1980/07/2280-910
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22~ 1980~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
CITY LIBRARIAN: William J. Griffith
PUBLIC WORKS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Thornton E. Piersall
CITY ENGINEER: William G. Devitt
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt called the meeting to order and welcomed
those in attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Reverend Bob Campbell, First Presbyterian Church, gave the '
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS AND COMMENDATION: A resolution of congratu-
lations and commendation was unanimously adopted by the City Council to be
presented to the Reverend Canon John Kimball Saville upon his retirement from
St. Michael's Episcopal Church and for his 35 years of devoted service to the
community.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of October 30, 1979,
May 6 and May 13, 1980, subject to typographical corrections. Councilman Bay
seconded the motion. Councilmmn Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda, after
reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to waiver is
hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the title, specific
request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinance or resolution
in regular order. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was
absent. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY In the amount of $7,820,373.16, in accordance
with the 1980-81 Budget, were approved.
153: SOLICITATION OF PROPOSAL - EMPLOYEE. GROUP MEDICAL PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND
LIFE INSURANCE: Onmotion by Councilweman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay,.
the Human Resources Director was authorized to solicit proposals for claim ad-
ministration services on the employee self-funded medical plan and the indem-
nity dental plan, the employee group life insurance and excess coverages for
the medical plan, all effective January 1, 1981, as recommended in memorandum
dated July 16, 1980 from the Human Resources Director, Garry McRae. Councilman
Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
80-911
City Hall, Anaheim, California -.COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980,. 1:30 P.M.
160/175: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - TWO 69 KV POWER CIRCUIT BREAKERS - BID NO. 3649:
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, purchase was
authorized for two 69 KV Power Circuit Breakers from McGraw-Edison, in the amount
of $49,338.76, as recommended in the Purchasing Agent memorandum of July 15, 1980.
Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
106/140/109: LIBRARY DEPARTMENT GRANT AWARDS - MURL AND LIBRARY OUTREACH
PROGRAM: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 80R-313 and 80R-314 for adop-
tion, as recommended in memorandum dated July 16, 1980 from Mr. William Griffith,
City Librarian, the first accepting a grant award from the California State
Library, in the amount of $3,469, to initiate a regional area collection plan
pursuant to the Major Urban Resource Library-(MURL) Program, and the second
accepting a grant award from the California State Library, in the amount of
$40,100, for the second year of the Library Outreach Program. Refer to Reso-
lution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 80R-313: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A GRANT OF FUNDS UNDER THE LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACT AS A
MAJOR URBAN RESOURCE LIBRARY (MURL).
RESOLUTION NO. 80R-314: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A GRANT OF FUND UNDER THE LIBRARY SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION ACT FOR
THE PURPOSE OF A LIBRARY OUTREACH PROGRAM.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Griffith described the Library Outreach Program
at the request of Mayor Pro Tem Overholt.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolutions.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 80R-313 and 80R-314 duly passed and
adopted.
MOTION: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, $43,569
was appropriated in Program 17-173, Central, Adult Services, to implement the
above programs. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
150: LET'S PLAY TO GROW/KENNEDY FOUNDATION GRANT: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, $1,000 was accepted from the Joseph Kennedy
Foundation on behalf of the Let's Play to Grow Club, and appropriating it to the
Therapeutic Recreation Program 272, as recommended in memorandum dated July 15,
1980, from the Deputy City Manager, James Ruth. Councilman Seymour was absent.
MOTION CARRIED.
124: CONVENTION CENTER NORTH EXHIBIT HALL ELECTRICAL SYSTEM UPGRADING: Account
No. 64-308-7107 (01-262-6325-9510) City Manager William Talley reported that
they received a letter dated July 22, 1980 from the low bidder on the subject
project, Mel Smith Electric, Inc., asking to be relieved from any and all
80-912
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
obligations of the bid because of an error in calculating the cost. The rec-
ommendation was that the matter be continued one week to give an opportunity to
review the request and to make the appropriate recommendation.
Councilman Bay asked if after reviewing the matter, they would have a choice as
to whether or not they would relieve the bidder of his responsibility.
Mr. Talley explained that bidders were required to place a bond with their bid,
and he would think that the City would have the option of taking the 10% bidder's
bond and then awarding to the second or lowest responsible bidder, or readverti-
sing.
City Attorney William Hopkins stated they would have to review the various docu-
ments, because there were certain statutory relief provisions in case of an error,
and they would do so before next week.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, award of the
above contract was continued one week as recommended in memorandum dated July 22,
1980 from the City Engineer. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
140: AWARD OF CONTRACT - CANYON HILLS LIBRARY: (Account No. 47-904-6325 and
24-904-6325). Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 80R-315 for adoption,
as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated July 22, 1980.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 80R-315: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS
AND EQUIPMENT AND'ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND
WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: CANYON HILLS LIBRARY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO.
