Connect and Protect: Law Enforcement Behavioral Health Responses Grant, authorizing the Police Chief or his designee to execute all required grant documents, and increasing the budget for Fiscal Year 2021-22 accordingly (grant funds in the amount of $550,000; FY 2021/22 budget amendment increase in the amount of $398,287), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members O’Neil, Diaz, Ma’ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES – 0; Motion carried.
15. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-004 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget to increase the Economic Development Department budget and decrease the Community and Economic Development Department budget by an equal amount ($42,887,141).
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-005 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing and directing the City Manager or his designee to represent the City in matters pertaining to the preparation of former Redevelopment Agency properties for sale and/or development and distribute proceeds from the sale of former Redevelopment Agency properties to the Orange County Auditor Controller (proceeds in the amount of $3,560,000).
Economic Development Director Sergio Ramirez reported the item is an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2021/22 budget. He explained the item transfers $42,900,000 from the Community and Economic Development Department budget to the newly formed Economic Development Department for funding for the remainder of the fiscal year. He advised no increase in funding is being proposed.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
Mr. Ramirez reported that new economic development programs and projects would be proposed throughout the FY 2022/23 budget adoption process. He advised the item also seeks authorization from the Orange County Auditor-Controller for eight (8) properties sold to date for $3,500,000. He reported a separate agenda item would be forthcoming to City Council to modify the name of the Community and Economic Development Department to avoid confusion moving forward.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiries, Mr. Ramirez explained many of the properties were conveyed to the City as right-of-way properties and that payment is the tax payment that belongs to the Auditor-Controller of part of the sale. He explained the transfer of funds would increase the budget of the newly formed Economic Development Department and reduce the budget of the Community and Economic Development Department by an equal amount.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Interim Community and Economic Development Director Grace Stepter reported that $42,900,000 represents 19% of the Community and Economic Development budget. She explained the majority of the department’s budget is for Section 8 use and would remain. Mr. Ramirez clarified approximately $33,000,000 is from the California Department of Finance with the remainder coming from the General Fund.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Ms. Stepter reported the Community and Economic Development Department has no General Fund money in its budget.
MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-004 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget to increase the Economic Development Department budget and decrease the Community and Economic Development Department budget by an equal amount ($42,887,141) and RESOLUTION NO. 2022-005 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing and directing the City Manager or his designee to represent the City in matters pertaining to the preparation of former Redevelopment Agency properties for sale and/or development and distribute proceeds from the sale of former Redevelopment Agency properties to the Orange County Auditor Controller (proceeds in the amount of $3,560,000), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno thanked Mr. Ramirez for responding to residents’ requests regarding new businesses. He encouraged City Manager Jim Vanderpool to consider increasing resources for the Community and Economic Development Department during the next budget cycle.
MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-004 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget to increase the Economic Development Department budget and decrease the Community and Economic Development Department budget by an equal amount ($42,887,141) and RESOLUTION NO. 2022-005 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing and directing the City Manager or his designee to represent the City in matters pertaining to the preparation of former Redevelopment Agency properties for sale and/or development and distribute proceeds from the sale of former Redevelopment Agency properties to the Orange County Auditor Controller (proceeds in the amount of $3,560,000), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members O’Neil, Diaz, Ma’ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES – 0; Motion carried.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
17. ORDINANCE NO. 6524 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Code), including Chapters 17.08 (Subdivisions); 18.04 (Single- Family Residential Zones); 18.06 (Multiple-Family Residential Zones); 18.08 (Commercial Zones); 18.10 (Industrial Zone); 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose Zones); 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); 18.30 (Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) Overlay Zone); 18.32 (Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone); 18.36 (Types of Uses); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); 18.42 (Parking and Loading); 18.62 (Administrative Reviews); 18.92 (Definitions); 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and Development Standards); and 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SP 2017- 1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and making findings in connection therewith (Development Project No. 2021-00216) (Adjustment No. 12 to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1) (Adjustment No. 5 to the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1) [reflect recent changes in State law related to Senate Bill No. 9].
Determine that the above actions are exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and the Legislature has declared that this ordinance, which implements the provisions of Government Code Section 65852.21, is not a project under CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines.
Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil explained the reason the item is on the agenda is that the State passed Senate Bill (SB) 9 last year, which allows residential lots to be split. He further explained that while the City must comply, it could impose certain requirements for lots, which will help a lot retain the same compatibility as much as possible for the rest of the neighborhood. He advised SB 9 does require three (3) years of owner occupancy before a residential lot can be split so there would not be speculators or developers coming and drastically changing communities.
Planning and Building Director Ted White reported SB 9 was signed into law on September 16, 2021.
He explained it gives the City the option to default to state law or adopt local regulations consistent with state law. He noted that adopting local regulations allows the City to adopt local guidelines above and beyond what is included in state law.
Mr. White reported there are two (2) main components to SB 9. He advised the first mandates ministerial approval of one (1) additional housing unit on an existing lot, which is known as a Two-Unit Development. He advised the second mandates the approval of lot splits into single-family zones, referred to as an Urban Lot Split. He noted that SB 9 provisions are different and separate from the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Law that allows three (3) units.
Mr. White reported SB 9 prohibits Affordable Housing, Tenant Occupied within the last 3 years, Rental Terminated within the last 15 years, Hazard Waste Sites, Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP) sites, Conservation Easement, and Historic District sites from implementing either a Two-Unit Development or an Urban Lot Split. He advised the City is allowed to deny a development if the development would have a significant impact on public health and SB 9 development would not be allowed in a Sewer Deficient Area. He reported SB 9 allows the City to prohibit, with exceptions, Very High Fire Hazard, Severity Zone Earthquake, Fault Zone Special Flood Hazard Zone, and Regulatory Floodway from implementing either a Two-Unit Development or Urban Lot Split. He noted a large area of the City would be prohibited from implementing SB 9.
Mr. White provided a brief overview of the Two-Unit Development and SB 9 requirements. He reported the proposed City standard would allow two (2) units, allow for a minimum of 400 square feet City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
and a maximum of 800 square feet for the unit size, require a 10 feet separation between units, allow for the new unit to use the height requirements of the underlying zone for Two-Unit Development, allow a maximum height of one (1) story or 16 feet, allow side and rear setbacks of four (4) feet, require one (1) parking space or no parking space if the unit is within a half-mile walking distance of a high-transit corridor, allow the conversion of common existing structures, require design requirements consistent with code for single-family zones, require new units are metered separately from the main unit for utilities, and advised all applications are ministerial.
Mr. White provided a brief overview of the Urban Lot Split and SB 9 requirements. He reported the proposed City standard would require ministerial approval, lot split on any single-family residential zone not prohibited, require the minimum lot size to be 1,200 square feet or 40% of the existing lot before the Urban Lot Split, whichever is greater, a maximum number of two (2) units, require all new lots that have a frontage directly on a public or private street to have a lot width of 25 feet, and require three (3) years of owner occupancy before an Urban Lot Split.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Mr. White advised the requirement would be that the owner would have to live on the property for an additional three (3) years once the lot is split.
Mr. White continued with the proposed City standard for Urban Lot Splits which also prohibits a lot to be split after the initial split, prohibits Urban Lot Splits on adjacent properties that have already been split and owned by the same owner, and requires each lot to provide separate utility connections. He noted since SB 9 requires ministerial review, procedural changes would need to be incorporated into the City’s Municipal Code to create an administrative review process and would be processed as a building permit with a fee. He reported that would be brought back to City Council at a future meeting.
Mr. White reported two general standards apply to both Two-Unit Development and Urban Lot Splits.
He explained that any rental unit under SB 9 must be rented for longer than 30 days and that ADUs are not permitted as additional units so the maximum number of units on a split lot would be four (4).
Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil expressed concerns regarding maintaining design standards in existing neighborhoods.
Mr. White reported that, per Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil’s request, he investigated any design standards that could be implemented per SB 9 and reviewed those changes which include building facades shall include articulation along street frontages by using color, arrangement of façade elements, a change in materials, or other architectural devices, buildings shall conform to the following design standards: (a) On a site already developed with an existing residential unit, the new unit shall be constructed using the same architectural style; (b) If residential development is proposed on a lot where no residential units currently exist, the units shall be constructed using the same architectural style; (c) Upper story windows located within 10 feet of an interior property line that face or overlook an adjoining property shall be installed a minimum of 72 inches above the finished floor, or installed with obscure glass and upper story doors shall be located on building walls facing the other on-site unit.
