Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1976/02/10
76-98 City }[all, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10, J076, 1:30 P.Y. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL M_EM~ERS: Kmywood, Pebley (left meeting at 2;50 P.M.), Sneegas and Thom ABSE'~IT; COUNCIL ~MBERS; Seymour PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY ~i~NACER: William O. Talley CITY ATTOP~NEY: Alan R. Watts DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts STADIUM-CONVENTION CEHTER-GOLF DIP~CTOR: T. F. Liegler PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton Piersall ZONING SUPERVISOR: Annika Santalahti CITY ENGINEER: James P. ~ddox (See Page No. 76-116for 7:30 P.M. roll call) Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. ITVOCATIOU: Captain Neal Hogan of the Salvation Army gave the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Calvin L. Pebley led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the FlaF. PROCLA>~.TION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unani- mously approved by the City Council: "Susan B. Anthony Day" - February 15, 1976. The proclamation was accepted by ~Chirley Modiano, Pat Kenworthy and P. ee Burnap on behalf of the League of ~,7omen Voters, Anaheim-Garden Crove Chapter. MI]IUTES: Minutes of the .%~aheim City Council Regular ~{eetings held December 23, 1975 and January 6, 1976 and Adjourned Regular }~eetings held January 15 and 21, 1~76, were approved, subject to typographical corrections and the following addition to Page No. 76-9 of the January 6, 1976 Minutes, on r~otion by Councilwoman llaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom: "Each Council l. ler,~er contributed $5.00 personally, thereby reimbursing Mr. Fried. Councilwoman ?.aywood stated that another solution to the problem must be found." Councilman Sneegas abstained. Councilman Seymour absent. MOTION CARRIZD. WAIVEP, OF PZADIi.~C - OPDI?LtUCES Al,ID RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Pebley moved to waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the waiver of read~ng is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Counc ilnan ~eymour absent. M~TION UHAMI'-~OU~LY CARRIED. REPORT - FIi~A'~CIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $3,447,773.30, in accordance with the 1975-76 BudFet, were approved. A2~AJ-tEI~.! STADIUI.~ CO~CESSIONAIRE CONTRACT: Mr. Talley submitted his report con- cerning negotiations conducted with the two concessionaires selected after hearing and evaluating~ proposals from the final five prospective concessionaires at the adjourned regular meeting held January 15, 1976. lle advised that meetings were conducted with Szabo Fo~ds, Inc., and Interstate United Volume Services and all aspects of the proposals were discussed, and any modifications these companies desired were included. As a result of these meetings, it has been determined that both financial offers are equivalent. He called attention to the pro forma financial statement prepared which illustrates the revenues which might be expected by the City in either situation. A term of five years ending on February 1, 1981 is suggested and a deposit amount of $250,000 would be required to assure that improvements are completed at an early date. Mr. Talley stated that one of the considerations used in reaching their recommendation that the contract award be made to Interstate United Volume Services, which was admittedly completely subjective, was whether or not one of these two firms would be more likely to generate a hi~her gross volume and Interstate United was selected because of their experience in all kinds of stadium operations. He also explained that it appears, if th~ ~ross sales volume were equal, that Szabo's financial proposal has a slight edge over Interstate United. 76-99 City Hall~ .Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February .10~.1076, ].:30 _F.t,~. In response to Councilman Sneegas, Mr. Talley explained the procedure through which the product cost was calculated, down from 28.6% originally sub- mitted by Interstate to 2A ~-" ..oz., as used in the pro forms financial .~tatement. ]!e advised that the 24.5? figure was corroborated by Canteen Corporation's actual statistics for the last year which showed 25%.. Both firms agreed on the use of this percentage and concurred that whichever firm %et the bid, if it were a. major company, they would be purchasing at t~e same pre. ce. lie assured Council ?~en~bers that the City would retain the ability to control the price structure with either firm and that both~companies appear to Ee able to exercise excellent loss controls. ' ' Council discussion indicated that because of the past nine years' .~lerience with .~zabo Foods at the Convention Center, a majority of the Council 'le~:~bers were i~clined to accept the offer of Szabo Foods, Inc., for~ the con- cession at the Ctadium. It was also note,'] that the Proximity of t!~ese two major operations would permJ, t that fir~, other economies in warehousini~, etc. Councilr.~an Pebley also voiced the opinion that from the analysis submitted, the Szabo financial proposal would be of greater benefit to the City. Prior to coming to any decision on the contract, Council }~emberm Thom and Sneegas both declared taat they had in the past conducted business transactions with Szabo Foods, Inc., through their own companies,' :(sale of furniture and restaurant equipment) and inquired whether this would constitute a conflict of interest which would preclude them from votinF on the matter. Mr. Watts stated that since these were transactions completed in the past, and the contract in question relates to future performance, in his opinion neither situation would constitute a conflict even indirectly. .',~.r. Red Patterson, representing the California Angels, indicated that they favor Interstate United Volume Services, Inc., of the two final prospective concessionaires mainly for the reason that they have vast experience 'in stadium and sports arena operations and particularly with major league baseball teams, which the Angels feel would be of benefit to both them and the stadium in :that the marketing and merchandising ability will'help improve attendance at the Angels games. He submitted the following letters which the Angels had received recommending Interstate United Volume Services: I) letter from Joseph R. Burke, Executive Vice President and General ':~anager, l.'.ansas City Royals Base- ball Club; 2) telegram from Jack. W. st'eadman, General !.?anager, Kansas City Chiefs Football Clu~, Inc.; 3) letter from William A. Cunningham, General Mana~.er, Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Complex; 4) letter from A1 LoCasale, Executive Assistant, Oakland Raiders; 5) letter from Dick Walsh, General Manager, Los Angeles Convention Center. Mayor Thom inquired whether Mr. Patterson would exercise a veto should the Council select Szabo FoodS, Inc., and .~*!r. Patterson responded that upon receipt of the City Council's final action in written form, after consul.tation with his organization, they would take the action they deem necessary, ~OTIO'.q: Councilman Pebley moved that the City Attorney be directed to prepare a contract for the concession at the Anaheim Stadium with Szabo Foods, INC., because of their excellent past performance for the City at the Convention Center and because they are the highest bidder. Councilman Tho~, seconded the motion. Before calling for a vote on the fOreRoing motion, Mr. 'Patterson and ~r. Vincent Pantuso of Interstate United VoluTM Services, were each afforded an opportunity to address the Council. ?!r. Patterson reiterated .and emphasized that Interstate United, because of their experience and tremendously aggressive merchandising and service policies, would actually assist the ;nFets in increasing attendance at the games. He noted that there ~s a difference of only 910,000 return to the City between the two firms. ~-~r. Vincent Pantuso emphasized his firm's proven experience in stadium and sports arenas throughout the Country as compared to 'the fact that Szabo Foods has no other stadium clien~ and only one convention center:client. Re stated that tt~eiz experience and success in this field will enable then~, to do a better job at Anaheim Stadiu~ and he urged Council to reconsider and award the con- tract to Interstate United Volume eoervic~s. I 76-100 City Ilall, Anaheim, Calif.ornia .- COUNCI~' }iI~]qTEC.- .Feb.~u~.ry 10~ 1976~ 1:3~ P.~. >Ir. Patterson inquired whether or not an ~rticl~ would be included in the concessionaire's contract which would provide that in the event that there are complaints about food services or it is deemed unsatisfactory, the contract might be terminated by mutual agreement between the City and the client, Mr. Watts advised this would fall under the provisions normally included for breach of contract. This contract will be different from the previous con- cessionaire's contract insofar as it will be more in the form of an employment contract to hire a concessionaire at the Stadium, rather than simply a grant of concession operation, and consequently should provide the City with more control over operational procedures at the Stadium. Mr. Patterson pointed out that both of these potential concessionaires agreed to that clause which was originally proposed by the Angels because of their past experience. He thereupon advised that the Angels would go along enthusiastically with either of the firms chosen by the City Council. Councilwoman Kaywood commented that both firms are close in qualifica- tions; that although Szabo had not had previous experience in a convention center when given the Anaheim contract, they have done an outstanding job. She was further of the opinion that having both Stadium and Convention Center food service from one firm would provide efficiencies and economies. Mayor Thom called for a vote on the foregoing motion. Councilman Seymour absent. ~TION CARRIED. ALTEPC~ATIVE FINANCING PROPOSAL - .ANAIIEIM CITY NEI4SLETTER: Proposal for alter- native financing of the City Newsletter was presented by the Assistant City ,~ianager, indicating that the City might save all or a substantial portion of the $8,700 currently budgeted annually for mechancial production of the City Mewsletter by permitting Specialty Publications to absorb the costs of typesetting, photo engraving and layout, and these expenses offset through the sale of advertising (a sample copy of a newspaper produced in this manner was also submitted). During discussion of the proposal, although ~r. Talley stated that he was advised the City would have some discretion as to the type of advertisements to be included in the newsletter, it was indicated by the City Attorney that according to decisions in analogous circumstances, it might be difficult for the City to restrict certain types of advertising considered undesirable with this arrangement. ?