47-904-6325 AND 24-904-6325. [J. A. Stewart, $1,239,999)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 80R-315 duly passed and adopted.
149: AWARD O~ CONTRACT - EDI.SpN .~.ARK?.ARKING LOT: (Account No. 16-816-7101),
Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 80R-316 for adoption, as recommended in
July 14, 1980 memo from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 80R-316: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS
AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND
WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: EDISON PARK PARKING LOT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO.
16-816-7107. (A. & C. General Engineering, $14,362.70)
80-913
City Hal~, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINU.TES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL M~MBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth. and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 80R-316 duly passed and adopted.
144: PROPOSED TAX SALE NO. 1274: City Engineer William Devitt first clarified
questions posed by Councilwoman Kaywood at the conclusion of which, Councilwoman
Kaywood moved to receive and file the report relating to proposed Tax Sale No.
1274, consisting of various 1-foot, more or less, strips of land adjoining
various City Streets, and directing the City Clerk to notify the County Tax
Collector-Treasurer that the City has no interest in said sale, as recommended
in memorandum dated July 15, 1980 from the City Engineer. Councilman Seymour
was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
123: INSTALLATION OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC SIGNAL ON CORONADO STREET: On motion
by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, an agreement was authorized
with Century Data Systems, Inc., for City participation in the construction of
a pedestrian traffic signal on Coronado Street, east of Kraemer Boulevard, as
recommended in memorandum dated July 22, 1980 from the City Engineer. Council-
man Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
123: PERMIT AGREEMENT WI%~H PINATA FOODS - PARKING SPACES AT ANAHEIM STADIUM:
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, a second amend-
ment to a permit agreement with Pinata Foods, Inc., was authorized for use of
50 parking spaces at Anaheim Stadium for a one-year period, commencing June 5,
1980, at $500 per month, as recommended in memorandum dated July 1, 1980 from
the Stadium-Convention Center-Golf Course General Manager, Tom Liegler. Council-
man Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Roth stated that such agreements made good business sense and staff
should continue to enter into those types of contracts. He thereupon commended
staff, noting that it was good revenue for the City.
173/126= ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL/RECREATION AREA TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
MANAGEMENT STUDY: Mr. Terrence Austin, Senior Associate, Project Manager, JHK &
Associates, 1671 East 17th Street, Suite 22, Santa Ana, explained that the
purpose of the study (see final report, June 1980--Anaheim Commercial/Recreation
Area Transportation and Circulation Management Study-JHK & Associates, on file
in the City Clerk's office) was to identify the transportation needs in the
Commercial/Recreation area, considering the increasing activities that were
going to be taking place. He then briefed the Council on the findings of the
study (see summary report, June 1980--Anaheim Commercial/Recreation Area Trans-
portation and Circulation Management Study-JHK & Associates--on file in the
City Clerk's office), especially with regard to both the short-range and the long-
range implementation programs (see Pages 55 through 59 of the summary report).
The package represented a series of short range improvements that were both
practical and feasible under the type of financing they saw available over the
next five years. In the longer range, it was obvious that some of the more
modest solutions would need to be supplemented by greater expenditures, as pointed
out in the report.
80-914
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980~ 1:30 P.M.
In concluding, Mr. Austin stated that the findings indicated there were going
to be some real transportation needs, but the program they outlined would en-
able those needs to be met on a program basis, and the study provided a frame-
work for aatering to those needs ss they occurred.
Councilman Bay then questioned Mr. Austin relative to the figures, stating in
1980 the parking demand for football was projected at 17,500, whereas for base-
ball the figure was 21,700. He could not follow the logic used.
Mr. Austin stated that they found that the number of people per car travelling
to football and baseball games grouped together differently for the two games,
and thus with the same number of people there were a different number of cars.
The data provided was the best they could actually support. The type of manage-
ment strategies that they were recommending could be implemented for both and
if they found that the factors were not that different, it was a matter of
merely implementing those same strategies.
Councilman Roth stated in reviewing the report, he thought it was very well done.
In noting the priorities, starting in 1980 and extending to 1985, he wondered if
there was a provision for updating priorities prior to 1985 if it was found
necessary to do so.
Mr. Austin answered he felt there was that provision. They put together a
technical resource document and from that it would be easy for staff to monitor
what was happening in the study area and on a yearly basis to ask if they were
finding that things were changing, were some of the original assumptions no
longer valid, etc., and subsequently go back and reprioritize the recommendations
made.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt asked if the Executive Director of Public Works, Thornton
Piersall, had anything to add; Mr. Piersall stated that he did not, but expressed
his appreciation in working with JHK and agreed it was an excellent report. He
thanked Ms. Pam Lucado for handling the study for the City as Project Manager.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt concurred that it was another fine job by Ms. Lucado.