Council Member Moreno thanked Mr. White for clarifying misinformation for the public.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiries, Mr. White explained that Anaheim has five (5) Historic Districts and SB 9 would not be allowed within those districts or properties that have been granted a historic designation and clarified it would apply to the entire district. He explained that City Council has the privilege of designating a Historic District. He explained he had not reviewed the City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
impact of designating the entire City a Historic District thus exempting the entire City from SB 9 and would have to further review. He advised there are Secretary of Interior standards that would have been met in addition to public hearings, but in theory, they could be found from state law.
Council Member Moreno requested staff provide additional information regarding the criteria for how to designate an area as a Historic District. He respected the intent of SB 9 and appreciated staff’s effort to protect local control.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Mr. White explained that in most of the flatlands of Anaheim parking is exempted because of their proximity to high-quality transit and the City would not be allowed to require additional parking as part of the proposed ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil provided a brief overview of his experience with the historic preservation process and State requirements.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil moved to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6524 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Code), including Chapters 17.08 (Subdivisions); 18.04 (Single-Family Residential Zones); 18.06 (Multiple-Family Residential Zones); 18.08 (Commercial Zones); 18.10 (Industrial Zone); 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose Zones); 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); 18.30 (Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) Overlay Zone); 18.32 (Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone); 18.36 (Types of Uses); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); 18.42 (Parking and Loading); 18.62 (Administrative Reviews); 18.92 (Definitions); 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and Development Standards); and 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SP 2017-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and making findings in connection therewith (Development Project No. 2021-00216) (Adjustment No. 12 to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1) (Adjustment No. 5 to the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1) and determine that the above actions are exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and the Legislature has declared that this ordinance, which implements the provisions of Government Code Section 65852.21, is not a project under CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines, seconded by Council Member Ma’ae.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Mr. White clarified that under the proposed ordinance residents would be allowed to add solar power roofing. He further clarified the standards speak to consistent roofing materials on a single property. He noted there are exceptions in state law that limit the City’s ability to dictate or preclude solar installations. Council Member Moreno believed the roofing materials might be too restrictive for homeowners.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiry, Mr. White explained the building materials language would help maintain consistency between both properties on the lot. He explained there is a lot of design flexibility in designing a new home. He noted there may be Homeowners Associations that may require consistency between units.
Council Member Moreno believed that some of the proposed changes allow too much control by the City over property owners.
Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil noted he understood Council Member Moreno’s concern and may consider entertaining a friendly amendment but deferred to Mr. White for additional information.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
Mr. White explained staff worked with the City Attorney who determined that as long as staff stays objective with the word “the same” staff would have broad discretion.
Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil proposed an amendment that would remove the roofing materials and exterior building materials from Sections A and B.
Council Member Moreno offered language that would state “using a similar architectural style which may include roofing materials and exterior building materials and finishes”. City Attorney Robert Fabela explained that is the language the City was trying to avoid and noted staff was comfortable with the language proposed to comply with SB 9.
Council Member Moreno proposed the language “that may include roofing materials”. Mr. White would like to have criteria that set up staff and residents for success and does not require staff to interpret the language for years to come.
Council Member Moreno withdrew his friendly amendment.
Council Member Ma’ae seconded Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil’s amendments to the ordinance.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem O’Neil moved to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6524 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Code), including Chapters 17.08 (Subdivisions); 18.04 (Single-Family Residential Zones); 18.06 (Multiple-Family Residential Zones); 18.08 (Commercial Zones); 18.10 (Industrial Zone); 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose Zones); 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); 18.30 (Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) Overlay Zone); 18.32 (Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone); 18.36 (Types of Uses); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); 18.42 (Parking and Loading); 18.62 (Administrative Reviews); 18.92 (Definitions); 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and Development Standards); and 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SP 2017-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and making findings in connection therewith (Development Project No. 2021-00216) (Adjustment No. 12 to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1) (Adjustment No. 5 to the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1), as amended, to add language to page 55 of the Ordinance for Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.38.255.0503 to read: Building Design. Building facades shall include articulation along street frontages by using color, arrangement of façade elements, a change in materials, or other architectural devices. Buildings shall conform to the following design standards: (a) On a site already developed with an existing residential unit, the new unit shall be constructed using the same architectural style. (b) If residential development is proposed on a lot where no residential units currently exist, the units shall be constructed using the same architectural style. (c) Upper story windows located within 10 feet of an interior property line that face or overlook an adjoining property shall be installed a minimum of 72 inches above finish floor, or installed with obscure glass. Upper story doors shall be located on building walls facing the other on- site unit, and determine that the above actions are exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and the Legislature has declared that this ordinance, which implements the provisions of Government Code Section 65852.21, is not a project under CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines, seconded by Council Member Ma’ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members O’Neil, Diaz, Ma’ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES – 0; Motion carried; ordinance introduced, as amended.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
