Loading...
1977/04/26 77-471 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William T. Hopkins STADIUM-CONVENTION CENTER-GOLF DIRECTOR: Tom Liegler' PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ron Thompson ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR - ZONING: Annika Santalahti ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR - PLANNING: Phil Schwartze PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER: Ken Clements SENIOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR: Harley Hesse CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR: Les King Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. INVOCATION: Reverend Gordon Sloan of the Melodyland Hotline Center gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman William Kott led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Thom and approved by the City Council and were accepted by Mr. William M. Clines and Messrs. Walter Last and Walter Tappen, respectively. "Anti-Litter Month" - month of May, 1977 Law Day U.S.A. in Anaheim - Sunday, May 1, 1977 MINUTES: Approval of minutes was deferred one week. 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 Thom seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $2,166,152.73 , in accordance with the 1976-77 Budget, were approved. 123: AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY~ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: (Shapell Government Housing) Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-284 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated April 18, 1977 from Executive Director Norm Priest. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-284: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY WITH THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. 77-472 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, SeymDur, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-284 duly passed and adopted. 153 AND 177: AUTHORIZATION FOR INTERMEDIATE CLERK TO BE ADDED TO HOUSING AUTHORITY STAFF: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, authorization for an Intermediate Clerk presently EDA funded to be transitioned into a regular Housing Authority position effective May 6, 1977, as requested by the Executive Director in his memorandum dated April 20, 1977, was approved. MOTION CARRIED. 153: CHANGE IN EXEMPT STATUS~ PLAN CHECK ENGINEER JOB CLASS: The Mayor noted in memorandum dated April 20, 1977, from Personnel Director McRae, that Personnel had consulted with the AMEA on the subject Job class. He requested that written affir- mation of such consultation be obtained prior to the Council taking action to be assured that the Association had time to digest and react accordingly in like matters. He recalled that a policy had been established a few weeks prior wherein this pro- cedure would be followed. Mr. Talley confirmed that written affirmation would be obtained in the future, but only to the extent of informing the Association of what was being submitted to the Council and in no way soliciting or seeking their concurrence; whether or not they agreed would be immaterial to the administration. The Mayor agreed that would be satisfactory. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern that tired and overworked employees could not perform at top efficiency if a great deal of work evolved as a result of assigning overtime work to Plan Check Engineers on a special request basis by the developer. If more employees were needed, then that should be considered. Mr. Talley stated the matter would be brought to the Council's attention should the need arise. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-285 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated April 20, 1977 from the Personnel Director. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-285: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DELETING THE JOB CLASS OF PLAN CHECK ENGINEER FROM RESOLUTION NO. 76R-680 AND ESTABLISHING PLAN CHECK ENGINEER AS AN OVERTIME NON-EXEMPT CLASSIFICATION. (effec- tive April 15, 1977) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-285 duly passed and adopted. 77-473 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 134: AREA III - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 142: Councilwoman Kaywood referred to Page 7 of the text of the Anaheim City General Plan for the Santa Ana Canyon Area presented for approval and expressed her concern relative to Items C and D, concluding with the statement "Do not exclude any portion of society." She ex- plained that the matter had been discussed with the Task Force and the consensus was that it was unrealistic to subsidize very expensive housing. Since there was such a great need, coupled with a very limited amount of funds, it was necessary to provide the greatest number with the least amount and not the reverse. If expensive housing were to be subsidized, funds would not go very far. The Mayor stated that staff was undoubtedly referring to 235-I tracts at the mouth of the Canyon. Councilwoman Kaywood explained that her comments were directed to the future. Mr. Phil Schwartze, Assistant Planning Director - Planning, stated that the text of the General Plan was compiled by the Task Force and the statements referred to were also contained in the City's Housing Element. Councilwoman Kaywood also requested that the name of Bob Dunham, on Page 18, be deleted as he only had the opportunity to attend one Task Force meeting. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-286 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated April 15, 1977 from the Planning Department. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-286: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TEXT TO ACCOMPANY AREA III OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 142 RELAT- ING TO THE SANTA ANA CANYON AREA. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-286 duly passed and adopted. 173: OPPOSITION TO ICAA STUDY: The Mayor explained that it had been brought to his attention that the Intercounty Airport Authority (ICAA) had reinstituted their efforts of obtaining endorsement for the study of a proposed airport in the Chino Hills area. To that extent, Mr. Larry Curran was present at the request of Mary Dinndorf to make an appeal to the Council to prevent the Authority from pursuing the study. Mr. Larry Curran, 5092 Torita Way, Yorba Linda, President of PATCH (Prevent Airport through Chino Hills) explained that he had received a call from Councilman Wedaa of Yorba Linda inquiring as to what PATCH intended to do when the ICAA made a presenta- tion to the City of Costa Mesa for endorsement of a study of the Chino Hills Airport Facility. Mr. Curran stated that subsequently he attended that particular Council meeting but since the question was on the consent calendar, there was no public discussion. He noted, however, that Mr. Jack Dutton, who previously made the pre- sentation on behalf of the ICAA was in the audience. Mr. Dutton was doing the 77-474 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. representation work for the Authority. The resolution adopted at the meeting supported the Airport Master Plan Study to be conducted by the ICAA. Mr. Curran also stated that recently State Senator John Briggs, speaking on the floor of the Senate, proposed that the area in question be dedicated to open space for a regional park. His opponent speaking the same day in Sacramento was Jack Dutton. Mr. Curran concluded by requesting Anaheim's cooperation through a resolution appeal- ing to the cities who had joined forces with ICAA asking them to withdraw their support. In answer to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Curran explained that besides Costa Mesa, there were allegedly twelve other cities who supported the resolution, confirmed by a Mr. Salmon of ICAA, although at the time he was only able to name San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Seal Beach, Tustin, Huntington Beach and Los Alamitos. Mr. Curran had not yet determined the balance of the twelve, but stated that he would obtain the names for Councilwoman Kaywood. MOTION: The Mayor stressed his opposition to the proposed study, as well as the City's past leadership position in opposing an airport in the Chino Hills, which study was also rejected by SCAG, the County of Orange, and every other responsible governmental Agency. He urged continued opposition to what he termed a scheme to use public funds to develop Chino Hills into anything, including an airport if all else failed, and offered a motion instructing staff to draw up a resolution or letter, whichever was most appropriate, to be sent to all the cities in Orange County. Before action was taken, Councilman Seymour proposed additions to the motion or resolution, first speaking to Anaheim's neighboring cities who did not seem to be concerned about the City's environment explaining that Anaheim shares a good neighbor policy and has tried to be cooperative to the greatest extent possible and now Anaheim is seeking the same cooperation in return by requesting other cities to consider withdrawal from the organization pursuing the study. As well, the resolu- tion should seek the support of other cities for Senator Briggs' proposal for a regional park on the proposed airport site (Chino Hills) which, if successful, would close the matter once and for all. Councilman Seymour also expressed his concern and considered it unfortunate that an ex-Mayor of Anaheim was pursuing the issue when he was well aware of the will of Anaheim citizens in opposing the Chino Hills Airport. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that SCAG's Executive Committee rejected even the possibility of a study as the fragile environment of the Chino Hills area was well known to everyone on the Committee. Further, she noted that the area was very close to Ontario Airport and with the same flight pattern, it could create an extremely dangerous condition. Mr. Curran explained that although SCAG had spoken openly against the ICAA proposi- tion, certain representatives were fearful as to the consequences, since they were representatives of their respective cities, if their support should differ from their city's stand on the matter. 