Loading...
1979/03/20 79-311 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - [~arch 20, 1979, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Norm Priest CITY ENGINEER: William Devitt ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Rabbi Hershel Brooks of Temple Beth Emet gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman E. Llewellyn Overholt, Jr. led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held January 2, 1979, subject to typographical corrections. Council- man Overholt seconded the motion. Councilman 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 and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the read- ing of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,343,448.64, in accordance with the 1978-79 Budget, were approved. 160: CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilman Roth, the following actions were authorized, as recommended by the Purchasing Agent: 1. Bid No. 3511 - Three-Phase Padmount Transformers - Award to Westinghouse Electric Corporation, $12,332.04 for Item 1, and to General Electric Company, $13,635.84 for Item 2. 2. Bid No. 3512 - Three-Phase, Padmount, Fused Transformers -.Award to Westinghouse Electric Corporation, $17,088.26. 3. Bid No. 3506 - Polyphase and Single Phase Meters and Demand Registers - Award to General Electric Supply Company, $2,210.10 for Items 1 and 2, and $50,200.12 for Items 3, 4 and 5. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 79-312 !~t_z._Ha. ll~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL RESOLUTION CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 79R-154 through 79R-156, both inclusive for adoption, awarding contracts as recommended by the City Engineer and approving an agreement (3) as reconmlended by the Executive Director. Refer to Resolution Book. ~. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-154: 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 ~ND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: SLURRY SEAL CONTRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 01-232-6340-00002. (Ted R. Jenkins, $66,832.50) 2. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-155: 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: CYPRESS STREET STREET IMPROVEMENT, W/O VINE STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 46-792-6325-2300. (T. J. Crosby Company, $7,381) 13. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-156: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN. AGREEMENT WITH BEVERLY HILLS SECURITIES COMPANY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour rl]~e Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 79R-154 through 79R-156, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. i23: FIRST TRUST DEED CHFA LOANS - KEYSTONE SAVINGS: Councilman Overh01t offered Resolution No. 79R-157 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated March 13, ~979, from the Executive Director of Community Development, approving an agreement with Keystone Savings and Loan Association, to allow the City to assist the Association in making construction progress payment disbursements in connection w~t¼ First Trust Deed CHFA Loans involving funds for home improvements. Refer to Resolution Book. !{ESOLUTION NO. 79R-157: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH KEYSTONE SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. 79-313 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Roth and Kaywood NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kott ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-157 duly passed and adopted. 134/174: CITY'S HOUSING ELEMENT - REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL: Referring to staff report dated March 13, 1979, Councilman Roth questioned why the not-to-exceed cost was $50,000. Executive Director Norm Priest answered they expected the consultants to come in at their best price, but they sought to establish the stated amount based upon what other housing elements had been costing in the last couple of years. He also confirmed for Councilman Roth that they would be coming back to Council with an outline as to what they were going to do and the actual cost. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the Community Development and Planning Departments were authorized to solicit requests for proposals to prepare the City's Housing Element, at a cost not to exceed $50,000, as recommended in memorandum dated March 13, 1979, from the Executive Director. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. 123: ANACAL ENGINEERING COMPANY - ENGINEERING SERVICES: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 79R-158 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated March 13, 1979, from the City Engineer, approving an amendment to the agreement with Anacal Engineering Company for engineering services in connection with storm drain facil- ities in an area bounded by La Pa!ma Avenue, Imperial Highway, Fee Ana Street and the Santa Ana River. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-158: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH ANACAL ENGINEERING CO. AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-158 duly passed and adopted. 