19. Update on the City's response to COVID-19.
Mayor Sidhu reported there is a wave of Omicron cases in the City and reported meeting with Dr.
Clayton Chau of the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHA). He advised there are six (6) City testing sites and provided an overview of testing statistics. He advised the City continues to offer vaccinations and boosters. He reported the City is buying 4,000 at-home test kits that will be distributed to the community and City employees and he hoped to have the tests available in the coming days. He urged residents to follow best practices.
Chief Communications Officer Mike Lyster provided a brief overview of the City’s response to COVID-
19. He reported weekly case counts are increasing due to Omicron. He reported the case rate is currently at a pandemic high and the positivity rates are much higher than usual. He advised health equity is sustaining and vaccinations continue to increase. He reported the City’s cases are on the rise in alignment with what is being seen across the county although the City’s positivity rate is slightly lower than the county.
Mr. Lyster reported the City was prepared for the Omicron wave and the six (6) testing sites are conducting record numbers of tests and vaccinations and he provided statistics. He thanked frontline workers for working 7-days per week and serving the community. He reported the City has been carefully managing appointments to provide good service to the community. He reported vaccinations continue to increase and are being administered at City Hall and Brookhurst Community Center. He confirmed 4,000 test kits would be distributed to the community and City staff beginning next week.
Mr. Lyster provided an overview of Omicron’s impact on the City and reported the first case was seen on December 28, 2021. He reported those at the highest risk are those who are not vaccinated. He noted hospitalization records are lower than last year and are faring slightly better than last year.
Mr. Lyster provided an overview of the impact of Omicron on the City’s workforce and reported 5% of the City’s workforce has been impacted by COVID due to illness or exposure risk. He reported 57% of the City’s workforce have been vaccinated. He provided examples of the impact of Omicron on the United Kingdom and South Africa that showed there was a rapid peak but also a rapid decline in the wave. He noted there is hope the county has seen the peak but they would not have definitive data for a few weeks.
DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Valencia’s inquiries, Mr. Lyster reported at-home testing use is on the rise, some do not report those numbers to the OCHA, and estimated that it is probably a 5% margin of those who test positive that are not reported in the official numbers. He reported it is currently taking a few days to receive a testing appointment. He encouraged residents to sign up for an appointment and if a test is needed sooner they could show up to a site for a walk- up test. He reported Anaheim tests are run with a priority and are generally returned within 24-hours.
Council Member Valencia thanked all frontline workers for their service to the City and wished everyone good health.
Council Member Faessel thanked Mr. Lyster and his staff for rolling up their sleeves and working with frontline workers to administer tests to the community.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
Council Member Moreno also thanked Mr. Lyster and his staff for helping to administer tests and for their work for the City and its residents. He thanked Mr. Lyster for quickly providing the statistics for City staff, which helps to show the impact on City staff that in turn may impact City services.
In response to Council Member Moreno’s inquiries, Mr. Lyster explained COVID Clinic is a non-profit and charges for other tests because it helps keep the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test free. He noted that other clinics may offer free testing but may have problems getting reimbursed by the federal government or obtaining testing resources. He further explained COVID Clinic has a high degree of stability and a great supply of resources. He explained a PCR is approximately 99% accurate in determining positivity but the antigen test is a better indicator in determining if the person is still infectious. He advised there are no metrics to determine the percentage of at-home tests that are positive and that his 5% report is an educated guess. He advised he would reach out to OCHA to seek additional numbers. He advised staff is in the early stages of a plan for distributing the test kits but there has been discussion of using existing Family Resource Centers.