The Mayor Pro Tem then stated significant was the fact that Anaheim's neighboring
communities participated in the study realizing that what happened in the subject
area would have an impact not only on Anaheim, but also adjacent cities. Anaheim's
leadership had been sensitive to that for a long time and had made it a practice
of meeting regularly not only with staff people, but also with other elected
officials, particularly in Orange and Garden Grove, to share comments and future
concerns. He considered the report to be a tremendous working document that
they could all use in charting their course as they proceeded into the unknown
with the great increase in traffic in the area. He complimented both staff
and JItK on the report.
MOTION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the
Anaheim Commercial/Recreation Area Transportation and Circulation Management
Study was ordered received and filed, as recommended in memorandum dated July 17,
1980, from Pam Lucado, Associate Planner. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION
CARRIED.
80-915
City .Hall, Anaheim~ Califor.n,.ia -,COUNCIL ,MI ,NUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
164: GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION: City Attorney
William Hopkins explained that several weeks ago (see minutes July 1, 1980)
the Council directed him to'prepare wording for a ballot measure that would
authorize General Obligation Bonds for storm drain construction to be placed
on the November ballot. In reviewing the matter, he consulted with Bond
Counsel, and it was their opinion that Proposition 13 (Article XIIIA of the
California Constitution) prohibited the issuance of General Obligation Bonds
as presently worded (see letter dated July 21, 1980 from Mr. Alan Watts of
Rourke and Woodruff, on file in the City Clerk's office). However, there was
at the present time in the Legislature, a Senate Constitutional Amendment No.
26 which, if passed, would authorize cities to issue General Obligation Bonds.
As noted in his memorandum dated July 21, 1980, several resolutions were
drafted and attached thereto incorporating the necessary wording, so that if
the California Constitution was amended to permit such bonds to be issued,
the Council would then be authorized to issue the bonds, providing the voters
approved both the Senate Constitutional amendment and the Measure submitted
by the City. No action was necessary today but the matter would be placed on
the agenda at a future date for further Council consideration.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if they could obtain another opinion.
City Attorney Hopkins stated that they could do so, but in view of the fact that
a Senate Constitutional Amendment was in the Legislature at the present time, it
confirmed the opinion received from Mr. Watts. However, he would be happy to
get another opinion.
Councilman Roth questioned the cost to obtain the opinion from Bond Counsel;
City Attorney Hopkins answered that he had not received any billing as yet, but
estimated that the cost would be approximately $100, and that there would be
a charge involved in soliciting another opinion.
Councilman Roth then amked the City Clerk if in the event there was a majority
affirmative vote on the Council, what the cost would be to place the storm drain
issue on the ballot; City Clerk Linda Roberts confirmed that the cost would be
approximately $12,000.
Councilwoman Kaywood then asked in the event that the storm drain or any other
bond issue were to be put on a separate ballot with no other election at the
time, for instance in April of 1981, what the cost would be of a special election.
City Clerk Roberts stated the cost could range from $60,000 to $80,000.
Councilman Roth asked what the next step would be relative to the issue; City
Attorney Hopkins explained it would be for the Council to formally consider the
resolutions and either approve or not approve placing the storm drain bond issue
on the ballot in November. The people would have to vote both on the Senate
Constitutional Amendment which would have to be approved, as well as the City
Measure.
Councilman Roth surmised, therefore, that there would have to be a State-wide
approval to amend the Constitution even with an overwhelming vote on the Anaheim
Measure which he considered to be quite a gamble instead of first waiting to find
out whether the people wanted to change the Constitution. That was his personal
opinion on the matter.
80-916
City Hal%., .~naheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt stated that Councilman Roth had expressed his views when
the Council by a vote of 4 to 1 directed the City Attorney to prepare the
resolution and they would have an opportunity when considering the resolution
to voice their opinions. At the time, he shared some of his (Roth's) concerns
and wanted to first speak with those whom he felt had a pulse on the community
as to whether or not it was possible, feasible or foolhardy to get two-thirds
of the voters to approve the local issue. Now they were also faced with the
problem of getting two-thirds of the voters of the State to approve the Senate's
issue. However, they would have an opportunity to discuss the matter when
they discussed the resolution. He then asked City Attorney Hopkins if he felt
that the opinion of the City's Bond Counsel, Rourke & Woodruff, could be relied
upon without incurring the additional expense of soliciting another opinion.
Mr. Hopkins answered that he felt quite confident in the opinion of Rourke &
Woodruff and Mr. Alan Watts. The firm did consult with other bond counsel in
the field, and he was certain they were well versed in the area. They had been
representing the City as Bond Counsel for approximately five years.