156: DISABILITY RETIREMENT APPLICATION OF DALE C. WALTERS: City Manager Talley briefed the Council on the report dated March 14, 1979, from the Safety Employee Disability Retirement Evaluation Committee relative to the subject. He further explained that after a series of meetings and much deliberation, the City Council adopted a policy regarding disability retirement procedures for fire and police 79-314 (jj~t~v Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES -March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. safety employees late last year. Under that policy, specifically City staff was charged with certain responsibilities which had been carried out in the subject case. A hearing was held wherein all medical testimony was presented. The Committee was composed of the Chairman, Assistant City Manager, William T. Hopkins and the Chief of Police and Fire Chief, as members of that Committee. Following ti~eir hearing where much evidence was considered, the Committee recommended the ~¢tion before the Council today and forwarded the entire file to his office for review. In accordance with Council policy, he reviewed the information and con- :-urred with the recommendation. Today, they would respond with any information the Council desired and would also present evidence that was considered and the ~f~ty Attorney could advise the Council if they wished. The members of the Committee were present, as well as the investigators and the Risk Manager who worked on the matter. Councilman Roth stated that due to the fact that basically the action recommended was to deny the claim, and considering the controversial nature of the issue, he moved that the matter be continued one week for full Council action. Councilman Kott seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. i23: ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE: Councilman Overholt offered Resolution No. 79R-159 for adoption, as recommended by the City Attorney. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-159: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF ORANGE EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (through fiscal year 1979-80) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-159 duly passed and adopted. 103: SANTA ANA CANYON NO. 7 ANNEXATION (UNINHABITED): City Attorney Hopkins ~ommented that relative to the subject, they had received a letter from the law firm of Brown, Winfield and Canzaneri, referring to a law suit that had been against LAFCO by certain environmental groups; however, it was not part of the action requested today, but the Council might wish to consider that at a later date. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 79R-160 for adoption, as recommended by the City Attorney. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-160: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED SANTA ANA CANYON NO. 7 ANNEXATION. 79-315 C_i_ty ~Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979, 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Roth and Kaywood NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kott ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-160 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Kott explained that his "no" vote was predicated on the fact that he did not believe the City was in a financial position to annex other lands. Until it was known what it was going to cost, if anything, he would oppose an expenditure of funds that would be created for the already existing taxpayers. 101/123: TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH CITY-OWNED PROPERTY: Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 79R-161 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated March 19, 1979, from the City Attorney's Office approving an agreement with Title Insurance and Trust in connection with certain City-owned property (ASI - expansion of Stadium) for a period of 15 years. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-161: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE AND TITLE SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH CERTAIN CITY-OWNED PROPERTY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-161 duly passed and adopted. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-28 AND VARIANCE NO. 2566 (TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8520): Request by Anaheim Hills, Inc., for an extension of time to Reclassification No. 73-74-28, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-HS-22,000 to construct an 18-1ot subdivision on property located at the northeasterly corner of Avenida de Santiago and Hidden Canyon Road, was submitted. OT~ motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, an extension of time to the subject reclassification was approved, to expire March 14, 1980, as recommended by the Zoning Division. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, 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. ]_18: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred to the City's insurance carrier or the self-insurance administrator: a. Claim submitted by Craig Evans for personal injuries and damages purportedly sustained as a result of a door mechanism jamming on or about January 7, 1979. 79-316 ~jj~_~_.Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ~. Claim submitted by Craig Martin Agency, Darlene Hidalgo, insured, for personal injuries and damages to a vehicle purportedly sustained as a result of an accident involving a City-owned vehicle on or about February 23, 1979. ~. Claim submitted by Jerry L. Krebs for damages to a vehicle purportedly sus- tained as a result'of a hit-and-run accident in a City parking lot on or about February 12, 1979. d. Claim submitted by Mercury Insurance Group on behalf of John B. Lewis, insured, for vehicle damages purportedly sustained as a result of an accident involving a traffic signal malfunction on or about December 7, 1978. e. Claim submitted by Terri S. Lavoot for vehicle damages purportedly sustained as a result of loose material falling from a City-owned truck and striking her car on or about February 12, 1979. f. Claim submitted by Chester Krilowicz for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about February 1, 1979. g. Claim submitted by Kent Aves, a minor, through Charlene Mittelsteadt, his parent, for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about November 24, 1978. h. Claim submitted by Econolite Control Products, Inc., for reimbursement of expenses incurred purportedly sustained as a result of damage to a main water line by Bebeck Company employees working under contract to the City of Anaheim on. or about December 28, 1978. ~. Claims submitted by G. Robert Woolsey for property damages purportedly sus- tained as a result of problems in utility lines on or about February 9 and 10, 1979. ~ Claim submitted by Joyce Alexander for personal injuries purportedly sustained in connection with a City street on or about October 19, 1978. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: 173: Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Frontier Airlines, Inc., applying for exemption authority for Orange County - Las Vegas - Denver routing. ~. 173: Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Hughes Air Corporation, dba Hughes Airwest, applying for exemption authority for Orange County -Las Vegas - Denver routing. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission Application No. 58724, in the matter of the Southern California Gas Company, for authority to increase its rates by an amount sufficient to offset changed gas costs. d. 175: Utilities Department, Customer Service Division - Monthly report for 'February 1979. 79-317 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20, 1979, 1:30 P.M. e. 105: Project Area Committee - Minutes of February 27, 1979. f. 161: Community Development Department - Annual report for fiscal year 1977-78 on Redevelopment Project Alpha. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 79R-162 through 79R-164, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-162: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Anamco, Inc.; David A. Gronberg, et al.; General American Life Insurance Co.; Mary Bader, et al.; Melville J. McLean, et ux.; Sent-Pac Corp.; Jack Busch, et ux.; Freddie Lepovac; Pacific Scientific Company; Franklin Enterprises) 161: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-163: 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: DOWNTOWN PROJECT ALPHA (PHASE I) STREET, SEWER, WATER, STORM DRAIN AND ELECTRICAL IMPROVE- MENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 46-792-6325-2180, 46-792-6325-2190, 46-792-6325-2210, 46-792-6325-2230, 46-792-6325-2240, 46-792-6325-2270, 46-792-6325-2290 and 46-792-6325-5130, (F.Y. 1979-80); 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 April 26, 1979, 2:00 P.M.) Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood questioned the use of smooth quarry tile on the sidewalk; City Engineer William Devitt explained that it was a pulmanite sidewalk that had the appearance of tile, but in actuality, it was concrete. He also assured Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood that it would not be hazardous for walking and it was used through- out the country. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-164: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE AND ABANDON CERTAIN PUBLIC STREET(S) OR ALLEY(S) AND FIXING A DATE FOR A HEARING THEREON. (78-21A, portion of the easterly 20 feet of Old Jefferson Road, 173 feet long, beginning approximately 1146 feet south of the centerline of La Palma Avenue, public hearing to be held April 10, 1979, at 3:00 P.M.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 79R-162 through 79R-164, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 79-318 <~!~}' Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20, 1979~ 1:30 P.M. CiTY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meeting held February 26, 1979, pertaining to the following applications, as listed on the Consent Calendar, were submitted for City Council information. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 78-79-27 AND CONDITIONAL USE PE~{IT NO. 1986: Submitted by Jonathan T. Y. Yeh, et al, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to CL, to expand an existing motel on property located at 420 South Beach Boulevard with certain code waivers. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC79-38 and PC79-39, granted, in part, Reclassification No. 78-79-27 and Conditional Use Permit No. 1986, respectively, and granted negative declaration status. 2. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 78-79-29: Submitted by Ernest A. and Donna J. Brown, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-1200 to construct a one- and two- story, 10-unit apartment complex on property located at 2224 South Lewis Street. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-40, granted Reclassification No. 78-79-29 and granted negative declaration status. 3. VARIANCE NO. 3079: Submitted by Conservative Baptist Association of Southern California, to retain two existing signs and install a third one on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 2528 West La Palma Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-46, granted Variance No. 3079, in part, and ratified the Planning Director's categorical exemption determination. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1928: Submitted by Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company, to permit on-sale beer and wine in an existing restaurant on CL zoned property located at 1061 North State College Boulevard with a waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-43, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 1928 and ratified the Planning Director's categorical exemption determination. 