Informational item; no action taken.
20. District 5 appointment of an unscheduled vacancy on the Budget, Investment and Technology Commission to serve a term ending December 31, 2024.
Budget, Investment and Technology Commission
District 5 appointment: Rory Zaks (term ending December 31, 2024) (unscheduled vacancy, David R. Heywood)
NOMINATION: Council Member Faessel nominated Rory Zaks. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Sidhu and Council Members O’Neil, Diaz, Ma’ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES – 0; Nomination approved.
PUBLIC HEARING:
21. This is a public hearing to 1) consider and discuss draft Council District Maps submitted to the City; 2) receive and file public input on communities of interest, district boundaries, and draft maps; and 3) select a draft map for adoption or select specific draft maps for additional public review and input.
Public Hearing Item No. 21 continued to January 25, 2022 at the request of staff.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (non-agenda items): None
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS/AGENDA REQUESTS:
Council Member Valencia hoped everyone had a blessed holiday season, looked forward to a productive 2022, and wished all good health.
Council Member Valencia left the meeting at 8:07 P.M.
Council Member Faessel recognized Community Services Supervisor Holly Unruh, who was leaving the City after over a dozen years of service. He offered congratulations, thanked her for her attention to the City, and noted she would be missed. He wished everyone a safe and well new year and addressed the ability to get together with family.
City Council Minutes of January 11, 2022
Council Member Ma’ae reminded everyone that Monday, January 17 is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, the only federal holiday also designated as a national day of service. She noted AmeriCorps had led volunteer efforts for the past quarter century and encouraged residents to visit www.mlkday.gov to find volunteer service project opportunities near them. She expressed her honor and privilege to represent the community into the new year.
Council Member Diaz noted Council’s approval of Item No. 16, a new housing project at 910 S.
Western Ave., and supported the project to bring 12 single-family residences to District 1 as step forward to rebuild Beach Blvd. and West Anaheim by encouraging new development and homeownership in the area. He noted that Human Trafficking Awareness Day was recognized today and all month and expressed pride for the work of the City and Police Department with other Orange County agencies to address this issue. He encouraged residents to visit www.ochumantrafficking.com to learn more and find ways to help. He welcomed a new business to District 1, LUV 4 Nutrition on Lincoln Ave., and asked everyone to support new businesses. He wished everyone a happy new year.
Council Member Moreno echoed Council Member Diaz’s statements about Human Trafficking Awareness Month, thanked the City Manager and Public Works staff for lighting City Hall blue to create more awareness of the issue, and requested the blue lights continue for the rest of the month.
He addressed COVID and its effects and encouraged residents to visit www.anaheim.net/coronavirus for resources on testing, vaccines, and data. He wished good luck to the Anaheim High School wrestling, girls’ water polo, boys/girls soccer, and boys/girls basketball in their Orange League games. He thanked Public Works Director Rudy Emami for a briefing on the City’s preparation for implementing SB 1383 regarding organic waste and its disposal and noted information is available at www.anaheim.net/organics. He thanked the Public Works and Public Utilities Departments for staring the $25,000,000 investment in infrastructure improvements in the Northeast Colony area of Anaheim Blvd, Pauline St., Sycamore St., and La Palma Ave. and encouraged residents to contact his office and the city with specific areas that need to be addressed. He requested the meeting adjourn in memory of District 3 resident, Emiliano Perez Garcia, a father, grandfather, business owner, and St.
Boniface congregation member.
Mayor Sidhu welcomed everybody to 2022, stating it was off to a great start. He thanked staff for their work. He addressed the continuance of the Coronavirus pandemic and hoped the peak of new cases would come down soon. He asked everyone to continue with safety measures such as wearing masks, washing hands, and keeping distance and encouraged everyone to take advantage of the six City sites for testing in addition to the test kits that would be distributed in neighborhoods.
ADJOURNMENT:
At 8:21 P.M., with no further business, Mayor Sidhu adjourned the City Council meeting in memory of Emiliano Perez Garcia.
Respectfully submitted,
Theresa Bass, CMC
City Clerk