Councilman Bay stated that the logic was there and he did not know why the Senate
would be putting a State-wide issue on the ballot if it was not a fact, but one
which was not brought out to the public, or at least to his knowledge as a voter
during the vote on Proposition 13. The way he understood the matter was that
it was possible to have General Obligation Bonds if there was a two-thirds vote
locally, but now it was found that the interpretations of that Constitutional
Amendment locked all local authority out of General Obligation Bonds under any
circumstances. If that was the intent of the Senate amendment, he saw no reason
for a second opinion, because it was obvious that the opinion they received must
be correct.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated it was difficult for her to accept that they had
wiped out any kind of local control and that distressed her greatly. As a
result of the discussion, she agreed that there was no point in obtaining
another opinion.
City Attorney Hopkins stated he would schedule the resolution for Council
consideration in one week.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman
Bay, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and
recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar Agenda:
1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred
to the City's Claims Administrator, or allowed payment of, and the Application for
Leave to Present Late Claim was denied:
a. Claim submitted by Ignacio Aburto and Maricella Ochoa Aburto for damages
purportedly sustained as a result of the death of claimants' minor child after
falling out of an unrepaired window at the Angelina Hotel, Lincoln Avenue and
Philadelphia Street, due to lack of Building Code enforcement, on or about
March 31, 1980.
b. Claim submitted by Jeff Norman Allee for vehicular damages purportedly sus-
tained as a result of tree branch falling upon claimant's vehicle (South Kellogg
Drive at the Orchard Drive Elementary School), on or about June 28, 1980.
80:917
City Hall,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
c. Claim submitted by Alice Jane Houchins for vehicular damages purportedly
sustained as a result of accident caused by directions from flagman in a
construction area near the intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Cypress Street
(Steiny & Company), on or about April 17, 1980.
d. Claim submitted by Howard Koorhan for damages puportedly sustained as a
result of City electric crew failure to locate problem at 5422 Willowick Circle
on or about April 22, 1980. Problem located after private electrical contractor
firm determined that said problem was in the street.
e. Claim submitted by Cathleen S. Lewis for personal injuries purportedly
sustained as a result of claimant being hit by baseball at Anaheim Stadium on
or about June 10, 1980.
f. Claim submitted Gregory D. Philpott for personal injury damages purportedly
sustained as a result of collision by City driver at the intersection of Broadway
and Magnolia Street on or about June 14, 1980.
g. Claim submitted by State Farm Insurance Company (Steve Gus, Insured) for
vehicular damages purportedly sustained as a result of collision with City
street sweeper on or about February 25, 1980.
h. Claim submitted by Marlene Thomason for vehicular damages purportedly sustained
as a result of golf ball striking windshield while car was parked in parking lot
of E1 Rancho Plaza, 421 North Brookhurst Street, on or about June 26, 1980.
i. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim submitted by West American
Insurance Company (Betty J. Rowzee, Insured) for vehicular damages purpor-
tedly sustained as a result of collision with City vehicle on Lincoln Avenue,
on or about July 17, 1979.
j. Claim submitted by Charles A. Simpson for vehiclar damages purportedly
sustained as a result of police officer opening claimant's car door on or
about May 13, 1980.
The following claim was allowed:
k. Claim submitted by Donald R. Schulte for damages purportedly sustained as
a result of accidental loss of personal property at the California Surf Pro
Soccer Team Offices at Anaheim Stadium, on or about April 20, 1980.
2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed:
a. 105: Anaheim Golf Course Advisory Commission--Minutes of June 19, 1980.
b. 105: Community Center Authority--Minutes of July 7, 1980.
c. 105: Community Services Board--Minutes of June 12 and 26, 1980.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted in the Community Services Board (CSB) minutes of
June 12, 1980 under Reports--Police Community Relations Committee (PCRC) the
following, "Board Member Dean indicated she did not attend last night's meeting
(June 11, 1980). She felt that not much is going on with the committee, Ms.
Dean also stated she has not received minutes of meetings or meeting notices.
Ms. Dean felt the meetings were very poorly attended." She asked to have a
80-918
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
report from the CSB on what the problem might be, the activity taking place
and whether there was a problem about which the Council should be apprised.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt asked if the PCRC reported to the CSB; City Manager
Talley answered "no", but that it was a Chief of Police Advisory Board. It
did not report to anyone, but met with the Chief and other members of the Anaheim
Police Department to discuss police/community relations problems and suggested or
advised the Chief on methods in which they might be handled. On the other hand,
the CSB reported to the City Council.
Councilman Bay asked if there was some misunderstanding on the CSB that the PCRC
reported to the CSB.
From the audience, Mrs. Patricia Clancy, 303 North Bush Street, answered "yes".