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1949: Submitted by C. Anthony and Esther Silva, to permit the outdoor storage of new automobiles on ML zoned property located at 27] North Manchester Avenue with certain code waivers. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-45, granted Condi- ti~'~nal Use Permit No. 1949, in part, and granted negative declaration status. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1593 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Request of Chapman and Tustin Avenue Associates and State of California, Department of Transportation, for an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 1593 to permit a restaurant, motel and coffee shop on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located south of the RiversJ. de Freeway on the east side of Tustin Avenue. 79-319 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 1593 to expire February 28, 1980. The following items (7-9) were removed from the Planning Commission consent calendar by Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood and Councilman Roth. 7. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 78-79-32 AND VARIANCE NO. 3078: Submitted by Douglas A. Gjersvold, et al, for a change in zone from County 80-AR-10,O00 to RS-HS-22,000 to establish a 3-lot subdivision on property located at 21082 Santa Ana Canyon Road with waiver of minimum lot area. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC79-41 and PC79-42, granted Reclassification No. 78-79-32 and Variance No. 3078, respectively, and granted negative declaration status. b~yor Pro Tem Kaywood noted in the Planning Commission minutes that Commissioner Barnes voted "no" on the subject in order to have something on the record that no precedent be set in approving the reclassification and variance. She also wanted something on the record from the Council agreeing that they were not changing the size of the one-half acre zoning in the area. Miss Santalahti explained that she believed it was Commissioner Barnes' reaction that up to now, it had been the unanimous feeling of the residents of the area that one-half acre zoning was appropriate in that area. There were no citizens in opposition to the proposal and she (Barnes) and the Commission were rather surprised that all of a sudden the residents were willing to go with something less. Councilman Roth commented that he saw nothing wrong and if that was what the people wanted, it was fine with him. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood stated that the road was off-site and therefore a larger parcel was involved. She reiterated she wanted something on the record that the Council was not starting a precedent. Councilman Kott also stated for the record that as far as his voting was con- cerned, it was never precedent setting, but just individually on the merits of the case and according to the desires of the people and their right to determine what they wanted. 8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1943: Submitted by June L. and Kelly M. Noordman, to permit a pre-school on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at 900 South Knott Avenue. 'Iq~e City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-44, granted Condi- tional Use Permit No. 1943 and granted negative declaration status. b~yor Pro Tem Kaywood referred to a letter received from a D. J. Moore, 906 South Knott, in the immediate vicinity of the subject property wherein it was claimed that no notification was received relative to the proposed pre-school. 79-320 ~ii~! Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES -March 20, 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ~liss Santalahti explained, to her knowledge, everyone involved was notified of ~he original Planning Commission meeting. Because of the interest, they always made a point of commenting that an appeal could be filed with the Council in ~he normal 22-day period after the hearing. There were a number of people present in opposition, although some of the immediate neighbors did not oppose ~ <~onditional use permit. (]ouncilman Roth suggested it was possible that the individual involved could be a tenant, rather than a property owner, and thus, may not have received a notice. ~ie had found out that when somebody complained about not receiving notification, which was only a courtesy, it was found after checking that the notice, in fact, went to the property owner and not the tenant, and thus, the tenant felt he had been left out. Miss Santalahti explained that they made every effort to notify everybody who might be interested in order to preclude them from coming back later with such a complaint. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood also noted that the letter indicated that people were now driving on his or her lawn. Miss Santalahti stated that the plans did show that a circular drive was going ~o be installed on Knott Street, which they typically recommended, and hopefully that would take care of the problem. The City Clerk reported that the file indicated that Mr. Moore was notified at 906 South Knott. 9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1945: Submitted by Ireneo G. and Emelita A. Munoz, to permit a health spa and massage parlor on CL zoned property located at 924 East ~.incoln Avenue with certain code waivers. City Planning Commisssion, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-37, denied ~onditional Use Permit No. 1945 and ratified the Planning Director's categorical ~xemption determination. ~{ven though no action was required by the Council, Councilman Roth stated for the rec©rd that he would abstain from any action on the subject conditional use permit ~ince he owned property at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Bush Street. Ne further action was taken by the City Council on the foregoing items, thus the actions of the City Planning Commission became final. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-55(9) - APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLANS: Request by Dunn Properties Corporation for approval of specific plans for Reclassification No. ?~{-74-55(9), proposed CL zoning on property located on the north side of La Palma .avenue, west of Magnolia Avenue, was submitted. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, specific plans for the subject reclassification were approved. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION ,~iARRIED. 79-321 _City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979, 1:30 P.M. 173: RAILROAD NOISE ON SANTA ANA STREET: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, consideration of the recommendations of the City Planning Commission relating to railroad noise in the Santa Ana Street area (continued from March 6, 1979) was further continued to April 17, 1979, as requested. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Roth wanted to be certain that people in the subject community were advised of any continuances because they were very interested in the issue of railroad noise. 170: ORDINANCE NO. 3985: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3985 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3985: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO CHAPTER 6.98 PERTAINING TO SOLAR SHADE CONTROL. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 3985 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3986: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3986 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3986: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-51(34), RS-HS-22,000) i{oll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 3986 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3987: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 3987 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3987: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (78-79-10, CL) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 3987 duly passed and adopted. 79-322 Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ~79: ORDINANCE NO. 3988: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3988 for first reading. ~)RDINANCE NO. 3988: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTION !8~84.038 OF TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.84, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING NEW SECTION IN ITS PLACE AND STEAD RELATING TO TREE PRESERVATION. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 3989: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 3989 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 3989: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, C]LAPTER 14.32, SECTION 14.32.272, SUBSECTION .110 AND ADDING THERETO A NEW SUBSECTION .115 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO NO PARKING DURING SCHOOL HOURS. (~-~7-b~th-~d~7-from-~-¥~mm-~v~nu~-to-C~r~flg~ ~4~e-~e~i~~e~b~des~rom~ts~aster~y~t~rm±n~s~t~m~a~tr~t)* [14: COMMENDATION TO PEOPLE WHO SERVED THE CITY: Councilman Overholt reported that he spent the last two weekends in Palm Springs where he joined people from City staff, other Council Members, and members of ASI (Anaheim Stadium, Inc.). He emphasized the most important factor which made the City of Anaheim great revolved around the people who made it so. He commended and had highest praise for those people on City commissions, non-profit corporations (ASI) and staff who served the City and contributed to its greatness. Councilman Roth concurred with the statements expressed by Councilman Overholt. 158: CITY MANAGER MEMO RELATING TO CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Councilman Kott referred to memorandum dated March 15, 1979, from the City Manager noting that there were some items in it which he did not understand. He therefore asked the City Clerk to place the matter on a forthcoming Council meeting agenda so that the Council could establish a policy for communications which !~h~y received to preclude any misunderstandings or need for such a memorandum ~ the future. He asked the City Manager if he would like to explain if he ~ it appropriate to tell the Council how to handle its mail. He did not believe that one of the City Manager's assistants was in a position to say what ~i~ City Clerk and City Attorney should do, and he wanted to know why the memo- ~andum was initiated. Manager Talley answered that he instructed that the memorandum be initiated~ Councilman Kott noted that if he (Talley) was notified on Thursday, March 15, !979, regarding the situation as outlined and the City Manager part of the memorandum stated, "unless directed to the contrary, I will initiate the~policy on March 19, 1979" how he expected to get any direction between. March 15, 1979 ~ncl March 19, 1979. He questioned if that was intellectually honest. >~ ?alley answered that not only was it intellectually honest, but also it was perfectly in accordance with normal Council policy--if anything was going to be done, all Council Members were to be told about it by putting the information in the Council boxes. If there was any objection, then the matter would be set for an agenda. He had not heard from anybody to the contrary and therefore proceeded ~n ~he matter. *(NS/o Orange Ave., from Magnolia Ave. to W. property line of Maxwell Elem. School; Western Ave. to 1300 ft. W/o Western Ave.; S/o Western Ave. 500 to 1300 ft. W/o Western Ave.; S/o Palm