77-475 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. In answer to Councilman Kott, Mr. Curran stated that it was unknown who funded ICAA but if that matter ever became a primary concern, government facilities could determine the source. Councilman Thom thereupon offered Resolution No. 77R-287 for adoption, opposing the proposed ICAA study, to be sent to all cities in Orange County including the additions as stated by Councilman Seymour relative to a good neighbor policy and seeking support for Senator Briggs' proposal for a regional park on the pro- posed Chino Hills Airport site. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-287: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM EXPRESSING ITS OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED STUDY FOR THE CHINO HILLS AIRPORT SITE AND URGING ALL CITIES TO WITHDRAW FROM THEIR SUPPORT OF SAID PROPOSAL AND FURTHER URGING SUPPORT OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 19 FOR A REGIONAL PARK IN PLACE OF THE PROPOSED AIRPORT SITE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-257 duly passed and adopted. 142: 1976 EDITION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS UNIFORM HOUSING CODE: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, a public hearing to adopt the 1976 Edition of the International Conference of Building Officials Uniform Housing Code with amendment thereto, was set for May 24, 1977 at 3:00 p.m. MOTION CARRIED. 173: COMMUTER TRAIN SERVICE BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND SAN DIEGO: Mr. Doug Ring, Deputy to Los Angeles County Supervisor Baxter Ward, explained that Santa Fe Railroad was acquiescing train service from Los Angeles to San Diego which service did not however, operate during peak hours. Because of this, the County of Los Angeles filed a complaint with the Public Utilities Commission ordering Santa Fe Railroad to operate the County train between Los Angeles and San Diego in the commuter time slot and they were requesting Anaheim's support. Councilman Kott thereupon offered Resolution No. 77R-288 for adoption as requested in letter dated April 1, 1977 from the Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles County and recommended in memorandum dated April 18, 1977 from the Planning Director. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-288: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION TO PERMIT THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO OPERATE COMMUTER TRAIN SERVICE BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND SAN DIEGO, INCLUD- ING STATION STOPS IN SANTA ANA AND FULLERTON, AND TO FURTHER ORDER THE SANTA FE RAILROAD TO PERMIT USE OF ITS FACILITIES FOR SAID OPERATION. 77-476 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-288 duly passed and adopted. Along the same vein, Councilman Seymour questioned staff relative to the status of the train station platform to be constructed at Anaheim Stadium. Mr. Schwartze stated that the check for the Grant Application of approximately $80,000 which was approved to build the platform was in process and expected to be received shortly. 123: AGREEMENT FOR TRAINING ANAHEIM POLICE PERSONNEL: (Agreement No. 341-76/77, California Highway Patrol) Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-289 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated April 19, 1977 from the Chief of Police. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-289: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY PATROL, RELATING TO TRAINING CLASSES FOR ONE ANAHEIM POLICE OFFICER AT THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL ACADEMY. (Training Agreement No. 341-76/77) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-289 duly passed and adopted.. 132: RATE ADJUSTMENT STUDY FOR REFUSE COLLECTION CONTRACTS: (Anaheim Disposal Company and Jaycox Disposal Company) Councilman Seymour explained that he had several meetings with both Public Works Director Piersall and Mr. Raoul Rangel, President of Jaycox Disposal, relative to rate adjustments. Since both Anaheim Disposal and Jaycox were going to be submitting rate increases, before making a decision in trying to set equitable rates, it was deemed advisable to wait until the extent of the increases was known. He suggested, therefore, that the matter be held over until the new rates were submitted, expected to be within the next 30 days. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, consideration of equitable charges to multi-family units was continued until after anticipated new contract rates with Anaheim Disposal Company and Jaycox Disposal Company were submitted, analyzed and forwarded to the Council. MOTION CARRIED. 123 AND 164: PAYMENT FOR RAMPART STREET SEWER TO THE FIRE TRAINING FACILITY AUTHORITY: (Account No. 110-422-922-01) On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, authorization of payment to the Fire Training Facility Authority in the sum of $25,258 from Account No. 110-422-922-01 for the construction of the Rampart Street sewer was approved, as recommended in memorandum dated April 19, 1977 from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. 77-477 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 169: WORK ORDER NO. 798-B~ LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: (East Street Street Improvement~ Ventura Contracting) On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, a 3-day extension of time to Work Order No. 798-B, East Street Street Improve- ment and assessment of liquidated damages totaling $75 was approved, as recommended in memorandum dated April 18, 1977 from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. 169: WORK ORDER NO. 788-A AND 812~ LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: (Halliday Street Street Improvement, Sully-Miller Contracting Company) On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, a 45-day extension of time to Work Order Nos. 788-A and 812 and assessed liquidated damages of $1,125 was approved, as recom- mended in memorandum dated April 18, 1977 from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. 135: H. G. "DAD" MILLER ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE DRIVING RANGE: Councilman Seymour stated that since architect Donald Brown had performed some work for him on a building about a year prior and he may be engaging his services again in the future, he would abstain from discussion and voting on the present matter. Councilman Seymour left the Council Chamber. (2:10 p.m.) Mr. Tom Liegler, Stadium-Convention Center-Golf Director briefed the Council on his report dated April 20, 1977 recommending approval of preliminary drawings of the proposed driving range at the H. G. "Dad" Miller Golf Course, as well as approval of the first payment for the drawings to architect Donald Brown. As depicted in the drawings, he emphasized that the range would be an asset to the Golf Course operation providing one of the finest ranges in the United States, as well as a cost effective program since it was estimated the range would pay for itself within five years. He explained that the plans were approved unanimously by the Golf Course Commission after looking at numerous other facilities in Southern California. In answer to Councilman Roth, Mr. Liegler confirmed that because the lighting for the range would be located at ground level, it would not cause light intrusion into the mobile homes and apartments to the west and to the north. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, preliminary plans for the H. G. "Dad" Miller Anaheim Municipal Golf Course Driving Range and payment of $1,250 to Donald M. Brown, architect, for work completed to date, was approved as recommended in report dated April 20, 1977 from the Stadium-Convention Center-Golf Director. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Seymour returned to the Council Chamber. (2:17 p.m.) 128: BANKING SERVICES: Referring to memorandum dated April 7, 1977 from the City Manager requesting banking services authorization, the Mayor asked if the service cost as outlined was guaranteed to remain the same for the 24-month period proposed. Assistant City Manager William T. Hopkins explained that the rates were firm for one year but the intent was to review the matter annually. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, procurement of banking services from the Bank of America for a projected term of two years was approved with a rate comparison review to be made at the end of one year. MOTION CARRIED. 77-478 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 156: LEAA FUNDING REDUCTIONS: City Manager Talley referred to memorandum dated April 22, 1977 from the National Association of Counties and memorandum dated April 25, 1977 from the Orange County Criminal Justice Council relative to a proposed reduction in the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) Budget of $250 million and urging opposition to such Budget cuts. MOTION: Councilman Seymour stated that although he could support cuts, when an area of service to the people involving crime and its reduction was involved, a hard line should be held opposing such a reduction. He thereupon moved that legis- lators be contacted opposing such reductions. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 113: CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODEr COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY: City Attorney Hopkins stated that for some time his office had been concerned as to whether or not the Community Center Authority was to be considered a local governmental agency within the meaning of the Political Reform Act. As a result of a Joint Powers Agreement be- tween the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Union High School District, he asked for a formal opinion from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). An answer dated April 12, 1977 from the Commission's Executive Director was received, indicating that a request for a formal opinion was denied because they did not consider the question to be a substantial one of interpretation. Further they indicated that the Community Center Authority was a local governmental agency and a Conflict of Interest Code should be prepared with the Anaheim City Council acting as the Code Review Board for the Authority. Accordingly, he prepared a resolution designating May 17, 1977, 3:00 p.m., as the date and time for a public hearing to consider a Conflict of Interest Code for the Community Center Authority. He also pointed out that the right to appeal denial of a formal opinion from the Commission was possible although the Executive Director was of the opinion there would be no change. Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-290 for adoption as recommended in memo- randum dated April 18, 1977 from the City Attorney. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-290: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DESIGNATING THE COMMUNITY CENTER AUTHORITY AS AN AGENCY WHICH IS REQUIRED TO ADOPT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE AND ESTABLISHING MAY 17, 1977, AS THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-290 duly passed and adopted. 160: AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 6395 - SWITCHGEAR EQUIPMENT FOR YORBA SUBSTATION: Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-291 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated April 19, 1977 from the Utilities Director. Refer to Resolution Book. 77-479 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-291: 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 SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL TRANS- PORTATION, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC UTILITY EXTENSION: 13.8 KV SWITCHGEAR ASSEMBLY COMPOSED OF SWITCHES, INTERRUPTING DEVICES, CONTROL EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTATION AND METERING EQUIPMENT, PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, ENCLOSED BUS AND OUTDOOR METAL-CLAD HOUSING FOR CONTAINMENT OF ALL SPECIFIED APPARATUS. (Research Service and Engineering, $211,311) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-291 duly passed and adopted. 108: APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION OF CHARITY FUNDS: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Kott, Application for Solicitation of Charity Funds from the Hemodialysis Foundation for telephone solicitation of businessmen who have shown prior interest in the Foundation for pledges during June and July was approved. MOTION CARRIED. 170: TENTATIVE TRACT NOS. 9171 AND 9172 - EXTENSION OF TIME: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Seymour, request from Milton Madole, Madole and Associates, Inc., for an extension of time to Tentative Tract Nos. 9171 and 9172, to establish 52 RS-5000 zoned lots on the north side of La Palma Avenue, east of Fairmont Boulevard, was approved, effective August 10, 1977, to expire on August 10, 1978, as recommended by the Zoning Division and the City Engineer in memorandums dated April i5 and April 18, 1977, respectively. To this motion, Councilwoman Kaywood voted "No". MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, 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 insurance carrier or the self-insurance administrator: a. Claim submitted by Alvaro Lopez and Alejandro Lopez, minors, by their mother, Clementine Carrasco, and Clementine Carrasco, for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of the wrongful death of Ruben V. Lopez, claimants' father and husband, at or near the intersection of Royal Oak Road and Honeywood on or about January 4, 1977. b. Claim submitted by Kim Waldner through Nelson Waldner, father and guardian, for personal injuries purportedly sustained following her arrest by the Anaheim Police Deparment on or about April 1, 1976. c. Claim submitted by Farmers Insurance Group for Albertha Amos for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of a collision with a city-owned vehicle on or about February 25, 1977. 77-480 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. d. Claim submitted by Ronald T. Lynch for vehicle damages purportedly sustained as a result of an accident involving a city-owned vehicle on or about April 13, 1977. e. Claim submitted by Stephen Wayne Smith, a minor, for personal injuries and general damages purportedly sustained as a result of a fall into a depression at Gerda Park Site on or about January 22, 1977. f. Claim submitted by Francis J. Rollins for personal damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by Anaheim Police Officers on or about February 10, 1977. g. Claim submitted by Pacific Telephone for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of a transformer malfunction on Lincoln Avenue, east of State College Boulevard, on or about February 7, 1977. 118: APPLICATION TO PRESENT LATE CLAIMS: The following Applications to Present Late Claims were denied: a. Application to Present Late Claim submitted by Mark Allan Kojac for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of his wrongful arrest by the Anaheim Police Department on or about August 13, 1976. b. Application to Present Late Claim submitted by Roy Kojac for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of his wrongful arrest by the Anaheim Police Department on or about August 13, 1976. 2. 108: AMUSEMENT DEVICES AND PUBLIC DANCE PERMITS: The following permits were approved in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Amusement Devices Permit to allow two Juke boxes at the Marquis Cocktail Lounge, 1203 West Lincoln Avenue. (Donald L. Shafer, applicant) b. Public Dance Permit for dance to be held May 8, 1977, 3:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M., by Sociedad Progresista Mexicana, Logia No. 24, at the Carpenter's. HalI, 608 West Vermont Avenue. (Ruth C. Hernandez, applicant) 3. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. 109 and 175: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Notice of Filing Application for Rate Change, Application No. 57199 of Southern California Edison Company for authority to modify its Energy Cost Adjustment Clause to in- crease its Energy Cost Adjustment Billing Factor and to provide for quarterly revisions thereof. b. 140: Monthly report for March, 1977 - Library. c. 105: Public Utilities Board - Minutes of March 3 and 9, 1977. d. 105: Public Library Board - Minutes of March 21, 1977. e. 102: Orange County Vector Control District - Minutes of March 17, 1977. MOTION CARRIED. 77-481 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NOS. 77R-292 THROUGH 77R-301: Councilman Kott offered Resolution Nos. 77R-292 through 77R-301, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-292: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Sunset Builders; Ball Road 863, L.T.D.; J.K.G. Company; La Jolla Avenue Associates; Charles F. Quinette; Community Bank; Robert Hostetter, et ux.; Dart Industries, Inc.) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-293: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUC- TION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: SLURRY SEAL CONTRACT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 100-421-241-02; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUC- TION 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 May 19, 1977, 2:00 p.m.) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-294: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUC- TION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: WALNUT CANYON CHANNEL REPAIR, S/O SANTA ANA CANYON ROAD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 910; 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 May 26, 1977, 2:00 p.m.) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-295: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: MANZANITA PARK PLAY AREA PAVING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 794. (Sea Foamed Lightweight Concrete, Inc.) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-296: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: LA PALMA AVENUE STREET AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT, E/O FAIRMONT BOULEVARD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NOS. 794-B, 1268 AND A.H.F.P. NO. 658 - PHASE II. (Clark Contracting Corporation) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-297: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: LA JOLLA STORM DRAIN, CARBON CREEK CHANNEL TO 630' N/O LA JOLLA IN KRAEMER BOULEVARD, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 886. (Valverde Construction, Inc.) 77-482 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-298: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: HASKETT BRANCH LIBRARY REROOFING, 2650 WEST BROADWAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1053. (Polycap of California) 151: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-299: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WITH CANYON 'VILLAGE, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, RAYMOND G. SPEHAR, ESTELLA K. SPEHAR AND MARCIA ANN HALLIGAN. (76-12E) 151: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-300: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITYCLERK TO EXECUTE SAID ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WITH ROLAND E. AND ETHEL N. NESMITH. (76-14E) RESOLUTION NO. 77R-301: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN TWO ADJACENT PARCELS LOCATED E/S/O ANAHEIM HILLS ROAD, N/O NOHL RANCH ROAD PURSUANT TO LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT MARKED EXHIBIT "A" AND ATTACHED HERETO. (Santa Anita Development Corporation) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 77R-292 through 77R-301, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 142: ORDINANCE NO. 3688: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3688 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3688: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING TO TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4.29 A NEW SECTION 4.29.045 RELATING TO HEALTH SERVICES FEES FOR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS. (three times per year) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3688 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-302: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-302 for adoption, establishing a $65 health fee per calendar year for County services relative to Ordinance No. 3688. Refer to Resolution Book. 77-483 City Hall~ .Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-302: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING HEALTH SERVICES FEES TO BE PAID BY OWNERS OR OPERATORS OF PREMISES REQUIRED TO BE INSPECTED BY THE COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 4.29 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-302 duly passed and adopted. 149: ORDINANCE NO. 3689: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3689 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3689: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING SECTION 14.32.181 RE- LATING TO DISPLAY OF VEHICLES FOR SALE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3689 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3690: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3690 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3690: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(79), C-R) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3690 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3691: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3691 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3691: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE'RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-33, RS-5000, Tract No. 9313) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3691 duly passed and adopted. 77-484 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. ORDINANCE NOS. 3692 THROUGH 3694: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance Nos. 3692 through 3694, both inclusive, for first reading. 172: ORDINANCE NO. 3692: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.40, SECTION 14.40.060 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SPEED LIMITS, THIRTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR. (Canyon Rim Road between Serrano Avenue and Nohl Ranch Road and Serrano Avenue between Canyon Rim Road and Nohl Ranch Road) ORDINANCE NO. 3693: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-13, RM-4000) ORDINANCE NO. 3694: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 14.32.158 RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS. (Chestnut Place, no parking 12 midnight to 6:00 a.m.) 105: RECOGNITION BANQUETS CITY BOARDSp COMMISSIONS AND OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES: Public Information Officer Ken Clements presented an updated report dated April 25, 1977 on the forthcoming Recognition Banquets for the City's boards, commissions and other official bodies. Recommendations resulted from subsequent Council discussion were as follows: 1. Newly formed HACMAC and Youth Commission not to be included. 2. Change second banquet date from June 3 to June 1, 1977. 3. Include Mr. Martin Sklar and Dr. Joseph Butterworth (Park & Recreation Commission). 4. Delete Mr. Robert Dunham (Task Force). No further action was taken by the City Council. Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (2:40 P.M.) 105: RESIGNATION OF MANUAL P. MENDEZ FROM THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the resignation of Mr. Manuel P. Mendez from the Community Redevelopment Commission as outlined in his letter dated April 19, 1977, was accepted with regret. Councilwoman Kaywood temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: By general consent, the City Council recessed until public hearing time at 3:00 p.m. Councilwoman Kaywood was temporarily absent. (2:42 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (3:00 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-39: Application by Imperial Bank, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to CL on property located at 835 North Euclid Street. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-75, recommended that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and, further, recommended that Reclassification No. 76-77-39 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Euclid Street for tree planting purposes. 77-485 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 2. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works. 3. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of two dollars ($2.00) per front foot along Euclid Street for street lighting purposes. 5. That the proposed driveways shall be aligned with existing driveways on the east side of Euclid Street and trash storage areas shall be provided in conformance with approved plans on file in the Office of the Public Works Director, said trash storage areas to have adequate access for sanitation vehicles, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 6. That in the event the furniture store vacates the property, revised parking plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department indicating conformance with Code standards, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 7. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1 and 4, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 8. That Condition Nos. 3 and 5, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 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. City Attorney Hopkins confirmed for both Councilman Seymour and Councilwoman Kaywood that no conflict of interest was involved for either of them merely be- cause they had a banking relationship with Imperial Bank since they had no financial interest or stock in the bank. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and satisfied with the recommendations of the Planning Commission. No one was present. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment since the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for general commercial land use, and the Initial Study submitted by the applicant indicates no significant adverse environmental impact and is, there- fore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. 77-486 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-303 for adoption authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-303: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-39, CL) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-303 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-42: Application by Mini-Skools Ltd., for a change in zone from RS-7200 to RM-4000 on property located on the east side of Topanga Drive, south of Lincoln Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-76, recommended that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and, further, recommended that Reclassification No. 76-77-42 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Topanga Drive and the alley, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all drainage facilities or other appurtenant work, shall be complied with as re- quired by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifica- tions on file in the Office of the City Engineer; that street lighting facilities along Topanga Drive shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities and in accordance with standard specifications on file in the office of the Director of Public Utilities; and/or that a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim, shall be posted with the City to guarantee the installation of the above- mentioned requirements. 2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Topanga Drive for tree planting purposes. 3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works. 4. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of structural framing. 5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 6. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 77-487 C. it~ Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 7. In the event that subject property is to be divided for the purpose of gale, lease or financing, a parcel map, to record the approved division of subject property, shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 8. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 9. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of a building permit. 10. That a reciprocal easement agreement between the owner(s) of Lot Nos. 2 and 3, providing for access and circulation, shall be submitted to the City Attorney's Office for review and approval; then be filed and recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder at the time of parcel map recordation. 11. That the petitioner shall submit letters requesting the termination of Reclassification No. 59-60-105 and Conditional Use Permit No. 1518. 12. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 7 and ll, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 13. That Condition Nos. 3, 5 and 6, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 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 asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. Mr. Paul Minnick, 3400 Glen Holly Drive, Agent for the Applicant, stated that he was satisfied with the recommendations of the Planning Commission. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to be heard either in favor or in opposition; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment since the Anaheim General Plan designates the subject property for land uses commensurate with the proposal, and the Initial Study submitted by the petitioner indicated no significant adverse environmental impact and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-304 for adoption authorizing the prepar- ation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject to the con- ditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. 77-488 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-304: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-42, RM-4000) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-304 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 76-77-45: Application by Eastridge Estates II, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-HS-IO,O00 on property located on the north side of Canyon Rim Road and west of Serrano Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-86, reported that Environmental Impact Report No. 185 in conjunction with the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 9466 was certified by the City Council on September 21, 1976 and no further action on the environmental status was deemed necessary and, further, recommended that Reclassification No. 76-77-45 be approved subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 2. In the event that subject property is to be divided for the purpose of sale, lease or financing, a parcel map, to record the approved diVision of subject prop- erty, shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 4. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 5. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions'or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 6. That Condition No. 4, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 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 asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. No one was present. 77-489 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to be heard either in favor or in opposition; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-305 for adoption authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-305: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (76-77-45, RS-HS-iO,O00) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-305 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2915: Application by Henry I. and Betty Lou Eschell, to permit existing illegal signs on property located at 630 South Euclid Street with code waivers of: a) permitted signs b) maximum number of signs c) minimum distance between signs d) permitted sign location e) pkohibited roof sign illumination The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-65 reported that the Planning Director has determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 11, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file and EIR and, further, denied Variance No. 2915. The action of the Planning Commission was appealed by the applicant, 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 asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and desirous of being heard. Mr. Ray Nichols, Agent for the Applicant, 630 South Euclid, stated that the Income Tax Crew had operated in Lynwood for 27 years at one location and the reasons they were appealing the decision of the Planning Commission were three: (1) they had never been involved in this type of action and were at a loss as to how to present the problem to the Planning Commission; since there were other free-standing signs in the area and a variance was already granted on other property, they assumed it 77-490 City Hal!~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. was just a matter of submitting a petition and paying the fee; (2) Everytime hardship was mentioned, it was termed economical by the Planning Commission; a hardship could now be demonstrated both mental and physical; (3) They were advised by the Planning Commission that because of a Supreme Court decision, since January 1, 1977, variances could only be granted by elected officials. Mr. Nichols described the land uses in the area surrounding 630 South Euclid and emphasized the fact that because Euclid was such a heavily traveled business street, the subject property could not survive as a residence, and it had not previously survived as a CO entity because of the impossibility of traffic being able to see any wall signs. Mr. Nichols then presented photographs to the Council of adjacent and surrounding businesses showing many free-standing signs in CO and CL zones that were in place with and without variances. He compared the existing situation with the reasons for denial of the variance by the Planning Commission (findings 2 through 5 of PC77-65) and took issue with the fact that contrary to the contention of the Plan- ning Commision, property rights extended to other property owners in the same vicinity and zone were being denied to them. Their sign would not be precedent setting and, as well, all frontage on Euclid was adjacent to single-family residential land uses. He maintained that many of their neighbors expressed appreciation for their lighting the corner and he would be surprised if anyone voiced opposition. Their sign was built of the finest materials with safety as a first consideration. It was engineered to be lit without making a bright light; was located so it could not be seen in any part of the residential area either day or night; and was not offensive or immoral, but beautiful and conforming. He concluded by stating that 630 South Euclid, the lot, not the people, in order to survive on a business street without the same means available to other businesses in the area, notifying traffic of its business and location, would be a hardship and difficult to endure. He respectfully requested the Council to grant the petition for a free-standing sign in its present location. In answer to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Nichols stated that the roof-mounted signs were going to be taken down; that they never worked, he did not know who put them there; and although the lights had been installed, they were not hooked up. Mr. Nichols also explained for Councilman Seymour that he did not believe it was necessary to obtain a sign permit for the erection of the sign. He had many signs erected in the past and did not recall ever obtaining a permit and was not aware if the contractor had done so. In this particular case, they did their own contracting, and the sign was built and erected in six or seven different increments. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to be heard either in favor or in opposition; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. For clarification purposes, the Mayor pointed out that requested waivers b, c, and e, had been withdrawn by the petitioner, thus leaving only waiver a, permitted signs, and d, permitted sign location to be considered. 77-491 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Councilwoman Kaywood referred to a letter of opposition received from a Mr, and Mrs. Omer Berry, 631 Alvy Street, who lived directly across the alley from the petitioner, complaining of light intrusion into their house and bedrooms facing the alley from the free-standing sign as well as a light in the back shining on the parking lot which also shines into their bedroom. Mr. Nichols contended that the light to which they referred could in no way be the light from the free-standing sign but, in fact, a spot light on the back of the building. The free-standing sign could not shine over the top of the house occupied by the Income Tax Crew, as also confirmed by Councilman Seymour'upon personal inspection of the property. Discussion followed between Mr. Nichols and the Council wherein it was confirmed that the building signs would be removed; the only consideration being the free- standing sign. As stipulated by Mr. Nichols, the light in the rear of the build- ing illuminating the parking lot would be turned off or shielded as suggested by Councilman Seymour. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council ratified the determination of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 11, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environ- mental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-306 for adoption granting Variance No. 2915, approving one free-standing sign, subject to Interdepartmental recommen- dations and additional stipulation by the applicant regarding light in rear of building. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-306: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2915, IN PART. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-306 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1694: Application by Dunn Business Parks, to construct a 45-unit motel on ML zoned property located on the north side of La Palma Avenue, west of Woodland Drive. Review of Conditional Use Permit No. 1694 was requested by Mayor Thom on April 5, 1977 and public hearing scheduled this date. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-68 recommended that the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ- mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and, further, recommended that Conditional Use Permit No. 1694 be granted. 77-492 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Miss Santalahti commented that the item in question and of concern to the developer was Condition No. 3 of PC77-65 pertaining to participation in traffic signalization at Woodland Drive and La Palma Avenue. The Mayor asked if a representative of Dunn Properties was present and desirous of being heard. Councilman Kott left the Council Chamber. (3:35 P.M.) Mr. Ray Chermak, Dunn Properties, 28 Brookhollow Drive, Santa Aha, explained that they came to an agreement with the City Council at a previous meeting and established the responsibilities of both Dunn Properties as the developer and the City with re- gard to signalization of two intersections, La Palma at Woodland Drive and La Palma at Magnolia Street. The agreement, however, did not correspond with the recommenda- tions of the Planning Commission at a separate conditional use permit hearing and the purpose of the present public hearing was to have the conditions in both of the conditional use permits coincide. The Mayor and Councilman Seymour confirmed that the participation was one-half the cost of the signalization and asked staff for clarification as to how the condition should now read. Miss Santalahti stated since one-half the cost was stipulated previously, it would also be appropriate in this case. Mr. Chermak stated that three weeks prior, a surety bond was posted in the amount of $40,000 to cover the developer's 50 percent share of the signals. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to be heard either in favor or in opposition; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment as evidenced by prior environmental impact reports and related information previously considered by this body for the subject property and, additionally, the Initial Study of Environmental Impact sub- mitted by the applicant indicates no significant adverse environmental impacts and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Kott was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-307 for adoption granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1694, subject to recommendations of the Planning Commission, modifying Condition No. 3, changing the cost of traffic signalization participation to one-half the cost to be in conformance with previously stated policy. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-307: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1694. 77-493 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: TEMPORARILY ABSENT: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Roth and Thom None Kott None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-307 duly passed and adopted. 107: PUBLIC HEARING - RECONSIDERATION OF NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE~ 1975.EDITION: To reconsider adoption of the 1975 Edition of the National Electrical Code, with amendments thereto, to be known as the Anaheim Electrical Code, amending Title 15 by adding thereto new Sections 15.16.001 through 15.16.140. A letter from Butler Housing Corporation dated April 25, 1977 was received opposing any changes to the previously adopted Code. Mr. Ron Thompson, Planning Director, referred to his report dated April 19, 1977, outlining and discussing the amendments made and previously adopted by Ordinance No. 3661 on March 15, 1977 and continued to recommend the 1975 National Electrical Code with the same amendments based upon additional research and subsequent dis- cussions with members of the private and public sectors. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition. Mr. Bryan W. Vaughan, 166 East La Jolla Road, Placentia, briefed the Council on his extensive background for the past 15 years as a member of the National Builders and Electrical Associations which qualified him to speak on the matter. Mr. Vaughan also pointed out that he was a member of the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) for approximately 15 years. He explained that their biggest concern was for the homeowner and whether or not a real safety factor was incorporated in the amendments to the National Electrical Code as adopted by Anaheim. They contended that the amendments did not offer additional safety factors. He also presented a packet of material to each Council Member. The Mayor clarified that, in fact, Mr. Vaughan was taking umbrage to the amend- ments made by the City. Councilman Kott returned to the Council Chamber. (3:39 P.M.) For the record, Mr. Vaughan stated that the National Electrical Code sponsored by the National Fire Protection Association was a democratic document developed over- 50 years and the only single Code throughout the United States free from all State and Federal government participation. The main points of Mr. Vaughan's opposition to the adopted amendments were as follows: (1) The amendment would add anywhwere from $100 to $250 to the cost of a new house, depending on the size, and compounded over the life of the housewould be $1000 to $2000 creating an undue burden on homeowners with no additional benefit; (2) The amendments were restrictive; and (3) Among the expensive changes involved was the restriction excluding the use of aluminum wire, thus eliminating a viable option, and fostering the use of copper wire. 77-494 Ci.ty Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Vaughan then elaborated on the foregoing reasons specifically relative to the use Of aluminum versus copper and the technicalities involved in so doing. He emphasized that in the Judgment of rating officials throughout the country, alumi- num wiring was perfectly safe, performed well and was approved by Underwriters Laboratories. Otherwise, it would not be in the National Electrical Code. He also stated that at the January 27, 1977 meeting of ICBO in Fullerton, Anaheim's inspector voted against the prohibition of aluminum wiring, which vote was 4 for, not prohibiting the use of aluminum and 3 for prohibition. Councilman Roth pointed to the fact that a number of cities in Orange CoUnty had modified the Code eliminating the use of aluminum wiring and also questioned why Mr. Vaughan had placed "no" beside five cities listed in the Planning Depart- ment's report of April 17, 1977, which cities had adopted basically the same Code as Anaheim. First, Mr. Vaughan stated that the Code modification by those cities concerning aluminum wiring related back to the era of the "unknown" during the early 1970's when no one was aware of what termination failures were costing and due to the fact that the inspectors had been with their respective cities for many years and liked copper wiring. Where he marked "no", he explained the reason was that under State law when changes were made, resolutions had to be passed justifying those changes. The cities marked with "no" failed to make a finding and also failed to file with the State, thus the changes were null and void because they did not comply with State law. Mr. Vaughan then demonstrated the electrical wiring techniques of "back-stabbing" and "pig tailing" to the Council and also presented samples of various electrical receptacles for inspection. Mr. ~arley Hesse, Senior Electrical Inspector, first commented that underwriters do not approve, they only list and also, he had never heard the term "back-stabbing" in his many years of experience. He then stated that basically the same amendments he had submitted to the Council for approval through the Planning'Department had been adopted by the cities listed on page 8 of the April 17, 1977 report with the exception of Huntington Beach and Santa Ana. Both ICBO and NEC had representatives on the Code Committee at the time the document was drawn and they, in turn, went to their people and explained the amendments with the result that there were few ob- jections from the contractors themselves. At the meeting of July 27, 1976 in Fullerton, Mr. Hesse stated he picked out what ICBO had submitted and cross-sectioned it into the City's Code. Relative to the use of aluminum conductors, he explained that failures had occurred in the City and relayed an incident where one large indus- trial company, because of a number of problems, stripped out all aluminum wiring and replaced it with copper. Mr. Hesse also did not agree, as questioned by Councilman Roth, that the differential in cost between aluminum and copper in a new house would be approximately $200 because the amendments presently in the Code were basically already being performed in the field. Councilman Seymour contended that ICBO had credibility in their recommendations and since it was alleged that Mr. Hesse's recommendations were an overkill going beyond the ICBO version, he wanted to know why. Mr. Hesse explained that there were few additional amendments in the Code than the ICBO version with the exception of the requirement for a patio receptacle and also the technique of "pig tailing". 77-495 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Discussion followed between Councilman Seymour and Mr. Hesse~ the essence of which revolved around whether or not the City would be running a great risk of health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the community if the ordinance were amended to the ICBO standards and recommendations, instead of beyond that point as adopted by the Council. Mr. Hesse could not confirm that this would not be so. Councilman Seymour emphasized his primary concern was one of safety for the City and he would amend any ordinance if he considered it would endanger liveS of Anaheim's citizens. He had spoken with a number of developers in the building business, however, who claim the amendments would raise the basic cost of a new house $200 to $250. If that were correct, and if the City had gone beyond what a "credible" organization (ICBO) offered, it was time to take another look at the situation. Further discussion followed between Councilman Seymour and staff at the conclusion of which Mr. Thompson stated that although he had a great deal of respect for the building officials, most members of ICBO had an overview of construction and tended to be more generalistic, whereas the Planning Department relied heavily on Mr. Hesse as to what was best and safest in the City of Anaheim in the area of electrical ex- pertise. Councilman Seymour reiterated that he was in no way questioning the qualifications of Mr. Hesse and was aware of his long service and quality performance. Mr. Hesse then confirmed for Councilman Seymour that he did not, in fact, vote on any matters at the January 27, 1977 meeting in Fullerton, but was merely there as a guest and observer. He did not participate in the 4 to 3 vote not prohibiting the use of aluminum. Mr. Hesse pointed out that relative to Mr. Vaughan's reference to the National Code, in 1968 the southwestern section of IAI submitted 52 of 53 resolutions for incor- poration into the National Electrical Code and of that number, 26 were adopted. A number of amendments the City had adopted if retained would have an opportunity of being submitted and subsequently incorporated into the NEC. He also commented that very few inspectors sat on the Code-making body of NEC. Councilman Roth questioned Mr. Hesse relative to why he preferred copper over aluminum. Mr. Hesse explained it was from a standpoint of workmanship quality in that copper was easier to handle. Relative to the question posed to Mr. Hesse by Councilman Roth, Councilman Seymour referred to page 2, continuation of Item 3 of the April 3, 1977 report from the Planning Department wherein it was indicated that, in fact, ICBO approved the use of aluminum conductors but amended so that no aluminum conductors smaller than No. 8-AWG shall be used. Mr. Hesse confirmed that ICBO was listed in error as approving conductors no smaller than No. 8. Their version indicated no smaller than No. 14. 