She thereupon approached the podium and stated that she was a member of the PCRC
in charge of one of the committees relating to the Community Watch Progr~n and
also the Sergeant at Arms. She explained that Ms. Dean's name was not on the
mailing list of the Secretary of the PCRC and thus did not attend some of the
meetings because she was not aware of them. The problem had since been corrected.
Mr. Steve Swaim, Manager, Community Services, had attended the last three meetings.
She did not know Ms. Dean's problem because she was in attendance at the last
meeting of July 9, 1980.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt suggested that perhaps the appropriate direction would
be to ask the City Manager to obtain a report from the appropriate authority,
whoever that might be, as to the status of the PCRC.
Councilman Bay stated he did not see the necessity of doing so since he received
the minutes of the PCRC as he assumed did all Council Members; Councilwoman
Kaywood stated that~ she did not, and if she received a copy of those minutes,
there was no need for the report.
Mr. Talley stated that he would have all the minutes forwarded to the Council.
He also clarified that the PCRC had always been. a committee formed by and worked
with the Chief of Police.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt stated since the membership of the committee was initially
very large and it may have changed somewhat with new members coming in, it might
be advisable to update those new members of th~ ~ur~o~a of th~ committee, the
line of authority, where the money would come from if they needed a budget to
do something, whether or not they were a little project committee or a committee
which could be a sounding board for interested citizens and so on. In talking
with some of the members of the committee, and he had not talked to them but
they had talked to him, when there were new members on the committee they lost
sight of a crisp definition of what they were supposed to be doing, and he felt
that was part of the problem--the turnover of members.
d. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission--Minutes of June 18 and 25, 1980.
e. 105: Public Utilities Board--Minutes of June 26, 1980.
3. 108: APPLICATIONS: The following applications were approved in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Police:
80-919
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
a. Entertainment Permit: Humdinger #4, 2860 West Lincoln Avenue, for one
dancer. (Robert Wayne Copeland, applicant)
b. Amusement Devices Permit: The Game Room, 1751 West La Palma, for various
amusement devices. (Edward Steven Arden, applicant)
MOTION CARRIED.
169: HARBOR BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENT: (Account No. 13-793-6325-E3430).
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 80R-317 for adoption in accordance with
the recommendation of the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
169: RESOLUTION NO. 80R-317: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: HARBOR BOULEVARD
STREET IMPROVEMENT - 2651' N/O KATELLA AVENUE TO 2211' N/O KATELLA AVENUE, IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM, PROJECT ACCOUNT NO. 13-793-6325-E3430; APPROVING THE DESIGNS,
PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF;
AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID
PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids
to be opened August 21, 1980, at 2:00 p.m.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 80R-317 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Bay stated that he wanted to explain his vote on the project which
he voted against initially (see minutes July 1, 1980). He did so at that
time because he considered it a "band-aid" approach and that was still his
position. The reason he voted affirmatively now was that it would solve the
automobile problem of reaching a left-turn spot in the median with double the
distance than in the past. He still felt very strongly that it did nothing
to solve the pedestrian jay-walking problem and would literally concentrate
that problem from the east side of Harbor Boulevard over to the Disneyland
employee entrance at one place where the opening would be at the end of the
fence that was going to be installed in the median. Thus, even though he
voted for the partial improvement, he still felt strongly that the pedestrian
problem had not been solved, and maintained that further study and looking at
the cost of what they could do to solve the pedestrian problem should be one
of their objectives in the future.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she felt that the problem was the existing motels
who must have been telling the people coming in that they could cut across Harbor
Boulevard in that way because they would not know to do so themselves. She sug-
gested that perhaps a small sign posted in each room or the lobbby indicating
they must walk to signal to cross to Disneyland would be a solution.
80-920
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22,. 1980, 1:30 P.M.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning
Commission at their meeting held June 30, 1980, pertaining to the following
applications, as listed on the Consent Calendar, were submitted for City Council
information.
1. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 79-80-42 AND VARIANCE NO. 3156 (TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
11079): Submitted by E. J. and Rita Carattini, for a change in zone from
RS-A-43,000 to RM-3000, to construct a 1-lot, 12-unit condomimium subdivision
on property located at 3633 West Ball Road, with various Code waivers.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-102 and 103,
granted Reclassification No. 79-80-42 and Variance No. 3156 (Tentative Tract
No. 11079), and granted a negative declaration status.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that the condominiums included two bedrooms, study,
living room, etc., she questioned if the study could be made into another bedroom.
Annika Santalahti, Assistant Director of Zoning, explained that they always
counted a study as a bedroom for the purpose of bedroom calculations unless
there was a "peninsula" arrangement from the living room. If there was no actual
door to the space, the architect might label it a study, but staff did not
consider it as part of bedroom calculations. If there was a door and a closet,
it would then be considered as a bedroom.
Councilwoman Kaywood then asked if in the parking provisions, was it considered
as a bedroom, she noted there were 42 spaces and 12 units.