Lane, from E. property line to W. property line Palm Lane Elem. School) 79-323 Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - blarch 20, 1979~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Kott stated the point was that any communication he received was his private business between himself and the citizen, and it did not have to be disseminated through him (Talley). Mr. Talley was of the opinion that Councilman Kott had misinterpreted the memo ¼e~'ause what was involved were communications from staff to Council Members. They had inquiries on how they distributed responses to Council Members and the answer back was generally, if something was distributed to all of the Council. at the time the inquiry was made, the response was generally distributed back to all the Council. On occasion, if a Council Member asked for a report on an quiry, they might give it back to just that Council Member or may not. It w~ dependent on whether or not it involved policy or was likely to be the subject <>f a Council meeting. The response to the existing policy was that they ought to be consistent so that no one could say they were showing favoritism. His reaction was, as a courtesy, and only as a courtesy, they would also send a copy of the policy to the City Attorney and City Clerk so that they would know what i~is office was doing. If Council, as a policy, preferred that all Members be equally advised on staff reports, as far as the City Manager's departments were .~oncerned, the City Attorney and City Clerk might feel they would also like to do the same thing. If so, he did not care. Councilman Kott thereupon asked the City Attorney's opinion on the matter. City Attorney Hopkins stated that he believed some of the misunderstanding was due to the fact that the memo said, to distribute all Council communications to the entire Council, and perhaps the "all" was more inclusive than what was actually intended. As far as the City Attorney's Office was concerned, they must in their professional capacity, exercise their discretion in line with their ethical requirements as to what should go to individual Council Members if they reqaest a confidential opinion. Again, if it was something that affected the ~tire Council or the entire City, they would use the discretion to distribute: ~hat to all Members of the Council. He believed that t:hey had avoided ? following that procedure in line with their Charter duties. As far as ~ersonal mail, there was no intent to intercept such mail. Relative to items ~'hat would go to all Council Members, that would be something in which the ',~anager would have to use i~is discretion. ~itv Manager Talley confirmed that the memo referred to the policy regardi~.g :it!~~ departments when submitting communications to the C~ity Council and had noth~£ng to do with private mail or anything else. further discussion followed between Councilman Kott and Mr. Talley rew~]vJng around the issue at the conclusion of which Councilman Overholt stated that the matter was the concern of the full Council and since the Mayor was not iore~ent, it should be deferred. By general consent, the subject of City Council communications was continued to March 27, 1979, for full Council consideration. 79-324 ~it¥ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20, 1979~ 1:30 P.M. !14: MAYOR'S HOTLINE COMPLAINT: Councilman Kott referred to a Hotline complaint received relative to parkway trees that were allegedly uprooting a lawn. City Manager Talley explained that the matter had been investigated and a response was being distributed that day, but there did not appear to be any parkway damage. Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood noted that relative to Hotline complaints, from her observation, people were demanding more services and they wanted them immedi- ately. Calls were received on Friday and then on Saturday and Sunday those same people would call asking for an answer. Although she did not think that t[~e Hotline should be eliminated, she maintained that it had to be put in proper perspective. She saw no point in bringing up Hotline complaints at Council meetings when responses as to the outcome of those complaints were being re- ceived regularly. t14: GRAND OPENING - SECURITY PACIFIC BANK: Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood reported on the first Grand Opening in the Redevelopment area which took place on Wednesday, March 14, 1979--the Security Pacific Bank building at the corner of Lincoln Avenue and Harbor Boulevard. She stated it was a very positive first step. 105: YOUTH COMMISSION MEETING: Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood reported that she had attended the recent meeting of the Youth Commission at the Brookhurst Community Center where Mr. Jack Kudron of the Parks, Recreation and Arts Department gave a workshop entitled--"Effective Group Interaction." Ail nine Youth Commissioners were present, and she believed they derived a great deal from the talk. She was looking for a lot of important new material to come from the group, and the Council would find them to be a source of pride. The Commission also passed a resolution supporting the Council's anti-pornography drive in the passing of the newsrack ordinance without violating Constitutional rights. RECESS: Councilman Overholt moved to recess until public hearing time. Council- woman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (2:25 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor Pro Tem called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Seymour. (3:00 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 3076: Application by Robert D. Etchandy, et al, to establish a 3-lot industrial subdivision on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located on the east side of Tustin Avenue, south of La Palma Avenue, with a waiver that all lots abut a public street. ~P~e City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-32, reported that the Planning Director has determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim Guide- lines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR, and further denied Variance No. 3076. 