~iayor Tl~om stated that although he appreciated the effort and emphasis on economy evident in the proposal, he felt the Council has only two options, either to continue with the newsletter as it is currently produced or to dis- continue it altogether due to the problem a government entity would have in attempting to restrict its advertising sales, as well as due to the fact that he did not think the City should be competing with other newspapers. At the conclusion of discussion, it was the consensus of Council opinion · that they did not wish to proceed with alternative financing through subsidization of the paper with advertising, and Mr. Talley respectfully with- drew the recommendation. PUBLIC }{EARING - Ai~iE)~DM£NT TO TITLE 18 - ZONING: To consider an amendn~ent to Title lg of the Anaheim ,'~{unicipal Code, Zoning, relating to home occupations - conditions and limitations. The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held January 10, 1976, by motion recommended that Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.01.090 ("I~" words, terms and phrases) and Sections 18.02.052.0~,0 through 18.02.052.047 (home occupations) be repealed, and that new Sections 18.01.090 and 18.02.052.040 through 18.92.052.049 be added, pursuant to recommendations contained in the Planning staff report. T]~e staff report to the Planning Commission was also submitted for Council review prior to the public hearing. ~'.{r. Watts advised that the changes proposed would basically amend the Code to provide that a violation of any one of the various elements contained in a home occupation permit is a violation of the permit itself, whereas previously 76-101 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California.- COUNCIL MINUTES - Febru%ry 10; 1976; 1;30 P.M. all elements had to be in violation for the home occupation permit to be revoked. Council discussion ensued regarding the definition used in this section of the Code for a commercial vehicle, several Council Members thinking that the Vehicle Code definition as used in the ordinance might be too broad and cause difficulties for those individuals who chose to use pickup trucks, large vans and station wagons for personal transportation. However Wt. Watts advised that the definition of a commercial vehicle is not proposed as one of the chan~es under consideration and, to date, the existing definition has not created significant problems. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to addresm the Council either in favor or in opposition to the proposed amendments to Title 18. Mr. Joe %~ite, 809 West Broadway, Anaheim, advised of a home occupation situation which currently takes m~ssive United Parcel deliveries daily, blocks neighboring sidewalks and driveways, and has the entire garage converted to shelves and work benches. He inquired whether the proposed amendments would be sufficient to rectify this situation and was advised that charges had been brought against this particular operator, and if the proposed amendments to the existing ordinance had been enforced, the operator would probably not have received the Court's finding that he was not guilty. Mr. George Vandermogle, Oakcrest Place, Anaheim, stated that he believed the Anaheim Municipal Code is well written as far as the definition of a commercial vehicle is concerned. He further hoped that the proposed ordinance would be sufficiently enforceable so as to stop people from abusing the horns occupation section of the Code. There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Thom closed the public hearing. ~RDINJC~CE ~O. 3507: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance ?:o. 3507 for first reading. A?~ ORDinANCE OF THE CITY OF ANA}LEIM REPEALI}~G SECTIONS 18.01o090 ~MD 18.02.052.040 OF THE A~AHEIM ?0NICIPAL CODE ;ND ADDI~.IG VFJ~,~ SECTIO?]S 18.91.090 AND 1,~.02.052.040 IIi Tiil]IR PLACE. (Home Occupations - Conditions and Limit at ions ) Councilman Pebley left the Council Chamber. (2:50 P.l~.) FINA..L..MAPS,T .¥CI' NOS.......841B. At,~D q6fi7 - FLOO.R.PL3~.S, ELEVATIONS A/~D %TALL PLA}~S: Developer, Lusk Corporation; tract located on the north side of ilohl ~anch ;load, east of Villa Real Drive; Tract No. ~418 containing 79 proposed RS-HS-IO,O00 zoned lots and Tract No. 8647 containing 1Ol propose.d RS-1tS-lO,O00 zoned lots. The City Planning Commission approved the plans for a six-foot high decorative, openwork wall to be constructed along Nohl P. anch Road in conjunc- tion with Tract Nos. 8418 and 8647. The Planning Department recommends approval, of the final floor plans and elevations. The City Engineer recommended approval and reported that both final ~,aps conform substantially with the tentative maps previously approwed, that bonds have been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval and required fees paid. In response t.o Councilwoman Kaywood, ?;~r. ~;Tilliam D. LuSk advised that the roofing materials to be used for these tracts will be shake shingle or mission tile and are not of fire retardant materials., tle indicated that he x~,ould participate in the final discussions regarding fire retardant roofing ,materials at the Canyon General Planning Task Force. On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council approved the floor plans, elevations and wall plans submizted for Tract ~.~os. 34}8 and 8647; found that the proposed subdivisions, together with their design and improvements are consistent with the City's C~neral Plan; and approved Final Maps, Tract Nos. 8418 and ,q6Z:7 as recommended by the City Engineer. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. ~OTION CARRIED.. 76-102 C~ity tie!l..! Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10! 1976~ 1;30 P.M. F~NAL MAPI TRACT NO. 5793; Developer, Matreyek 1-lomes; tract located north of La Palma Avenue, west of Euclid Street; containing 65 proposed RM-2400 zoned lo~s. The City Engineer reported that said final map conforms substantially with the tentative map previously approved, and recommended approval subject to the completion of the followinE conditions prior to the City Clerk's certification of the map: 1. Approval of the public street, storm drain and lake improvement plans and the grading plans for the Anaheim Shores project. 2. Approval o{ the CC&Rts and the synopsis of the operating corporation for Tract ~o. 8793 by the City Attorney. 3. Posting of the bonds and fees for Tract Mo. 8793. 4. Posting of the bonds or other means of security acceptable to the City Attorney to insure the public street, storm drain, lake and grading improve- ments within the Anaheim Shores project are completed. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the proposed subdivision, together with its design and improvement was found to be con- sistent with the City's General Plan; and the City Council approved Final Map, Tract No. 8793, subject to the four conditions recommended by the City Engineer. Council }{embers Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. T~2-IPORARY MOBILE OFFICE TRAILER: P. equest of ~{r. G. Steve !!ammatt, ~{ammatt & Sons, for permission .to use a mobile trailer as temporary office facilities at 1548 West Orangewood Avenue was submitted together with report and recom- mendation from the Planning Department. It was noted that the mobile trailer is required due to the widening project on Orang~ood Avenue and that the use would be temporary until this project has been accomplished and structures relocated. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council granted permission for use of a mobile trailer for office purposes for a period of one year, expiring February 10, 1977, with review at the expiration date for possible extension, upon written request by the applicant. Council }~fembers Seymour and Peb ley absent. MOTION CARRIED. TEbIPORARY TE_~T PER',IIT: Request submitted by Donald !J. Cooke, General Manager, Howard Johnson's:lotor Lodge, to erect a temporary tent from February 12, to February 23, 1976, at 1380 South }{arbor Boulevard, (Mr. Tilly's Restaurant) was submitted and approved on motion by Councilman T~om, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, subject to the City Attorney's approval of a certificate of public liability and property damage insurance, as reco~mnded by the Planning Depart- ment. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 76R-49 - EMPLOYEE HOUSING ACT - LABOR CAMPS: On report and recom- mendation' of'"the City Att'orney'~' advisi~'g that the previous resolution and ordinance relating to "farm labor camps" should be amended to reflect the change in the State law, more particularly to delete the word "farm" from same, Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 76R-49 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM P. ESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 74R-476 A~D ASSUMING ~{E RESPONSIBILITY FOR ENFORCEmeNT OF THE F~.fPLOYEE tiOUSING ACT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO LABOR CAMPS, AND DESIGNATING TIlE BUILDI~G DIVISION AND THE COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AS THE ENFORCE}DZNT AGENCY FOR 1%}E CITY PURSUANT TO SECTION 2640 OF THE LABOR CODE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL }~MBERS; Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL ~},(EMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL M~MBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-49 duly passed and adopted. 76-103 City llall~ AnaheimI Califq.rnia....- COUNCIL MINUTES - Fcbr.ua~r7 1.0;_ 19.76~._T_!?.30.~.p,..,~.' ORDINP~NCE NO. 3506 - EMPLOYEE HOUSING ACT - LABOR CAMPS; Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3506 for first reading. A/~ OPd)INA/qCE OF THE CITY OF ANAIIEIM R/IPEALING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 6.95 ~F THE A~NAIIEIM ~,.cO'NICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC i{E;/,/q! A/ID SAFETY AND ~DDING CHAPTER 6.95 IN ITS PLACE. (To delete the word "farm") RESOLUTION NO. 76R-50 - PREVAILING RATE OF WACES: Councilman SneeFas offered Resolution No. 76R-50 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A ?~ESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AJ'~AHEI?I AMEUDING RESOLUTION 75R-674 BY ADDING %~tE~ETO PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 6, PERTAININC T~ Tt~.E PREVAILINg, POkTE OF WAGES TO BE PAID FOR EACH CRAFT, OR TYPE OF WOR}~,~3C,], ~R i'~CI!ANIC NEEDED PUBLIC UOPJ%S ContRACTS, Ii~ THE CITY OF ANAiiEIM. Roll Call Vote; AYES; COUNCIL ..~]~ ....... l[aywood~ Sneegas and Thom NOES: C~UNCIL }~.~EP~: Uone ABSE~T '. COI~CIL '~'~ '~ ~_.~,.~-...o, Seymour and Pcb ley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-50 duly passed and adopted, AGP, EEME~,, CITY OF PLACENTIA TP~.FFIC 9I .,~,AL: (Crowther and Kraemer Boulevard) l.{r. ~,Tatts reported on a propose(' agree~,ent with the City of "].acentia for maintenance of a traffic signal located at the intersection of Crowther Avenue and !Iraemer Boulevard and for reimbursement by Placentia to the City of Anaheim for 25% of the ~aintenance cost. ?~SOLUTIO.:N NO. 76R-51: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution ::o. 76R-51 for adoptiop. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTIOW OF %~tE CITY CD~ICIL OF TIIE CITY OF A.'.?AIIEIM ;PI'ROVING A ?.%*TUAL AG~..E_~.~T WITH TItE CITY OF FLACK~TIA FOR THE ~' '~- ~ ''~ TP~FFIC SI~,~Lo ~T C7,O?~ilEK AVENUE A~D ..... OULEVAO~. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL FB!~tBE?~S: ]iaywood~ Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL ~.~>[~ERS: i~one ~.BSi]ITT: COUNCIL ,~>L~ERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-51 duly passed and adopted, LICenSE AGREE!'~E~TT - GARDE]~ING PROJECT~ ;2qAHEIM ELE:-%ENTARY SCHOOL DISTR!,C.T~ Mr. Watts reported on the request received from the Anaheim Elementary School District for use of City-owned property located at the southwest corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street, commonly known as the Old Sod Farm, in conjunction with a school gardening project. ~!e recommended that su=h use be granted the School District with basic provisions that the School District hold the City harmless and make reimbursement to the City for the cost of water used in the program. On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council authorized the Mayor to execute · letter agreement, granting the Anaheim Elementary School Pistric: a license ~o use the Old Sod Farm ,property for gardening purposes as outlined. Council ~,embers' Seymour and Pebley absent. ',lOTION CARRIED. STATUS .,REPORT - SOL~qD ATTEN. UATION ~fEASURES.;' ROUTE 5.7 FRE~JAY: The City Attorney submitted a status report on the sound attenuati-on prOblem'adjacent to the Route 57 Freeway. The report describes recent State and Federal legislation pertaining to this problem (Noise Control Act of 1972 which is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency and the State Noise Control Act established pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 46040).. The status report further submits recommendation that the City pursue a solution via these approaches 76-104 City..Hall~ Anaheim~ Calif.q. rnia- COUNCIL MINUTES -Febru.ary 10~ 1976~ I:30_..P..M. first inasmuch as this may be less time consuming and costly and may be more productive. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council authorized the City Attorney and City staff to pursue a solution to the noise pollution problem adjacent to the Route 57 Freeway with the appropriate State and Federal agencies, and if unsuccessful, to file litigation as appropriate. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman llaywood read the letter she received from the California Itighway Commission thanking her for attending their January 23, 1976 meeting and advising that the sound barriers currently carry a low priority compared to other public safety programs. She further reported that she had received a copy of legislation introduced by Assemblymen Britts and Nestande on February 2, 1976 (Assembly Bill 2959) asking that the ilighway Commission allocate funds for development of appropriate noise barriers. EXTZ!?SIO'~] OF SOLICITATION PEP2fIT - CYSTIC FIBROSIS FO~.:DATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the solicitation permit previously approved for the Cystic Fibrosis Foun,.~ation, 5205 Agnes Avenue, i,~orth ]Iollywood, California, 91607, was extended to February 15, 1976 to cover the rescheduled date of the bike-a-thou. Council }~embers Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTIO',-~ CARRIED. PUBLIC D_~g;CE PEF~iIT: On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Thom, a permit :to conduct a public dance at the ?~artin Recreation Center on February 15, 1976 from 8:00 p.m. to midnight, submitted by .Club M.E.C.H.A. and Club Latino of Anaheim Iligh School, was granted subject to approval by the Chief of Police. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEM.~.~T - AT & SF (TP~ACT NO. 7666): Mr. Maddox reported that this agreement is in connection with Tract I~o.~ 7666, and would permit the developer to construct a storm drain under the tracks adjacent to Esperanza Road, near Fairmont Boulevard. The agreement provides for a payment of $150 which will be charged to the developer in accordance with City Policy. RESOLUTION NO. 76R-52: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 76R-52 for adopt ion. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF A~At!EIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A PIPELINE LICENSE AGREEMENT ~.rII"d ~HE ATCHISON, TOPEKA ;~ND SA~rA FE RAILWAY COMPANY. (84-inch s:orm drain near Esperanza) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COb~CIL }~MBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ~one ABSEi'~T: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-52 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 76R-53 - MUTUAL TERMINATION AGREEMENT - DOUGLASS STREET UNDERPASS: (Atchison, Topeka and santa Fe Railway Company) Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 76R-53 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF'TtIE CITY coUNcIL OF ~IE CITY OF AN~tEIM ACCEPTING A }'~TUAL TERMINATION AGREEMENT OF A TEMPORARY PRIVATE CROSSING EASEMENT WIll ~IE ATCtlISON, TOPEKA ~{D S~NTA FE RAILWAY COMP~.~ kMD AUTtlORIZING ~tE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAME. (Douglass Road Underpass) Roll Call Vote: 76-105 Cit.~ Hal!, A.nm~ei.~, Cal~f.ornia - ,COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10, 1976, 1:30 p..M. AYES: COIR,~CIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES; COUNCIL ~.~}IBERS; ?lone ABSENT: COUNCIL ~MBERS: Seymour and Pebley The ~ayor declared Resolution No. 76R-53 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 76R-54 - LICENSE ACREE~NT - ACCESS ROAD: (Atchison, Topeka and ' ' L I II I I I -, , 1,11 I ± J I I .... 'Santa Fe Railway Company) coun'ciiwoman ]~ayWood offered ~esolut~on No. 76~-54 for adoption~ authorizing the execution of a license agreement for construction of an access road east of the Santa Fe right-of-way from ~alsam Street, 635 feet northerly~ for the purpose of sewer maintenance. 2efer to Eesolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF I~,{E CITY CO~CIL OF TIlE CITY OF ANAtlEt,~'~ AUTIIOP, IZING TIlE .~':D CITY CLERI( TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AND AU~IORIZING PAY~"Ci,,'T THEPJ~FOR. (Consgrucgion of an access road east of Sanga Fe's right-of-way from t~alsam Street, 635 feet northerly, for the purpose of sewer maintenance.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL ~MBERS: Kaywood, Eneegas and Thom NOES; COL~CIL .%~,BERS; None ABg~.:T: COUNCIL ~4BERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-54 duly passed and adopted. REPORT ~%~D AGREI~2~ENT - ENGINEERINC ~r,~D GPADING ,COSTS~ LIBP~RY' ,S!T~,: (Imperial ....... i ii ii _ il iii iiiiilll i ~1 I1 ii il i1 . approval of an agreement with the Orange Unified School District regarding the City's share of the cost for topographical survey and grading plan pertaining to the library portion of the Joint school and library site, was submitted indicating the City's share of the cost to be $7,980 and in addition 3,~.6% of the $8,395.98 charged for engineering and topographical surveys. RESOL, UTIO'N NO. 76R-55: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 76R-55 for adoption, authorizing the agreement with the Orange Unified School District, Refer to Resolution Book. A P~SOLUTION OF THE CITY CO~CIL OF TIlE CITY OF ;uX;AEEIM APPROVING I~IE TEP~IS CONDITIONS OF Al: AGPJ~EMENT WITII THE ORANGE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. (Library Site) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUi,~CIL .XiEMBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-55 duly passed and adopted. Olta/~GE COUNTY SOLID NASTE ~AGEMENT PLAN: Mr. Piersall submitted the Orange "c~dn~y Solid 'waste }tana~ement Plan and recmm~end,ed approval of same by the City Council with the following two item transmitted for possible revision When the plan is updated. (Said document on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 1. That the weight for individual containers be upgraded from 50 pounds to 65 pounds. 2. That the City of Anaheim disagrees that trash areas shall have locked gat es. P. ESOLUTION NO. 76R-56: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 76F.-56 for adopt ion. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF %]tE CITY OF ANAttEIM APPROVING ~ND CON- CURRING IN TIlE CObq~TY OF ORANGE SOLID WASTE MANAGE}~NT PLAN. 76-106 City ttall~ An~lelmt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February lO, 1976~ 1:30 ¥.7!. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom NOES: C~UNCIL ME~.{BERS: ,~Ione ABSE~'IT: COUNCIL I~EMBEES: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-56 duly passed and adopted. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Maywood, the C~ty Council approved the transmittal of tile recommendations for possible revision to the Orange County golid ~.~aste Management Plan as outlined by the Public Works Director. Council ~embers Seymour and Febley absent, :~OTION CARRIED. GOLF COURSE COMPLIb~NTARY PLAY FOLICY: (Continuedfrom the meeting of February 3, 1976) Report £rom the City Attorney, including a proposed complimentary play policy, prepared in response to the recommendations submitted by the Golf Course Advisory Commission was submitted for Council con- sideration. Mr. Watts advised that there is a provision in the City's agreement with the Grant Company of California wherein when the Anaheim Hills property was acquired, that the City would establish rates and charges which are customary at other Southern California municipal golf courses. This proposed policy has been reviewed and determined to be consistent with customary practices at other Southern California golf courses. Mr.'Liegler advised that this policy would be incorporated into the over- all policy manual being formulated by the Golf Course Advisory Commission. lie' stated that he is in agreement with the terminology proposed by Mr. Watts for. the policy and advised that the recipients of complimentary play would be known to the Golf Course Director and Assistant City Manager and that adequate con- trol would be provided. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the following complimentary play policy was approved: "It is the policy of the Stadium-Convention Center-Golf Course Director that the President and Tournament Chairman of the Men's and Women's Association and the Club Champion at each of the City Golf Courses be permitted to play four (4) rounds per month without payment of, green fees. Such play is non-transferable and shall be per- mitted during their terms of off~ce and shall be limited to one (1) round per week. It is expected that the individuals holding the positions listed above will perform such services as may be requested by the Director for the purposes of increasing revenues and utilization of the Golf Courses or advising the Director concerning maintenance or operation of the courses. The Director may in his discretion, consistent with the purposes stated above, permit others such play. This policy is consistent with the obligation of the City as set forth in Sections X (M1.) and (M2.) and (I~) of that certain agreement between the C~ty of Anaheim and Robert H. Grant Company, dated February 29, 1972." Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent, MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council tfember and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: .!- CLAIMS AGAINST .THE CITY: 'The following claims were denied and referred to the insurance carrier: a. Claim submitted by Horace White for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions of Anaheim Police Department, on or about November 8, 1975. b. Claim submitted by Larry R. and Jo Betty Hart and Bryan, ~all~y, Tanya, and George Hart for personal injuries and wrongful death purported as a result of condition of Gilbert Street and crosswalk, on or about ~ovember ]0, 1975. c. Claim submitted by Thomas Torres for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions of City trucks, on or about November 24, 1975. 76-107 A~.aheim. California - COU,XlCTL t.!I?~UTE~ - Fohruar~ t0., 107~, 1:30 t'.:-~. d. Claim submitted by Trella D. £uckman for injuries purportedly sus- tained as a result of fall at Convention Center, on or about December 28, 1975. e. Claim submitted by Stephen P. ~X~elton, fnr ~!ama~.es purportedly sus- tained as a result of conditions of a portion of "~h] "~anch Road, on or about January 16, 1976. f. Claim submitted by William A. Toplikar for .~.ama~es purportedly sus- tained as a result of street repair on Knott Avenue, on or about January 20, 1976. 2. PUBLIC DANCE PEP3~IT: The following permit was ?ranted, subject to the · . ,i ~ recon~aendations of the Chief of Police: a. Public Dance ?ermit for dance to be conducted February 14, ]97~ at St. Doniface Church Hall, 525 Uest Lincoln Avenue, From 9:00 p.m. to 1:O0 a.m. by the Irish Games Committee (Betty Jabbour, Applicant). 3. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and ftled ~ a. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company - ~otice of filin~ amended application for increases for intrastate telephone rates. b. LAFCO - Minutes - January 14, 1976. c. Canyon Area General Planning Task Force - ~'.!inutes - January 20, 1976, d. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - January 14, 197&, eo PAC (Alpha) - ~Jinutes - January 13, 1076. f. Financial and operating reports for the month of Dece. mF, er 1975 for the Water Division. g. Intergovernmental Coordinating Council Resolution Service. Council ~,'~embers Seymour and Pebley absent· o~OTION CARRIED RESOLUTIO~i NOS. 76R-57 AND 76R-58: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 76R-57 and 76R-58 for a~opti°n "{n accordance with the reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council ,~ember and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 76R-57 - DEEDS OF EASE~fENT: A RESOLUTIO~J DF T!tE CITY COI~ICIL OF T~{E CITy' oF ANAItEIM '~CCEI~I'iNG CERtAiN' 'DEEDs AND ~RDERING THEIR PECORDATIO?]. (City of Fullerton; Nartha K. Schumacher; Valbour E. Rennet, Trustee; Lynn E. Thomsen, et al.; Alfred Warkentin, et ux.; Robert I{. Ualker, et ux.; Patrt. cia Joy Jones) RESOLUTION NO. 76R-58 - 1976-77 ~ED ABATE~XENT CONTRACT: A RES~LUTIOt: OF THE CiTY COUI,:CiL "OF TltE cITy oF ~hEIM DECLARI~,~C 'THE ~CESSITY PURSUANT TO GOVE~N- }~NT CODE SECTION 39576·5 TO CONTACT FOR ~IE CUTTING AHD REMOVAL OF ALL GRO%~H ~l) I~EDS, ~D R~1OVAL OF P. UBBISH, ~I~SE ~ND DIRT UPON A~ PARCEL OR PARCELS OF ~AL PROPERTY OR A~ PUBLIC STREETS ~THI~ THE CITY OF A~AHEI~, CALLI"~G FOR BIDS ~iEP. EON, ;lqD AUTHORIZINg ~RLICATION OF 37mTICE THEP~FOR, ACCOUNT ~O. 322-297. (1976-1977) (Bids to be opened,~ ?~arch 4, ~976, p.~.) ~oll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL b~MBERS: i%aywood, Enee?as and Thom .;O~.o. COU~'~CIL ~gZMBEP. S; ~one ABSZI;T: CO~CIL ~ERS: Sey~ur and Pebley The Hayor declared Resolution ,'los. 76R-57 and 76R-5C, duly passed and adopted. CITY ]L~i,II,,C CO,~,!ISSION ITP~S: Actions taken by the ~ity Plannin? Commission at their meet~n~ h~l'd Januar'y 19, 1976 pertaining to the followinF applications were submitted for City Council information and consideration: On motion by Councilwoman Ka)~ood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the CJ_ty Council authorized the actions pertainin~ to the following environmental impact 76-108 City llall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10, lq761 1:30 P.M. requirements as 'recommended by the City Planning Commission and took no further action on the following applications; (Item Nos. 1 through 6) 1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PdZPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS: The Planning Director has determined that the proposed activities in the following listed zoning applications fall~ within the definition of ~Section 3.01, Class 1 of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environmental impact report and are, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an environmental impact report: Variance No. 2772 Conditional Use Permit No. 1596 2. VARIANCE NO. 2772: Submitted by Vincent C. Grant to permit an unlawfully established apartment addition on RS-7200 zoned property located at 1635 East Romneya Drive, with Code waiver of; a. Permitted uses. The City-Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-16, denied said variance. (Councilwoman Kaywood called attention to an error in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC76-16 and requested this be corrected nunc pro tunc.) 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MO. 1596: ~ubmitted by Comet, Inc., to permit automotive transmission repairs on ML zoned property located at 837 East Orangethorpe Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-15, granted said conditional use permit, subject to conditions. 4. PARCEL SPLIT AT 121.~ 131 AND 141 CERRO VISTA UAY: Request for negative declaration status from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report submitted by Ports, Bruckner Corporation in conjunction with plans to split a parcel into three one-acre lots. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the subject project be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report pursuant ~o the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. 5. RA2©N PERALTA ADOBE HISTORICAL SITE: Submitted by C. R. Nelson, Assistant Director, Environmental ~nagement Agency, County of Orange, for determination of compliance with the City of Anaheim General Plan. Property is located south of the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Fairmont Boulevard. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution ~io. PC76-17, deter- mined that the project is in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan. 6. L~iEVIEW AVENUE EXTEI.ISION: Recommendation submitted by the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force that the Lakeview Extension be omitted from the Ceneral Plan and that further study be given to alternate routes, was approved by the City Planning Commission. Council Y~embers Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. CITY PL~.~>~ING CO~4ISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meetin8 held January 19~ 1976 pertalnin8 ~o the following applications were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion and separate action by the City Council: 1. VARIA/4CE IlO. 2768: Submitted by William D. Ehrle to establish an office on RS-7290 zoned property located at 838 South State College Boulevard with Code waivers of: a. Permitted uses. b. Permitted signing. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-8, granted said variance in part, for a period of two years, subject to review at that time. 76-109 City..tiall, ._Anaheim, Cali. fornia - .COUNCIL MINUTES - February. ~0,_!976.~, 1.! 3ri. P..t!; "oaid variance was ,~et for a public hearJn~ at the request of Councilwoman i[aywood. ,, w~ .... . (Tentative Tract ?los VARIAJ{CE ~IO. 2770 ~{D ESVIRO,~u,~TAL IMPACT REPORT ;~O. 162: 9169, 017~, 9171 and 9172) ,q~bmitted by Dorothy I.;. Travis, VirRlnia Richards and Ellen Simmons to establish a 113-1o~, R,S-5000 (SC) zoned ~ubdiv!~i0n on the north side of La Palma Avenue, west of the northerly exten,~ion of I,!eir Canyon Road, with Code waivers of: a. Minimum buildinl site width. (Withdrawn) b. Requirement that single-family structures rear on arterial h i ghway s. The City Plann~n~ Commission, pursuant to Resolution ~o. PC76-9, recom- mended that E.I,R, No. 162 be certified as bein~ in compliance wAth the California Environmental Quality Act and further granted Variance Ho. 2770, in part, waiver "a" having been withdrawn, subject to conditions, ENVIRO}D~ENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 162 - CERTIFICATIOI~; F,. I.P,. )~o. 162, hay!nE '~een r'eviewg~"'~y the City staff and recommended by the City Planninc Commission to be in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the S;ate of California t~nvironmental Quality Act, the C~ty Council acting upon such information and belief, does hereby certify on motion by Councilman SneeFas, seconded by Councilman Thoro, that E.I.R. No. 162 is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City and Sta;e Guidelines. Councilwoman ~{a.vwood voted '"no". Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. NOTIOn] CARRIED, The City Council took no further action .on Variance No, 2770, TE~.I.T,.A,.TIVE TRACT MOS, 9.1.69 ,.....9 !7~, ,9!71 AND 9172: Owners, 9oro~hy B, Travts, Vtr~inia Richards and Ellen Sirrah°ns; proper~ty io~.ate~ bn the n~rth si,de ~f La P:alma Avenue, west .of l,,~etr Canyon Road; satfl tra:~.ts to be subdivided into 113 RS-5000 (SC) zoned lots, · ,4iss Santalahti reported that subsequent to the ?lan~inF C~ls.sion~'s approval of st, bject tentative maps, it was d~te~i, ned that there ~a6 an addi- tio~al portion of land locat~ed to the east of this property which .could be incor~rated into the two ~ost easterly tracts, Tract :~ns, at69 and 0!70, and therefore the applic~t pr~p~es t'hat these tract.s be approved 'wi~h lots respectively. ~e revised breakdo~ of lots in these sloes wo.~ld be as foll~s: Tract 'No. 9169 - 37 proposed V,S-5~00 ~, ~,.~ z~ed lots; Tract i~.o. 9170 - 26 propped ~-5000 (SC)z~eg t~ts; Trae:t proposed V,S-5000 (SC) zoned lots; Tract 31o. 9172 - 2'5 proposed ~S-5000 (SC) zoned lots, Cmmcilwcrman Kaywood .voiced her concer,n about the number o{ ~,',.3-5~00 .zoned projects proliferatin~ in the canyon. She ,~estioned wheth~-r .m.eamurts .had been taken to mitigate the noise impact ~frcm,, the rail,r,o, ag' .amd was ad.~vis,eg that the project would be in conformance wi'~th Council Policy No. 542, .On motion by Councilman 9neegas, seconded by Co,uncil,r,'~a:n Tt~om, the City Council approved Tentati.ve ~ract Maps r;os,. 9169,, 0.170, 9171 and ~172, sisting of a total of lt~6 'lc~ts, on the b.as~s tha~ .~h:ese p:r:opos,ed snail, vlsi. oils, to~ether with their design and impr, overaent are c,~nsistent wi,th the Ci~ty'~s General Plan, subject to ~t~e £ollowing conditions recomm.~ended by the City Planning Commission: Tentative l.~ap, Tract 'So. ~t69: 1. That the approval of Tentative ,'-~.ap of Tract 'io, 9169 is g:~anZ~ed subject to the approval of ~Va'riance No, 2770. 2. That should ~thts subdivision be ,developed as more ~han one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall ~be .submitted in tentative lorn for approval ~o 3. That, in accordance with City Council ~ollcy~, ~.a 6-.f, oo~t m~,son~rv wall shall be constructed on Che .south ',property lSne sepa~atSm.~ L~t Nos,. 24 32 and 'I,~ Patna Avenue. Reasonable landscaping, including 1,trig. at!ion facilities, shall be installed in the uncement, ed ;pore, ion ~o~f *tke highway parkway the full d~stance of s.aid wall, plans f~r s,a~d !.and$.caping to be submitted ~to .and subject to the approval of the Supe.r',~nten~-en:t .~of P~a, rk~ay 76-110 · City ~',all~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February l0t 1976~ 1:30 P.M. Maintenance; and following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 4. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and ~hen be recorded in ~he Office of the Orange County Recorder. 6. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map and., further, that the approved covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 7. That prior to filing the final tract map, the applicant shall submit to the City Attorney for approval or denial a complete synopsis of the proposed functioning of the operating corporation, including but not limited to the articles of incorporation bylaws, proposed methods of management, bonding to insure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such .other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers of the project. 5. That street names shall be approved by the City of .~.naheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 9.' That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreatlon 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. 10. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 1bth. 'iIeCessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer), prior to the commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facilities shall b.e of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to ultimate disposal, as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal, prior to the issuance of any final building inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be available to the developers of said property upon their request. 11. That grading, excavation, and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through this project. 12. That the developer shall obtain from the Orange County Flood Control District, a favorable flood hazard letter, acceptable to the City of Anaheim. 13. If permanent street name signs have not been installed, temporary street name signs shall be installed prior to any occupancy. 14. Iq~at Orange County Flood Control District facility E06SO1 shall be constructed to the standards of, and as approved, by, the Orange County Flood Control District. 15. That no storm runoff water shall be permitted to flow from subject tract onto the surface of the traveled way of La Palma Avenue. 16. That prior to the approval of the final tract map, the petitioner shall submit final specific floor plans, elevations, and plot plans to the City Council for approval. Tentative Map, Tract No. 9170: 1, That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 9170 is granted subject to the approval of Variance No. 2770. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as.more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval.. ., 3. .That, in accordance with City Council. Policy, a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the south, property line separating Lot Nos. 1 through 6 and La Palma Avenue. Eeasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, 76-111 City £~all~ Anaheim~ California - COU~CIL YT~)UTES - .'ebruar~ lA, 197AI 1:30 P.)(. J , i i i L~ I I I shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the artt.r(al highway parkway the full dist~nnce of sai~l wall, plans for sa~d landscapJ~'.F to he submitted to and subject to the apI~r~.,al of tltc ~uperintenHent of Par)-way );aintenance; a~d following installation .~:~d acceptance, the City of Ana)~ shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said land~;caping. 4. That all lots within ti~is tract shall be served ?'>y ~nder~round utilities. 5. ~!~at a final tract map ~f subject property ~l~a]] t.~e submitted to ~qnd approved by the City Cou~cil and then be recorded ~n tl~c~ .' ffice of the :~range County Ilecorder. 6. That the covenmtts, co~ditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by t!te ~..qity Attorney's .~fftce prior to City Council approval of the final tract map and, further, that the approved covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 7. That prior to filing the final, tract map, the appltcapt shall submit to the City Attorney for .qt?rova] or denial a complete synopsis of the proposed functioning of the operating corporation, including but not limited to the articles of incorporation bylaws, proposed methods of management, bonding to insure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens~ and the purchasers of the prnject. ~. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval, of a final tract map. Q. That the owner(s) o{ 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. 10. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 15th. ~':ecessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer), prior to the commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from hi~her properties through said property to ultimate disposal, as approved by the City Ilngineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal, prior to t)~e issuance of any final building inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be available to the developers of said property upon their request. 11. That grading, excavation, and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into the ~anta Aha P~iver by storm water orizinatin~ from or flowing through this project. 12. That the developer shall obtain from the Orang~ County Flood Control District, a favorable flood hazard letter, acceptable to the City of ~naheim. 13. If permanent street name sik~ns have not been installed, temporary street name si .gns shall l)e installed prior to any occupancy. 14. That Orange County Flood Control District facility l'.06,~qO1 shall be constructed to the standards of, and as approved by, the erange County Flood Control ~istrict. 15. That no storm runoff water shall be permitted to flow from subject tract onto the surface of the traveled way of La Palma Avenue. 16. That prior to the approval of the final tract mapm the petitioner shall submit final specific floor plans, elevations, and plot plans to the City Council for approval. Tentative liap, Tract ldo. 9171: 1. ~at the approval of Tentative t~ap of ~)7ract :~o. 9171 is granted subject t~ the approval of Variance 'lo. 2770. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more titan one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shal~l~ be submitted in tentative form for approval. 76-112 City Ilal..1.~ Anaheim, Cali_fornia - COUNCIL b~NUTES - February 10~ 1976, 1:30 P..M. 3. That, in accordance with City Council Policy, a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the south property line separating Lot Nos. 23 through 28 and La Palma Avenue. Reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial highway parkway the full distance of said wall, plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway ~{aintenance; and following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 4. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 5. 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 F. ecorder. 6. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map and, further, that the approved covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. 7. That prior to filing the final tract map, the applicant shall submit to the City Attorney for approval or denial a complete synopsis of the proposed functioning of the operating corporation, including but not limited to the articles of incorporation bylaws, proposed methods of management, bonding to insure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers of the project. g. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 9. 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. 10. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 15th. ]]ecessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer), prior to the commencement of grading operations. 77~e required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties through said property to ultimate disposal, as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal, prior to the issuance of any final building inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be available to the developers of said property upon their request. ~ 11. That grading, excavation, and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project bein~ carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through this project. 12. That the developer shall obtain from the Orange County Flood Control District, a favorable flood hazard letter, acceptable to the Ci:y of Anaheim. 13. If permanent street name signs have not been installed, temporary street name signs shall be installed prior to any occupancy. 14. That no storm runoff water shall be permitted to flow from subject tract onto the surface of the traveled way of La Palma Avenue. 15. That Street "D" shall be a full standard 64-foot wide street. 16. That prior to the approval of the final tract map, the petitioner shall submit final specific floor plans, elevations, and plot plans to the City Council for approval. Tentative Map, Tract No. 9172: 1. -That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 9172 is granted subject to the approval of Variance No. 2770. 76-113 Cloy ~iall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10, 1976, 1:30 P.M. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That, in accordance with City Council Policy, a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the south property line separating Lot ~os. 20 through 25 and La Palma Avenue. P. easonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial highway parl~way the full distance of said wall, plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the ~uperintendent of Parkway ~'~aintenance; and following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. 4. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground ut ilit tes. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by t~e City Council and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County ?.ecorder. 6. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council approval of the fi~al tract map an~, further, that the approved covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded coDcurrently with the final tract map. 7. That prior to filing the final ~ract map, the applicant shall submit to thc City Attorney for approval or denial a complete synopsis of the proposed functioning of the operating corporation, including but not limited to the articles of incorporation bylaws, proposed methods of mann~ement, bonding to insure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the purchasers of the project. 3. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 9. That the owner(~) of subject property shall pay to the City of Amaheim t]~.e 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 ~.s issued. 10. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the site, sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative. Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities will be completed prior to October 15th. 7~ecessary right-of-way for off-site drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall be borne by the developer), prior to the commencement of grading operations. The required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from hi~her properties through said property to ultimate disposal, as approved by the City Engineer. Said drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall be completed and be functional throughout the tract and from the downstream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal, prior to the issuance of any f~nal buildin5 inspections or occupancy permits. Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be available to the developers of said property upon their request. 11. That grading, excavation, and all other construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into the Santa Ana River by storm water originating from or flowing through this project. 12. That the ~eveloper shall o~tain from the Orange County Flood Control District, a favorable flood hazard letter, acceptable to the City of Anaheim. 13. If permanent street name signs have not been installed, temporary street name signs shall be installed prior to any occupancy. 14. That a street and a public utility easement shall be obtained across Lots 64 and 65 of Tract 7~o. 7417, as required for the extension of Allwood Circle; Allwood Circle shall be reconstructed as required by the City Engineer; and an abandonment request shall be processed for abandonment of the excess right-of-way for the existing cul-de-sac on ;llwood Circle. 15. That no storm runoff water shall be permitted to flow from subject tract onto the surface of the traveled way of La Pal~.a Avenue. 16. ?hat Street "A" shall be a full standard 64-foot wide street. 76-114 C. ity ~[all~ ~maheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 10~ 1976m 1;30 P.I'!. 17. That prior to the approval of the final tract map, tile petitioner shall submit final specific floor plans, elevations, and plot plans to the City Conu~cil for approval. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "no". Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOT I 0~ CARRIED. ~;VIRONM~iTAL IMPACT REPORT l!O. 164 (SUPPLEM?2'~TARY TO E.I.~. NO. 80) ; E.I.R. No. 164 was submitted by Anaheim Hills, Inc., in conjunction with the grading plan for Unit IXA of the Anaheim Hills project, property located to the north of Canyon Rim Road, approximately 300 feet to the northeast of the Walnut Canyon Reservoir, together with recommendation from the City Planning Commission that F.I.R. ~lo. 164 be certified as being in compliance with the California Environ- mental Quality Act. Environmental Impact Report No. 164, Supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80, having been reviewed by the C~ty staff and recommended by the City Planning Commission to be in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the State of California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council acting upon such information and belief does hereby certify on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman %~om, that E.I.R. No. 164, ~upplementary to E.I.R. ~o. 80, is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City and State Guidelines. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL USE PER.MIT NOS. 1063 A3~D 1072 - EXTENSION OF TIME: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Eneegas, the City Council granted a one-year extension of time to Conditional Use Permit Nos. 1063 and 1072 expiring October 7, 1976 and '!ovember 4, 1976, respectively, pursuant to the request submitted by Mr. C. M. McNees and in accordance with the recommendation of the City Planning Conunission. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3501: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3501 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF %U.tE CITY OF kNAt!EIM ~PEALING TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.03, SECTION 18.03.060 OF TIlE .~AHEI~i~ ~CU!IICIPAL CODE ;f~D ~DDING A ~.U~W SECTION 18.03 060 IN ITS PLACE AND STEAD RELATING TO PUBLIC ttEARI~GS ON PETITIONS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUi{CIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom ~OES: COb%JCIL ~.~MBERS: None ABSENT: COL~CIL b~MBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3501 duly passed and adopted· ORDINAt~CE NO. 3502: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3502 for adoption. ,,, Refer to Ordinance Book. ;C~ ORDINA/*~CE OF TIlE CITY nF ANAIIEIM AMENDINC TITLE 18 nF TIlE ;~AHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE R3,]LATING TO ZONING. (70-71-49 (3), RS-50OO) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COU).TCIL ~'.~.MBERS: Sneegas and /]lom ~T T~ . ~O~,S: COUNCIL I,~I.[BEP. S: Ka~ood ABSE?~: COUNCIL ?~MBERS: Se~our and Pebley Tile Mayor declared Ordinance L~o. 3502 failed to carry. ORDIN~qCE NO. 3503: oouncilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3503 for adopt ion. Refer to Ordinance Book. ,,~T ORDINA;'~CE OF TUIE CITY nF A~']A/!FIM .~NDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAIIEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (75-76-7, ?.S-;-43,000, }{ohler Drive ~':o. 4 Annexation) 76-115 City HallI An~heimm Call,lorn,ia- COU!ICIL ),!II~,TE§ - February 10m 1976m_ 1:3~, P.M.,, ~.Ioll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL ,~MBEP. S: :'.aywood, Sneegas and Thom ;JOES: COUNCIL ~'~MBERS: ~Ione ABSENT: COU:'~CIL ,x~MBERS: Seymour and ?ebley The ~1ayor declared ~,rdinance ilo. 3503 duly passed and adopted. ORDIHA~)CE :lO. 3504: Councilman Sneegas offered ~rdinance Yo. 3504 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AH OPuDI:IA2~Cl'] OF THE CITY OF ANAtlEIH ~2~iI;DING TITLE 18 OF TI{E AI.~AtlEIM MIYNICIPAL CODE PJELATING TO ZONING. (75-76-9, RS-A-43,000, Frontera ,'lo. 2 Annexation) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL }%MBERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom ;'~()ES; COUNCIL ~%~iBERS: ,"Ione ABSI2!T: COUL'CIL ~MBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Ordinance 'Jo. 3504 duly passed and adopted. Councilwoman l!aywood offered Ordinance ~o 3505 for ORDI,IA..,C,~ NO...3505: . _ adopt ion. Refer to Ordinance Book. Ai~ ORDIN~J{CE OF THE CITY OF ~%~IAI{EI.N A~tE.{DI..~G TITLE 18 OF ~IE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (75-76-4, RS-A-43,000, Orangethorpe-Uixon Freeway Annexat ion) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL }~b~. ERS: Kaywood, Sneegas and Thom ?'~OES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSI2!T: COUNCIL }{EMBERS: Seymour and Pebley The Mayor declared Ordinance >~o. 3505 duly passed and adopted. 0RD, INAN,CE,,,, NOS. 3508 TttROUGII 3510: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance Uos. 3508 through 3510, both inclusive, for first reading. ORDIN~]CE NO. 3508: AN ORDINANCE OF TIlE CITY OF AN~dIEIM A~NDING TITLE 18 OF TIlE ANAl[ElM I~[LrNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-49 (1), CL) OPJ)INA.UCE NO. 3509: AN OPDINAI~CE OF T~IE CITY OF ;~AHEI}! A~-mNDING TITLE 18 OF Tii'~ ~2~A]~IM ~;:ICiPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONINC. (74-75-42, RM-1200) ORDINAl]CE NO. 3510: AN ORDINANCE OF TIIE CITY OF AN;d{EIM A~fENDING TITLE 18 OF , · TIIE ;C'~AI~EIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONINC. (75-76-11, P~M-1200) FLOOD INSURANCE ACT - PREMIUM REFUNDS: Councilwoman Kaywood requested that City staff follow up on the flood insurance premium refunds to ensure that the City is doing everything required to enable homeowners to promptly receive their refunds. >~Ui;ICIPAL' L!ABILI~,Y INSURA/~CE: Councilwoman Kaywood requested that the City staff investigate the municipal liability insurance situation and was advised that the City Attorney's Office has been investigating this matter for some time and will be reporting to the Council with a recommendation. SAT~A ~£:A ~IVER/SA~ITIAGO CREEK GREENBELT CO~!ISSION: Councilman Sneegas sub- mitted ~ritten materials for duplication and distribution to Council ~.!embers regarding the curtailment of activities of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission and requested that Council review these prior to taking a position.as to how much reduction they feel should be accomplished. .,,.~:-~,. ~..,, ,.=,a~.~{ I,.oUPJ~C:~ IDENTIFICATION CARDS: ~!ayor Thom advised of complaints ! , he ',~as received and of his own personal experJ.ence regarding the identification 76-116 City iiall; ,^.nahcims California - COU%ICIL MINUTES - February l0T 1976! 1:30 P.}~.~. cards issued by Galbrairh and Green and was assured that these are temporary only. :';ew employee identification cards are on order and should be distributed in Yarch. R:~]CESS - FPiECUTIVE SESSIO]~; Councilman Sneegas moved to recess to Executive ~ession. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Council Members Seymour and Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. (4:06 P.??.) AFTER %ECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all members of the City Council being present, with the exception of Councilman Seymour and Councilman Pebley. (4:45 P.M.) RECESS: ~ae City Council recessed to 7:30 P.H. (4:&.5 P.H.) AFTER RECESS: l[ayor Thom called the Council meeting to order, all members of the City Council being present with the exception of Councilman Pebley. PRESEi. IT; COUNCIL M~P~EP~q: Kaywood, Seymour, Sneegas and Thom ABSEi.~T: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley PRESENT; ASSISTA2qT CITY I~2{AGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTOI~IEY: Alan R. Watts DEPUTY CITY CLERK; Linda D. Roberts COI~-~JNITY DEVELOPP[E?~IT DIRECTOR: Knowlton Fernald ItOUSING DIRECTOR; Rosario Hattessich CO~4b'NITY DEVELOPMENT CONSULTAHT: Alice McCullough GUEST OBSERVERS: PLAI.~NING CO~,~.ISSIOII ~'-~MBERS: Herbst Morley, King and Barnes PUBLIC IlEA/tING - COPEqUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROPOSAl.: To consider: 1. A second-year Community Development Program (to identify City-wide activities and a one-year development program for the area generally bounded by Anaheim Boulevard on the west, Santa Fe Railroad tracks on the east, La Palma Avenue on the north and Cypress Street on the south). 2. A IIousing Assistance Plan (City-wide to identify needs, goals, objec- tives and locations for a second-year program.) The Deputy City Clerk reported that the City Planning Commission at the joint meeting held with the City Council February 4, 1976, recommended that Plan "D" of the four proposed expenditure plans be presented to the public. Mr. Mattessich, using transparent slides, reviewed the proposed second- year application developed from the series of citizen meetings. He described the five major areas in which the funds are proposed to be spent as follows: Group 1,housing programs; Group II, public improvements; Group III, other programs; Group IV, administration and planning and Group V, contingency. (Proposed second-year budget Plan "D", Exhibit 2 - Revision 2, as submitted at this meeting on file in the office of the City Clerk.) Mr. Mattessich reviewed the sums presently allocated to the items in each category. I!e emphasized that these amounts are presently flexible and can be changed according to the priority needs determined by the Council together with citizen input. ..Once Council adopts a plan and budget, however, only 10% of the total sum can be revised without going through a formal procedure with public meetings. The total second year budget amount is ~1,132,000. The rationale behind the priority of first performing the necessary underground improvements to the sewer and water systems prior to other repairs was explained. At the conclusion of the presentation, l~r. ~{attessich advised that copies of the draft application proposal as well as leaflets and other information about the Community Development Program and Housing Assistance Program are available at his office, 119 ,qouth Claudine Street. Extensive informal dialogue was conducted between the Council I. lembers and the audience. Two areas of primary interest and community need were discussed - a community youth center and jobs for youth living in the target area. ~'~r.-Amin David referred to the large turnout of youth at the meeting (the Council Chamber was almost 100% occupied by young people between the ages of 14 and 20 years) as indicative of the tremendous need in the downtown area for a youth center, lie urged that the Council give serious consideration to the use !I T -r -- 76-117 ~ity ilall, Anaheim~ California - COID, ICIL MINUTES - February 10~ 1976~ 1:30 of the $35,000 shown under Group III, Item Mo. 13, for a neighborhood center and to increasing this amount to meet a serious people need. He explained that the youth group in the audience is currently wor]~ing on a statement of needs which will be submitted to the City Council. This group has the support of the Anaheim Police Department, County !Iuman Relations Commission and the Youth Advisory Board to the County. IIe respectfully suggested that the Council be receptive to these recommendations when submitted to them. :~ayor Thom assured Mr. David that the Council would take serious note of such statement of needs, tle advised that he has been aware of the pressure which has been building over the past couple of years for a youth center in the general central City area. lie advised that with the funds proposed under the Community Development Act, however, the center could not be exclusively for youth; it would have to be a multipurpose center. A spokesman for the youth group described the type of facility they have been considering in relationship to the needs of the community, which would offer educational programs for children through to adult education; different kinds of cultural programs; and sports activities for children up to adults. During discussion, in response to other questions from the audience, it was explained that the funds for the second year program would become available July 1, 1976. In answer to an inquiry as to what the youth might do to assist the Council in the planning stages of a neighborhood center, Councilman Seymour requested that they complete development of the statement of needs referred to by .~fr. David; that they further develop what they feel the center should con- tain; and prepare a priority list of the items according to their importance. This would aid the City staff in finding a suitable site and in matching as much money as possible to the need. Another member of the audience inquired whether any advisory board is planned, or any structure for same, to be appointed from members of the com- munity to serve during the planning stages. It was also suggested that an on- £'.oing advisory board should be considered which would be active in the opera- tion of the center once established, as it is important to the people that they have a voice in these operations. It was pointed out that the need for the center is imminent and urgent and that although such a facility has been promised by various government agencies several times during the past years, no positive results are yet evident. It was indicated that the members of the youth group present have been meeting in the basement of the City's social services center which is not at all adequate and may be hazardous. They have recently been given approval to meet in the basement of the City Personnel Department. l'owever this location is again not adequate and will not perr,/t them to install the recreational equipment, etc., they would like to be able to use. ,..ir. Fernald reported that there is included in the redevelopment plan a community center site location in the downtown area and that perhaps redevelop- ment funds might be combined with Community Development Act Funds to create such a facility. Councilman Seymour remarked that he concurred with this approach for the ultimate neighborhood center facility, but that redevelopment is still somewhat in the planning stage, and these people are interested in forming an ad hoc committee to tackle the immediate problem and provide an interim facility as soon as possible. ;ir. Fernald responded that an interim facility might be provided by using a vacant building in the redevelopment area which would ultimately be put to another use. He noted that there are one or two buildings which he thought would work rather well, one of which has been recommended by Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department for this use. >irs. McCullough advised that Community Pevelopment and Redevelopment funds could be combined for this purpose as long as the target area is expanded to include the site of such facility in the second-year application, under short term objectives. 76-118 City ttall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL ~NUTES - February 10~ 1976~ 1:30 P.~. In response to the audience, it was also pointed out that a committee could be immediately formed to work on such a proposal and could be funded through the last year program contingency fund. At the conclusion of discussion, it was determined by general consent of all parties involved that a well balanced advisory committee, containing representatives of both the youths and adults of the community, would be formed. Mr. ~Iattessich and Mr. Fernald were invited to attend the next youth group meeting to be held in the basement of the City Personnel Department on Tuesday, February 17, 1976, 7:30 P.M. to assist in the structuring of this commit tee. The City Council Members indicated that they would seriously consider recommendations made by this ad hoc committee. The topic of second emphasis as brought out by the discussion and public input was that of the ability of the City to provide jobs, particularly for youth in the community development target areas. The spokesman for the youth group stated that he could not stress enough the importance of this particular need in the community. The paint and pick-up crew program, allocated SPO,000 (Item Uo. 4 under Group I in the proposed second year budget) was described. It was noted that the Council would have the ability to utilize all or as much of the g70,900 in the contingency fund to expand this program at their ~!iscration. Councilman Seymour indicated that he would be favorable to creating any- where from 50 to 60 jobs for youth from these census tracts to perform paint and fix-up tasks in their own community, as he could envision a great amount of benefit to the entire community from such projects, lie noted that this type of expenditure would produce a very visible result and encourage pride in the com~nunity. He advised that he would be willing to revise some of the other allocations in the proposed budget if necessary to provide sufficient funds for these jobs. Mrs. ~cCullough pointed out that aside from the youth paint and pick-up crews, the funds allocated to public improvements in the proposed budget might also be considered as generating job opportunities. She noted that the public improvements may be performed in one of two ways: 1) either by private contractor, who must stipulate that he meet affirmative action require~mnts and to the fullest extent possible hire people from the project area; 2) or by establishing a special program in the Public l~,~orks Department to specifically hire people from the area and train them to perform the work required. Later in the meeting prior to taking action on the proposed budget plan, Councilman Seymour again introduced the subject of how the Council might best provide jobs for the youth to answer the need which was communicated during the public hearing and specifically whether or not amendments should be made to the proposed budget at this time to ensure that the funds are available. Extensive discussion with staff members indicated that because of rather strict prevailing wage rate regulations and the technical requirements inherent in public works construction, as well as difficulties with trade and craft unions~ they would not recommend that this be the vehicle through which jobs for neighborhood youth be provided. Furthermore, as a practical matter, it was noted that to provide jobs in the magnitude of 100 at $2.50 per hour would amount to approximately $520,000 in one year, which would not be possible out of a total budget of $1,132,000 in Community Development Funds. Mr. Talley stated that he felt the Jobs Council desires to establish could be accomplished through CETA Manpower funds under Title I in combination with Community Development Act Funds. l~rs. McCullough stated that these two programs would work extremely well together inasmuch as the labor might be provided from Title I and the materials from Community Development Act funds. She advised that in working out any type of training program, the Community Development Department would need assistance in the area of dealing with labor unions from Council Members who may have a better working relationship. 76-119 City l:all~ Anaheimt California - COINCIL HIiIUTES - February l0T 1976~ 1:30 P.M. At the conclusion of discussion, ~lr. Talley advised that at the time the City budget for Fiscal Year 1976-77 is submitted, a plan will be included for use of Title I Manpower funds and Community Developr-ent ;~ct funds to provide the jobs for youths discussed at this meeting. }ther items specifically but briefly discussed durin£ the public hearing were the crime preventiom pilot program and historical preservation projects. The youth spokesman indicated that they currently attempt to work with individuals in correctional institutions and .~,,oulc] be interested in supporting alcoi~olism and drug abuse rehab~_litation and prevention projects as activities of the previously discussed neJ~ghborhood center. Also discussed throughout the meeting were the City's attempts at com- munication within the predor~inantly Mexican-.~r-ericpn Community Pevelopment target areas. ~embers of the audience felt that these attempts had not been entirely successful because they had just recently heard of the prograr:. It was noted that the City l~ad insufficient staff ad;~inistering the Community ~]evelop];ent Prograph curing: the prior year to enable ther~ to go out into the community a,~d develop any rapport. This type of activity is being provided for in the citizen participation component of the second-year budget proposal. 7qembers of the audience stressed that it is important that information disseminated and comr.~unications about the program be in both English and Spanish as many of their parents do not read or speak English, and were advised that the Department does have bilingual capabilities and will continue to communicate in both English and Spanish. The City Council reiterated several times that they were extremely happy to have the excellent turnout of young people at this public hearing; that they would indeed be receptive to their suggestions and recommendations and would welcome them to attend future Council meetings to provide further input. At the conclusion of the public hearing, l'~r. ;.?in David, speaking as a member of the Orange County Human Relations Commission, publicly requested that the Conmmnity Development Department of Anaheim share with that Commission their proposed plans, as well as completed draft proposals, so that the Human Relations Commission might have an opportunity to review and comment before these proposals are sent to HUD or SCAG. Prior to closing the public hearing, !-~ayor Thom solicited any additional comments and the members of the Planning Commission stated that they were very impressed with the program as proposed and noted that the young members of the public present seemed enthusiastic, were well informed, and generally handled themselves extremely well. i.'[rs. ?~cCullough compared her experience with assisting 40 other cities in preparation of their Co~vmaunity Development Applications during the last seven years and stated that she is impressed with the Anaheim City Council and with the general attitude in this City. She felt that a real effort had been made to create a vital, energetic and responsive program. She complimented the Council on the Community Development Program itself and advised that she is pleased with the way it is going. ?.[ayor Thom closed the public hearing. Commissioner ~erbst had earlier suggested that Item ~]os. 12 and 13 of Croup III, i.e., open space projects and multipurpose neighborhood center be combined for a total sum of $130,000, to be allocated to the neighborhood center concept. The Council indicated they concurred with this idea as it would make the neighborhood center a more credible and viable program. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman ~as~ood, the City Council authorized staff to prepare the second-year Community ~cvelopr'ent Elock grant Application in accordance w~th Plan "D" amended to incorporate Item ';os. 12 and 13 into one category - ~'nltipurpose ~;ei[hborhood Coymunity Center, with an allocation of $13,q,OqO. Councilman Pebley absent. ..'~OTIO~ CARRIED. 76-120 City Ilall~ Anaheimt California - CODICIL MI.~U,_ES,- FebruarY 10, 1976~, 1.30 P.~{. ADJOUF.£~Mi2~; Councilman 3eymour moved to ad3ourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. Councilman Pebley absent. MOTIO~ CARRIED. Adjourned: 9:50 P.~{. ALO~A ~. HOUGARD, CITY CLERK