Miss Santalahti answered that on a condominium project regardless of the size
of the unit, the parking count was identical,'or three and one-half spaces per
unit. It did not matter how big or small the unit was, whether one bedroom or
four bedrooms.
2. VARIANCE NO. 3154: Submitted by Pacific Newport Development, Inc., to con-
struct a 10-unit apartment complex on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at
2468 West Orange Avenue, with a Code waiver of maximum structural height.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-101, granted
Variance No. 3154, and granted a negative declaration status.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2087: Submitted by State Mutual Investors, Inc.,
to permit an exterminating service on ~L zoned property located at 2524 Woodland
Drive.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-104, granted Con-
ditional Use Permit No. 2087, and granted a negative declaration status.
4. VARIANCE NO. 3155: Submitted by Anthony and Lea Gouveia, to retain an
illegal fence on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 837 South Beach Boule-
vard, with a Code waiver of maximum fence height.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-108, granted
Variance No. 3155, and ratified the Planning DirectorTs categorical exemption
determination.
80-921
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2088: Submitted by Jerry and Rosalie Wong, to
permit the on-sale of alcholic beverages in an existing restaurant on CL zoned
property located at 1142 North East Street, with a Code waiver of minimum number
of parking spaces.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-105, granted Con-
ditional Use Permit No. 2088, and ratified the Planning Director's categorical
exemption determination.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that on Page 2, Number 2 of Resolution No. PC80-105,
"that the proposed use is hereby granted subject to the petitioners' stipulation
that the hours of operation shall be 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m .... "she questioned if
it should be 8:00 p.m.
Miss Santalahti stated that the time would be corrected because it was definitely
~upposed to be p.m.
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2092: Submitted by Harry and Lillian Sham, et al,
to permit the on-sale of beer and wine in an existing restaurant on CL zoned
property located at 400 South Euclid Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-106, granted Con-
ditional Use Permit No. 2092, and ratified the Planning Director's categorical
exemption determination.
7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2093: Submitted by Nelson and Maria T. Casanova,
to retain an aviary on RS-7200 zoned property located at 911 South Sylvan Street,
with a Code waiver of minimum setback for a bird coop.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-107, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2093, and granted a negative declaration status.
8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1396 - REQUEST FOR TERMINATION: Submitted by
Robert D. Selleck, II, Sav-On Realty, Inc., requesting 'to terminate Conditional
Use Permit No. 1396, to establish an educational institution in conjunction
with an industrial use on property located at 1500 South Anaheim Boulevard,
as a condition of approval of Variance No. 3148.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC80-110, terminated
Conditional Use Permit No. 1396.
9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1888 - APPROVAL OF REVISED PLANS: Submitted by
Donald M. Loynd (Laderbel, Inc.), requesting approval of revised plans to
Conditional Use Permit No. 1888, to permit business offices and restaurants
in an industrial complex on ML zoned property located at 1212 North Magnolia
Avenue.
The City Planning Commission approved the revised plans of Conditional Use
Permit No. 1888.
10. 142/179: REVISED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FORMS: Revising
Conditional Use Permit and Variance Petition forms and Supplements in connection
with Section 18.03.050.010 of the Code.
80-922
City Hall~ Anaheim,,. California .-..COUNCIL MI.NUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission approved the revised Conditional Use Permit and
Variance Application forms.
11. 142/179: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE RM-1200 AND RM-2400 MULTIPLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONES PERTAINING TO STRUCTURAL HEIGHT AND DWELLING UNIT SIZE: Pro-
posed Code amendments to the RM-1200 and RM-2400 multiple-family residential zones
pertaining to structural height and dwelling unit size were referred back to staff
for more revisionary work. (INFORMATION ITEM)
Councilman Bay stated he assumed this item was totally informational.
Miss Santalahti confirmed that was correct and the item was placed on the Council
agenda merely to show it was on the Planning Commission agenda and that Council
would be seeing a proposed ordinance for their consideration which would be con-
sidered by the Planning Commission as well.
Councilman Roth recalled that the Mayor was going to call a joint meeting with
the Council and the Planning Commission on the issue of the 150-foot setback,
etc. It appeared to him that before they started to adopt an ordinance for any
change, it would be appropriate to have a meeting with the Planning Commission
to discuss the matter. He suggested that the Planning Commission be made
aware that the Council would want to have a meeting with them and then to work
with the Mayor or whoever was necessary to set-up that joint meeting.
Miss Santalahti stated she would relay that to the Planning Commission on next
Monday, July 28, 1980 and propose some times and dates.
No action was taken on the foregoing items, therefore the action of the Planning
Commission became final.
142/166: ORDINANCE NO. 4148 - RELATING TO SIGNS APPROVED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4148 for first
reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4148: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTION
18.05.043, INCLUDING SUBSECTIONS .010, .011, .012, .020, .021, .022 AND .030
THEREOF, OF CHAPTER 18.05, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING
NEW SECTION 18.05.043 TO CHAPTER 18.05, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
142/179: ORDINANCE NO. 4147: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4147 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4147: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.01.070
OF CHAPTER 18.01, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(redefining the words, terms and phrases relating to the definition of "family")
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 4147 duly passed and adopted.
80-923
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980~ 1:30 P.M.
142/149: ORDINANCE NO. 4149: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4149 for
first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4149: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTIONS
14.32.170 AND 14.32.178 AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 14.32.173 AND 14.32.176 TO
CHAPTER 14.32 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING.
(City parking lots)
126: DISNEYLAND'S 25TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION: Mayor Pro Tem Overholt reported
on his attendance at the July 17, 1980 Disneyland celebration of its 25th Birthday
and the ceremony that' took place at 2:30 p.m. He felt that the 25-hour marathon
was an event that perhaps did not receive the public attention that it should
have in terms of its significance on the community. It was significant that
the population of the City had expanded over that 25-year period stimulated by
Disneyland's location in the City. It was Mr. Disney's inspiration and "sweat
and tears" of not only the people in his organization, but also people in the
City resulting in that location from which the City reaped benefits today. He
would venture to say that without Disneyland, there would be no Convention Center
or Stadium, industry, or the residential community that existed today in Anaheim.
He was privileged to be a part of the ceremony and was deeply touched by it
paying tribute to 25 years of hard toil, mistakes and difficulties that did not
show upon visiting the park. It was all smooth, happiness and well taken care
of.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was also happy to be present at the ceremony to
share in that great moment. One thing she wanted to correct was the fact that
before Disneyland came to Anaheim, the City was a Planned Community from the
beginning with the balance of industry, commercial and residential, although no-
where near the Size it was todmy. She was pleased that ~isneyland chose to
be a part of the City and that the City was such a part of Disneyland as well.
105: BREA ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO APPOINTMENTS TO CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
Councilman Roth reported on a newspaper article in the July 19, 1980 edition of
The Register regarding the City of Brea's adoption of a new ordinance concerning
appointments to City boards and commissions. In the article, Councilwoman Norma
Hicks was quoted as saying that the ordinance would take politics out of the
selection process for such boards and Commissions, and three other Council Members
agreed with her.
Councilman Roth thereupon requested tha~ the City Manager appoint someone to
obtain a copy of the new ordinance and route it to Council Members for their
comments and also for comments relative to the possible adoption of a similar
ordinance in Anaheim.
173: COMPLAINTS REGARDING RAILROAD CROSSINGS IN THE CITY: Councilman Bay
referred to the considerable number of hotline complaints received regarding
railroad crossings in Anaheim. There was no doubt in his mind and in his own
personal experience that the railroad crossings in the City, particularly those
on Broadway, Lincoln, Vermont and various other crossings, that it was apparent
that railroads did not have a positive program for seeing that maintenance was
carried out on those crossings. He urged staff to take all the necessary action
that they could take within their authority to "put the heat" on the railroads
in the City to compel them to do something about their responsibility on the
80-924
City ~al.l~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980~ 1:30 P.M.
crossings. Orange had been trying to do the same for some time to where they
were now soliciting their legislators in Sacramento to do something about making
the railroads move on their responsibility. If Anaheim was headed for that
same point with the railroads, they should start immediately. There seemed to
be a long standing opinion that to do anything with the railroads, it took seven
years. He did not know why they should sit still for that or continue to be
nice about it. He wanted to be certain that they took the strongest action
possible to get something done.
114: LIAISON MEETINGS: Councilman Bay stated he had a report dated July 15, 1980
from the Executive Director of Community Development, listing the fact that they
had a Redevelopment Liaison meeting on July 9, 1980 and giving a brief summary
of the subjects discussed in the meeting and inviting any Council member to call
if .they wanted more details or as well they could ask him (Bay). Using that
report as a model, he would like to see some type of memorandum generated from
every liaison committee meeting that took place in the City so that first, he
was aware of what was happening and secondly, if he wanted more detail on the
subject, he could call and get that information. He was suggesting if the
Council approved, that the least they would have, was a memo of the fact that the
a liaison meeting did take place enabling them to ask about it if they wished
to do so.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt stated if he was proposing that action at this time,
he would move that it be continued until the Mayor was present, since it was
the Mayor's idea in the first place and thus, he should be given an opportunity
to express his views.
Councilman Bay stated if the Mayor Pro Tem was going to continue it, then he
would wait until the next week to make his motion.
114: LETTER FROM ROLLING HILL ESTATES URGING OPPOSITION TO AB 2464: Councilman
Bay referred to letter dated July 17, 1980 from the Mayor of the City of Rolling
Hills Estates, concerning AB 2464 (Roos). It also noted that "in the League of
Cities Legislative Bulletin of July 3, 1980, reference is made to AB 2464. The
League urges your City to support this legislation." However, the City of Rolling
Hills Estates was urging the opposite and their major objection to the bill,
"...is its reference to using the Housing Element of the Regional C0unsil of
Governors as the benchmark for each cities fair share housing requirement."
Councilman Bay stated he was merely calling the Council's attention to the
letter in the event that next week they wanted to take action on the bill.
Councilman Roth stated that yesterday he took the letter and attached a memDrandum
to it, asking the City Clerk to send it to IGR and to Ron Thompson, Planning Director
for comments subsequently to be submitted to the Council and, therefore, action
had already been initiated.
Councilwoman Kaywood suggested that on anything having to do with housing, they
should also obtain a report from Lisa Stipkovich, the City's Housing Manager.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2086 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
Application by Lease-All La Palma, to permit industrially-oriented commercial
sales and office uses on ML zoned property located at 4081 - 4095 East La
Palma Avenue.
80-925
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL M~.NUTES..- July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PCS0-100, declared the
subject exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR and further denied
Conditional Use Permit No. 2086. The decision of the Planning Commission was
appealed by the Leaverton Company on behalf of Lease-All La Palma, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
In letter dated July 21, 1980, the applicant requested a one-week continuance of
the public hearing to July 29, 1980.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt asked if anyone was present on the subject CUP; from the
audience, an agent for the applicant indicated his presence and confirmed that
they wished the matter to be continued one week. There were no other persons
present.
On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilman Roth, public hearing
on Conditional Use Permit No. 2086 and negative declaration was continued to
July 29, 1980, at 3:00 p.m. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
176: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 78-27A: In accordance with
application filed by Classic Development Corporation, public hearing was held
on proposed abandonment of a portion of the "01d" Santa Ana Canyon Road, lying
southerly of the Santa Ana Canyon Road and west of the S.A.V.I. Canal, pursuant
to Resolution No. 80R-155, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices
thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated March 24, 1980 and recommendations by the
Planning Commission were submitted recommending denial of said abandonment.
Extensive testimony was received at the meeting of April 29, 1980 (see minutes
that date) and the EIR finding categorical exemption was ratified by the Council.
The public hearing was then continued to July 22, 1980 at which time the question
of legality of the parcel would have been determined.
City Clerk Roberts announced that a proposed agreement had been submitted relating
to the sale of real property between Classic Development Corporation and Canyon
Gardens Nursery.
City Attorney William Hopkins thereupon recommended that action be taken on the
agreement prior to proceeding with the public hearing on the abandoranent.
i23: MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to authorize an agreement with Classic Develop-
ment Corporation and Canyon Gardens Nursery, Inc., relating to sale of real pro-
perty adjacent to Santa Ana Canyon Road near Fairmont Boulevard. Councilwoman
Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Roth recounted the problem that had been associated with the aban-
donment, but that now the Kobayoshis and Classic Development had conferred and
the appraiser, Cedric White, had submitted an appraisal of the property of $8,000.
The appraisal was acceptable to the nursery and the $8,000 was deposited in trust
with the City Attorney's office and an agreement had now been signed. Relative
to the abandonment, he questioned if it was that portion that belonged to the City.
Mr. Malcolm Slaughter, Deputy City Attorney, explained that the City presently
had a dedicated right-of-way over parcel "C" in the agreement (Exhibit A). The
80-926
City Hall~ ~na~eim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 22, 1980, 1:30 P.M.
request before the Council was whether it was appropriate to abandon the City's
public road across the parcel of property, fee title to which would be in the
Kobayoshi Nursery upon mailing of the documents. The Engineering Department
had previously recommended the abandonment of the City's road right over parcel
"C" and he had no objection to that. If the Council proceeded with the abandon-
ment, the Kobayoshi property would then be clear of the road right-of-way.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor in opposition,
there being no response, he closed the public hearing.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if it would affect the Kobayoshis at all if the aban-
donment were not granted.
City Engineer William Devitt answered "yes" and further stated on the basis of
the approval of the foregoing agreement, he would recommend approval of the
abandonment.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 80R-318 for adoption, approving abandonment
No. 79-27A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 80R-318: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF (OLD) SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD.
(78-27A)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 80R-318 duly passed and adopted.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to recess into Executive
Session. Councilman'Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent.
MOTION CARRIED. (3:10 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Pro Tem Overholt called the meeting to order, all Council
Members being present, with the exception of Councilman Seymour. (4:Z5 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded
the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 4:25 P.M.
~D. RO~ITY CLERK