79-325 ~Ci~ty Hal.l.~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. The action of the Planning Commission was appealed by Elden W. Bainbridge, Agent, and public hearing scheduled this date. Miss Santalahti described the location and surrounding land uses. She outlined the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered by the City Planning Commission. The Mayor Pro Tem asked if the applicant or applicant's agent was present and desirous of being heard. Mr. Elden W. Bainbridge, 2800 South Main Street, Unit K, Santa Ana, stated in appearing before the Planning Commission, he thQught that there was no contro- versy involved with his application and thus did not elaborate much on it, but subsequently was shocked at their response. He did not know how they could say that no special circumstances were involved when they were being allowed only one access along approximately 750 feet of frontage. The reasons for the appli- cation being turned down were not discussed, but the Commission was hung up with the commercial use. He explained that he had a six-acre parcel with about 750 feet of frontage limited to one access because of the overpass on the freeway and the on-ramp. They tried to get two access points, but the Traffic Division turned them down because it was too close to the traffic coming down the overpass. He reiterated, the Commission was hung up on the commercial use and did not realize that every time he put a commercial use on the property, it would have to go back to the Commission for approval because the property was designed as an industrial park. Also, Mr. Bainbridge could not understand how the project could be detrimental to the public welfare because he could still build the same three buildings with- out the parcel map, but he was asking for it so that it would give him more flexibility for financing and individual tax bills. He emphasized, the denial would not prevent him from building the same three buildings proposed in the same form as at present and they were presently in plan check. If the Council needed ammunition to back up approval, he noted that they approved a similar situation at the northwest corner of La Palma and Kellogg in November 1976, which contained eight lots without any street frontage. Councilman Roth noted that the only way Mr. Bainbridge could get out of his six- acre parcel was by some type of frontage or easement, or otherwise three-quarters of his property would be landlocked. He did not see why the Planning Commission would restrict the man and deny his request. Miss Santalahti stated that Mr. Bainbridge's comments relative to limited access onto Tustin Avenue were correct. He was restricted and there was a fairly substantial slope on a good part of the property to the'south. If he subdivided in accordance with the zoning, not all of those lots would have frontage, and he would have to provide access by some alternate means. She also confirmed for Councilman Roth that the Planning Commission was, in fact, ~ery concerned on the possibility of commercial use, rather than industrial. At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Kaywood, Mr. Bainbridge then elaborated upon the use he proposed ~n the development. 79-326 .~i_t~_Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- March 20~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M. ~]ouncilman Roth stated that he did not believe the issue was relative to whether or not uses would be commercial or industrial. Mr. Bainbridge was asking to be able to build a private street or to have an easement for ingress and egress to Tustin Avenue. There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor Pro Tem closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council ratified the determination of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 5 of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (~uncilman Roth offered Resolution No. 79R-165 for adoption, granting Variance No. 3076, thereby reversing the findings of the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 79R-165: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 3076. Roil Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kott, Roth and Kaywood None Seymour The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 79R-165 duly passed and adopted. 170: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF HILLSIDE GRADING ORDINANCE~ TENTATIVE TRACT GO. 8418: Application by John D. Lusk and Son, requesting a waiver of lot line requirement of the Hillside Grading Ordinance relating to Tract No. 8418 located north of Nohl Ranch Road, east of the Newport Freeway, was submitted. Yhe Mayor Pro Tem asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in oppo- sition. There being no response, she closed the public hearing. >~iss Santalahti then clarified questions posed by Councilman Kott relative to t~he staff report regarding responsibility for slope maintenance. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, waiver of the ~{illside Grading Ordinance on Tentative Tract No. 8418, was approved, as recom- mended by the Planning Commission. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: By general consent, the City Council adjourned. Adjourned: 3:20 P.M.