77-496 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. In concluding, Mr. Vaughan spoke to the following: Outside receptacles - they were never placed on the panel box. Aluminum wire - the aluminum ~ire never failed, just the terminations which was the reason for avoiding the binding screw; in many respects, aluminum wire was better. Aluminum wire could not be back-stabbed and was not allowed, back-stabbing could only be done with copper. Relative to limiting the use of No. 8 wire or smaller, at present, 90 percent of the wiring in houses was No. 8 or smaller. Relative to the 7 page document mentioned by Mr. Hesse, no building officials participated in the documentation or had anything to do with it. Electrical Inspectors had as good a representation on every Code Panel as anyone else. Of 20 panels, they had a representative on each one. Regarding safety, the Code was presently overloaded with safety and there was no minimum. Mr. Vaughan added that Orange County was boxed in with approval of the ICBO version by Los Angeles City and County, as well as Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego County. He contended the reason why 12 of the 26 cities in Orange County adopted the same Code as Anaheim was due for the most part to the convenience of having a packet placed in their hands. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to be heard. Mrs. Janice Hall, 545 Tumbleweed Road, President of Westridge Homeowners Association, stated that they had a tremendous amount of problems with aluminum wiring and had to have a whole tract reinspected as a result of those problems. She emphasized that no one in Westridge could be convinced that the Code was too strong and she personally would pay $200 anytime not to have her house burned down. One house had burned down and 11 others suffered electrical-related fires. Councilman Seymour posed several questions to Mr. Thompson wherein he (Thompson) stated that ICBO was a credible organization, but there were honest differences of opinion with them. He also stated that it was a matter of trying to do a profes- sional job for the citizens of Anaheim, offering the best possible Code. Amendments had to be submitted to the State by March 1, 1977, consequently, amendments were included that were deemed appropriate with the thought that they could always be amended or eliminated. Mr. Les King, Chief Building Inspector, in answer to Councilman Seymour, explained that ICBO was an organization of publicly appointed Building Officials of Orange County which had been in existence for approximately 20 years and one-third of the make-up were men who had been with the organization since its inception. Councilman Kott, directing his ~omments to Mr. Hesse, stated that from the testimony, he ascertained that aluminum was more difficult to handle correctly than copper and that it was possible to be more "sloppy" with copper and achieve good results,but the same was not true when working with aluminum. He also explained that his general philosophy was that mandatory requirements had a tendency to skyrocket prices and, for example, whether receptacles should be placed outdoors or not should be left up to the individual. He also disliked comparisons made with other cities as such an argument was no justification for doing the same thing in Anaheim. He reminded the Council that he had voted against the Code amendments the first time and would do so again. Mr. Hesse explained that nothing was ever put in the Code without thinking first of the taxpayers and customers of Anaheim; anything that was included was for the betterment of the community. 77-497 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public hearing. RESOLUTION: Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she had read through the Code completely and was concerned more with quality rather than quantity. If there were added safety factors which would eliminate any fires or problems for home- owners, she would like to see those continued. In the final analysis, it would be less costly than calling in an electrician. Her opinion was based on personal experience with faulty aluminum wiring that could have caused a fire in her home. She thereupon offered a resolution to approve the National Electrical Code, 1975 Edition, as previously approved and adopted with amendments, for the added safety involved and in the best interest of all the citizens and residents of Anaheim. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Seymour, speaking against the proposed resolu- tion, stated that the Code as previously adopted was an overkill and would do noth- ing more than go a step beyond that which was reasonable in the best interest, safety and welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. Having heard the extensive testimony on both sides, he was not convinced that the version of the Code as offered by ICBO was an unreasonable one. Even that version went beyond the National Electrical Code, but did not go as far as the ordinance the City previously adopted. A vote was taken on the foregoing resolution and failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Roth COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Kott and Thom Councilman Seymour thereupon moved to adopt the Code version as amended by the ICBO. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood questioned Councilman Kott's "No" vote since he previously commented on the statement made that it was possible to have a greater area of less skill and still be safe with copper wiring, yet a much greater risk was involved with aluminum. She considered this to be contradictory. Councilman Kott explained that it was not a contradiction but instead pointed out that due to the lack of quality workmanship or people interested in performing or super- vising to assure that quality was obtained, then every taxpayer, homeowner or buyer would have to pay more to be assured of a compensatory mechanism through which safety could be obtained. If there was a lack of integrity, then someone should be respon- sible, the builder or the City, to insure that whatever conductor was used was prop- erly wired. Mr. Thompson suggested that it would be more appropriate to adopt an ordinance that would delete the present amendments and Justifications down to the ICBO version since he did not want to Jeopardize all of the amendments, including ICBO's, relative to State requirements. A vote was taken on the foregoin~ motion amended to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amending the City's present Electrical Code to meet the ICBO recommenda- tions. Councilwoman Kaywood and Councilman Roth voted "No". MOTION CARRIED. 77-498 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 105: SUBMITTAL OF CITIZENS' CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE REPORTS: Councilwoman Kaywood presented letter dated April 25, 1977, from the Coalition of Anaheim Leaders (COAL) urging that the Council request all reports of the sub-committees of the 1976-77 Citizens' Capital Improvement Committee be completed and submitted by May 15, 1977 in order to have the reports considered by the Council before the annual Budget Hearings were completed. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, all reports of the 1976-77 Citizens' Capital Improvement Committee not yet received are to be sub- mitted to the Council by May 15, 1977. MOTION CARRIED. 120: REQUEST FOR NO SMOKING IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND SUPERMARKETS: Councilwoman Kaywood read a letter dated March 28, 1977 from Mrs. Dean Olsen requesting prohibi- tion of smoking in all public buildings and supermarkets. Thereupon Mayor Thom made an untoward remark relative to Mrs. Olsen's letter. 120: NO SMOKING ISSUE: Relative to the no smoking issue, Councilman Seymour stated that he personally opposed cigar smoking in the Council Chamber because of the resultant ill effects on another Council Member. Regarding the letter written by Mrs. Olsen and subsequent comment by the Mayor, he was concerned that the issue, having become the object of a great deal of pub- licity, was no justification for involving and degrading members of the public. He considered the comment to be unfair and unprofessional. 139: PUBLICATION OF FELONY SENTENCING RATE OF JUDGES: Referring to the procla- mation on Law Day and the LEAA funding issue acted upon earlier in the meeting, Councilman Kott contended that the real problem was contained in the fact that, in his opinion, Judges did not fully perform their duties. He referred to a bill pending in the State Legislature recommending that judges' decisions be made public and asked the City Attorney to clarify the matter. City Attorney Hopkins stated that he received a report indicating that such a bill was pending and, if passed, would make public the sentencing records of judges, and might be worthy of support. On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilman Seymour, support of the pend- ing bill making public the felony sentencing rate of judges so as to measure judicial performance, was approved. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: Councilman Kott moved to recess to 7:30 P.M. for a joint meeting with the- Hill and Canyon Municipal Advisory Committee. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:17 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Seymour. (7:30 P.M.) 77-499 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William T. Hopkins CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR - PLANNING: Phil Schwartze ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR - ZONING: Annika Santalahti ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Bill West ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Ron Smith 105: JOINT MEETING WITH THE HILL AND CANYON MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HACMAC): To discuss the scope and responsibilities of the newly formed committee. The Mayor first announced the names of the HACMAC members as follows: Ron Allen, Tom Beckett (absent), Lynn Buffington, Red Moltz, Mary Dinndorf, Hans Gowa, Janice Hall, John Lether, Bill Maxwell, Mary Ruth Pinson, "Hank" Rivera, Ronald Trunk (absent), Jerry Walsh, Mike Perry (entered Council Chamber at 8:15 p.m.), John Rau (entered Council Chamber at 8:10 p.m.). The Mayor then introduced members of the Planning Department staff. He also ex- plained that the meeting was for the purpose of discussing the goals, objectives and responsibilities of the newly-formed committee. Mr. Phil Schwartze, Assistant Planning Director - Planning, referred to memorandum dated April 6, 1977 from the Planning Department, approved by the Council, outlining the scope and responsibilities of HACMAC which he presented to each member. He ex- plained that the primary task of the Committee as outlined in Item 1 was to suggest priorities in Planning Area B. He then briefed the Committee on their additional responsibilities and pointed out that one of the purposes was to promote impr.oved communications between the City Council and the residents and property owners in Planning Area B. The Mayor then solicited general comments, questions or matter of concern relative to the documents or any other matter as it related to HACMAC. Mary Ruth Pinson explained that she had received a call in which concern was express- ed over the fact that developers would also be serving on HACMAC thus presenting the question of possible conflicts of interest on the part of some members of HACMAC. She suggested that perhaps each of the members should survey their own situation to ascertain if there was any reason why they could not serve without conflict. City Attorney Hopkins explained since the group was advisory to the Council and in general without financial interest, no problem was involved. However, it would be up to each individual to decide if they had some ethical type of conflict of interest wherein they might want to excuse themselves from considering or voting on specific cases. The Mayor confirmed there was a distinct difference between a legal financial conflict of interest and an ethical one. Since HACMAC would not be making binding decisions, it would not fall under the strictest sense of Proposition 9. 77-500 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. In answer to the Mayor as to whom on the Committee was involved in the develop- ment business, Ron Allen, Lynn Buffington and Hans Gowa all explained that they were in the real estate business; Mr. Allen was not involved in new home develop- ment and Mr. Gowa sold real estate outside of Anaheim. Although Mr. Buffington was a real estate developer actively engaged in developments in the Santa Ana Canyon, he stated he would be willing to abstain should any conflict arise. Relative to Mr. Buffington, Mary Dinndorf indicated that in his service on the Task Force, he did not display any bias and provided very valuable input. Janice Hall stated that there was a difference between the Task Force and HACMAC wherein their credibility might be questioned by homeowner groups they represented. The Mayor explained that since each Council Member appointed three people to the 15-member Committee, if a problem arose, the course of remedy would be to bring pressure to bear on the Council Member to remove and replace that member if he chose to do so. As requested by Mr. Allen, the Mayor explained the historical background leading to the institution of HACMAC. Councilman Seymour entered the Council Chamber. (7:55 P.M.) Discussion followed ~volving around inquiries from both Mr. Allen and Mr. Lether relative to whether HACMAC would be a vehicle causing more delays in the development process and the weight the Planning Commission and the Council would give to recom- mendations made by the Committee. It was concluded that since developers would know beforehand whether or not their project was a viable and acceptable plan before presenting it to the Planning Commission, it would expedite matters considerably. It was e~phasized, however, that HACMAC was not another level of bureaucracy or another Planning Commission. Regarding the weight or influence it would carry, it was agreed that, in fact, because of the broad based representation from different homeowner organizations in the Canyon on the Committee speaking in a united voice, that their recommendations would be given serious consideration. It would also be an informa- tional and communication device for the developer in an effort to clarify the "rules of the game" enabling him to make a decision at the outset as to whether or not to go forward on a project rather than further downstream after a substantial invest- ment had been made. The proportionate vote of the Committee would also be evalu- ated in the decision making process. However, in a close vote, for example, 8 to 7, the minority opinion also had to be considered, as well as opiniOns of all various homeowners' associations and citizens at large. Appointees should not make individual decisions but rather a decision based upon what the constituency at large desired. The Mayor also clarified for Mr. Lether that the Planning Commission was not man- dated to solicit input from HACMAC if a developer went straight to them with a change or a new proposal circumventing HACMAC. He commented, however, it might be imprudent for the developer to do so. Administrative procedures of the Committee were then discussed relative to a meeting place, various methods of communicating with the residents of the Canyon when soli- citing input or relaying meeting notices, funding and staff assistance. 77-501 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Regarding staff assistance, Assistant City Manaser William T. Hopkins stated the recommendation was that such assistance not be an ongoing, full,time administra- tive type of assistance. Once the Committee was established internally, staff in- put would consist of explaining particular development concepts as they came through providing an informational type approach, with occasional clerical assistance for their meetings as deemed necessary. Councilman Roth suggested that those members not involved in committees in the past should be made aware that City staff would be available for assistance and, as well, that individual members on their own could come and talk and work with staff people to obtain information they may need. Councilwoman Kaywood cautioned that considering the recent hiring freeze which lasted approximately 300 days, and since HACMAC was to be a very low-key, low-budget committee, if staff were to be assigned, then more hiring would be necessary and that was not the intent. If HACMAC felt they had access to staff at anytime, then this was an entirely different concept. Another matter was broached by Mr. Allen relative to stipulating whether members of the Committee were speaking on behalf of their associations or themselves. As Mrs. Hall pointed out, some members of the Committee had been nominated by their associations to serve on HACMAC. ' The Mayor noted that both situations have been covered many times by the person involved stating they were representing an association, whereas on other occasions they stated they were speaking on their own behalf. Councilman Seymour stated that one of the important issues that HACMAC should under- take st the earliest possible date was the matter of the Orange Unified School District's proposal of builders' fees (see Council Minutes April 19, 1977), a subject with which most members of HACMAC were familiar. Councilmen Roth and Kott were appointed as part of a special committee to investigate the matter in concert with the cities of Villa Park and Orange to gain an overview of the entire problem. They would look to HACMAC for input as to how Anaheim should approach the proposal offered by the District. There were many questions that the OUSD had not addressed. The City of Anaheim through Anaheim Hills and the Redevelopment Agency made a commit- ment to deliver schools to the population in relation to the approval of developments in the Canyon. Councilwoman Kaywood considered it appropriate to note that Anaheim Hills donated three school sites to the Orange Unified School District. One of the sites was donated to Anaheim for a park site but the City, in turn, donated it to the School District. Therefore, Anaheim Hills donated another park site to the City. Further, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency paid approximately one-half million dollars to the School District for construction of an elementary school. She stressed these points because she maintained that as a result Anaheim should not share equally, but be credited with a plus in discussing fees. 77-502 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. In answer to Hank Rivera, it was generally agreed that no alternates would serve on the Committee and as so stated in the April 6, 1977 memorandum from the Plan- ing Department, any member who missed three consecutive meetings would be considered to have resigned. Councilman Seymour also explained his concern relative to Council representation on HACMAC in an ex-officio capacity with no voting privileges. Since his previous recommendation regarding such representation failed to materialize, he wanted con- firmed that if, in fact, a Council Member wished to attend Committee meetings, they would be privileged to do so, and that such attendance would not be considered an intrusion. The Mayor stated that it was an ongoing policy that all Council Members were also ex-officio members of every board, commission or committee and could attend all such meetings. Mr. Allen noted that consultation with developers was to be done as a committee and not by individuals. He wanted to know if he were called by a developer if it would be permissible to discuss an~.opinion or if, in fact, the developer had to attend a meeting to do so. Councilwoman Kaywood advised that if a member was speaking in a HACMAC capacity, several members should be present and no member should discuss matters alone since such discussion would defeat the purpose of the Committee and could cause more trouble than help. Councilman Seymour expressed a dissenting point of view in that the people involved were intelligent enough not to be swayed one way or the other. Discussions were for informational gathering purposes; the more information gathered, the better. Before concluding, some additional administrative and procedural matters were clari- fied relative to liaison with the Planning Department, and a follow-up meeting of the Committee was set for Tuesday, May 3, 1977, 7:30 p.m., in the Management Control Center. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 8:55 P.M. LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK