1976/11/2376-864
City .Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976, 1'30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: EITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ronald L. Thompson
MANPOWER PLANNER: William Hepburn
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton Piersall
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION' Reverend Randy Rhoades of the Melodyland Hotline Center gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE' Councilman Don R. Roth led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Thom and
unanimously approved by the City Council:
"Adoption Week in Anaheim", November 22-29, 1976.
Mr. John Beisner accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Orange County Committee
for Adoption Week with a brief thank you address.
"Audio-Visual Week in Anaheim", January 13-18, 1977.
MINUTES: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman SeYmour,
minutes of the Anaheim City Council regular meeting held September 21, 1976,
were approved with the following correction to page 5, paragraph 7, to add to
the beginning of said paragraph, "Mayor Pro Tern Seymour stated he had not read
the second Structural Engineer"s report just now distributed.". Councilman Thom
abstained from voting. MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to
the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after
reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the
reading of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Roth seconded the motion.
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,693,744.35 in accordance
with the 1976-77 Budget, were approved.
PARKS, RECREATION AND ARTS DIRECTOR - AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE CONTRACTS: A
resolution was submitted for Council consideration' W~i'ch would authorize the
Parks, Recreation and Arts Director to execute contracts up to $2,500.00, in
connection with budgeted recreation programs. Mr. Talley reported that this
authorization would eliminate approximately 100 items from Council agenda.
Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 76R-737 for adoption. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-737: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF ANAHEIM PARKS, RECREATION AND THE ARTS DEPARTMENT TO
EXECUTE CERTAIN AGREEMENTS FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WHEN THE AMOUNTS DO NOT
EXCEED $2,500.00.
76-865
CitM Ha!.l~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23~ 1976, 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-737 duly passed and adopted.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the Parks,
Recreation and the Arts Director and City Attorney were instructed to Prepare
a standard format setting forth terms and conditions within which agreements
are to be administered, and submit said format for City Council review and
approval. MOTION CARRIED.
1976 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION REPORT: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by
Councilwoman Kaywood, the City of Anaheim Affirmative Action Report for 1976
prepared by the Personnel Department was ordered received and filed. MOTION
CARRIED.
CETA I AND II CONTRACTS: Mr. William Hepburn briefly reported on proposed modi-
fications to CETA I and II contracts.
Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 76R-738 through 76R-741, both inclusive,
for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-738: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING A MODIFICATION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CETA TITLE I GRANT, AND AUTHORIZ-
ING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID MODIFICATION AND SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS
PERTAINING TO THE FISCAL YEAR 1976-77 CETA TITLE I GRANT. ($674,162.00)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-739: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN T~E ~!TY'_ .....
OF ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO
COMMUNITY BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION IN BASIC EDUCATION STUDIES. · (CETA I,
$38,938.00, December 1, 1976- September 30, 1977)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-740: 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 ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, INC., RELATING TO
COMMUNITY BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION AND VOCATIONAL SKILLS TRAINING. (CETA
I, $56,344.00, December 1, 1976- September 30, 1977)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-741: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY MANPOWER
COMMISSION RELATING TO MANPOWER PROGRAMS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT AND MODIFICATIONS THERETO ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
(CETA II, $891,259.00, October 1, 1976- September 30, 1977)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-738 through 76R-741, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
NALCO CHEMICAL COMPANY - SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT: A resolution which would
authorize execution of a sale and purchase agreement, option, lease and escrow
instructions with Nalco Chemical Company for acquisition of property located along
the south side of Vermont Street at The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad
track, east of Olive Street for use as a Public Works yard was presented for
Council consideration.
Mr. Talley commented that the purchase agreement provides that the City would
acquire Parcel 2 during the current fiscal year for the sum of $250,000.00 and
$320,000.00 for the other parcel during the next fiscal year. This recommendation
was discussed during the Budget hearing process and also confirmed by the Arthur
Young and Company study of the Mechanical Maintenance Division.
76-866
citffHall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES-____November 23, 1976, 1'30 P.M.
Mr. Thornton Piersall summarized that the agreement provides for purchase of the
rear portion (Portion No. 2) with an option to purchase the front portion prior
to August 1, 1977. In the event the Nalco Chemical Company had not constructed
their new facility at that time, they would have the opportunity to lease back
from the City, at a pre-determined price, for a period up until July 1978, and
on a month-to-month basis thereafter until their construction would be complete.
It is felt the acquisition of this property would provide an excellent opportunity
to combine the Streets and Sanitation and Mechanical Maintenance functions. The
cost of the rear portion is included in the 1976-77 Budget and a construction pro-
gram would be funded over 2 years with an estimate of one million dollars projected
for the facility and equipment.
Councilman Kott questioned the amount of taxes on this property and was advised
that once the City acquired same they would request cancellation of taxes, and
further that if any possessory interest taxes were applicable, these would be
paid by Nalco Chemical Company.
It was further ascertained that the present Mechanical Maintenance yard would be
used for expansion of the Property Maintenance Division and the City-owned site
which would become surplus would be the City's current Mechanical Maintenance
yard at 518 South Claudina Street.
In response to Councilman Seymour's inquiry as to whether or not any value had
been attributed to this property as a result of the trackage agreement between
Nalco and the Railroad, Mr. Slaughter calculated that the appraiser had attributed
a value of approximately $28,000.00 to the Railroad switch and spur and then de-
preciated this by 60%, thereby adding a value of approximately $16,800.00 to the
property.
·
Councilman Seymour further questioned the method proposed for acquisition of the
property, indicating concern that should the Nalco Chemical Company not be able
to deliver title to the front portion, that the City would be in dire straits,
having acquired title to the rear portion without the front parcel.
Mr. Slaughter advised that a short form of the title policy would be recorded
against the property when the first parcel was acquired, which would remove
the Nalco Chemical Company's ability to sell it free and clear of the effects
of the City's option; that the only reason this method was considered was to
enable the City to acquire the property in two fiscal years as the City does not
have funds to commit to the entire purchase price in one year and cannot commit
funds from future budgets.
Mr. Stuart Smith, representing the Nalco Chemical Company, stated that it is his
understanding that if the City were able to purchase the entire property out-right
for $570,000.00, this would have been agreeable to Nalco Chemical Company and that
it was only to accommodate the City that the purchase arrangement in two segments
was prepared. In response to Councilman Seymour's concerns as to the Nalco Chem-
ical Company's ability to deliver title to the front portion, Mr. Smith concurred
that a recorded option should resolve that problem.
Councilman Seymour inquired whether the Nalco Chemical Company would agree, in
the event that they could not for any reason whatsoever deliver title to the
front portion of the property, to buy back the rear parcel, at the amount the
City paid for it.
Mr. Smith stated that he was unable to commit his client to any such agreement.
At the conclusion of discussion, Councilman Seymour stated that although he
supports the concept of combining these two City functions, he remains concerned
relative to: (1) the value of some $16,000 to $18,000 applied to trackage, for
which the City does not know whether or not they will be able to retain and use;
(2) the lack of definitiveness in the delivery of title to the front parcel.
76-867
City Hal.1~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23~ 197.6, 1'30 P.M.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the consideration
of a sale and purchase agreement with Nalco Chemical Company was continued to
the meeting of November 30, 1976, pending further information to clarify the con-
cerns as set forth by Councilman Seymour. MOTION CARRIED.
HISTORICAL MARKER (WEST OF WEST STREET BETWEEN LINCOLN AND CENTER). On motion
by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, t~he City Council.approved
the installation of a concrete monument marker in the landscaped median located
west of West Street between Lincoln and Center by the Orange County Historical
Commission, in conjunction with local participants, to identify the San Pedro
Westerly Gate Entry to the original town of Anaheim, .at no cost to the City.
MOTION CARRIED.
FINAL MAP~ TRACT NO. 9375' Developer, Nelson Development Company; tract located
at the southwest corner of Ball Road and Sunkist Avenue; containing 14 RM-1200
zoned lots.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the proposed sub-
division together with its design and improvement Was found to be consistent with
the City's General Plan, and the City Council approved Final Map, Tract no. 9375
as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated November 16, 1976.
MOTION CARRIED.
STATUS REPORT~- SALE OF CITY PUBLICATIONS - ANAHEIM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE' In re-
sponse to Councilman Kott's request for a progress report on the purported sale
of publications produced at City expense by the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Mr.
Talley reported that it had been determined that the book "Dynamic Anaheim" was
available at the rate of $10.00 for a soft cover and $15.00 for a hard cover copy.
Upon discussing this further with Mr. Larry Sierk, it was his opinion that the
charges made were a valid procedure to discourage wholesale or indiscriminate dis-
tribution of the publication. It was not known whether or not any copies had
actually been sold.
Mr Talley stated that the City then requested information on all publications
sold by the Chamber since July of 1971, which indicated $6,380.~0 worth of
materials had been sold. Information was also provided from the Chamber that
they had never included the standard 20% overhead charge for various items which
they felt equitable, and that if the amount of sale of publications minus the 20%
overhead rate were considered, Mr. Sierk's contention is that there would be a
substantial deficit to the Chamber. The City Attorney has been apprised of these
facts and no further action has been taken pending specific details. The City
Attorney will render mn opinion for submittal to the City Council, as to whether
or not the City should have been credited for these amounts or whether it would
be appropriate to present the Chamber with a billing for same.
Councilman Kott stated that he believes that the 20% overhead figure cited is
strictly subjective and that it is immoral to sell government property or prop-
erty belonging to another.
Councilman Seymour remarked that while he believes in and supports activities
dealing with the appropriate and correct use of taxpayers, funds, and if there
has been any improper expenditure of funds, it should be pursued and clarified.
He also feels this should not be conducted at any expense, recalling that the
last time Councilman Kott called for an investigation of the 'Bicentennial Com-
mittee the sum total of $73.86 was identified at considerably more expense to
the City.
Further Councilman Seymour commented that from the tone and persistence of
Councilman Kott's remarks there is something larger than dollars and cents
involved, that these remarks reflect an attitude of vindictiveness and desire
to disparage the character of some of the business leadership, To the degree
that this activity continues, Councilman Seymour wished the record to be clear
that he does not support same inasmuch as it leads to dissension among commun~
ity leadership and negative attitudes.
76-868
citXHall~. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976,. 1'.30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood strongly concurred with Councilman Seymour's remarks.
Councilman Kott advised that these activities are in line with his campaign
promises to obtain the most and best of the tax dollar. He stressed that
he has never questioned individuals or organizations per se, just the agree-
ments and contracts. He felt his activities were positive as they involve
honesty, responsibility and accountability in government as far as contract
agreements and follow-up are concerned.
No further action was taken by the City Council.
ON THE JOB INJURIES - PANEL OF FIRST TREATING PHYSICIANS: (Continued from the
meeting of November 16, 1976) Mr. Garry McRae resubmitted his recommendation
that the Council reaffirm the City's policy to exercise medical control of
employees injured on the job and designate the following list as the Panel of
First Treating Physicians: (1) Acacia Medical Center, 1491 East La Palma,
Anaheim (2) Ball-Taft Industrial Medical Center, 1440 South State College
Boulevard, Anaheim (3) Heffner Medical Clinic, 935 South Gilbert, Anaheim (4)
Inter-County Medical Group, 3340 West Ball Road, Anaheim and (5) Johnson-Gendel
Medical Associates, 1390 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim.
Mr. McRae reported that during the past week he had reviewed the clinics listed
in his recommendation with representatives of the Orange County Medical Association,
Orange County Health Department and Orange County Personnel Department. It was
ascertained that all of the recommended clinics have physicians who are listed
in the Directory of Medical Examiners practicing within Workers'Compensation laws
for the State of California. He has been able to find no reason why these clinics
should not continue to perform industrial accident work for the City.
Mr. McRae did report that the Orange County Medical Association had one reserva-
tion regarding the Inter-County Medical Group because of an action brought by
the Food and Drug Administration against one physician in that group for his use
of silicone implants. Mr. McRae, however, did not feel that this would detract from
the clinics ability to perform industrial accident treatments and because of their
location did not wish to exclude them from the Panel of First Treating Physicians.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council
reaffirmed the City Policy of exercising medical control of employees injured
on the job and designated the Panel of First Treating Physicians to be consti-
tuted as recommended by the Personnel Director and set forth above. MOTION
CARRIED.
EUCLID BRANCH LIBRARY - SIGNALIZED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK: (Continued from the
meeting of November 9, 1976) Recommendation of the City Engineer that the City
Council not order a traffic signal installed at the Euclid Street Branch Library
crosswalk as it is not warranted by pedestrian volumes and secondarily that if
Council determines a mid-block pedestrian signal is to be installed, that full
signal as described in Method 2 of his memorandum dated November 16, 1976 (on
file in the office of the City Clerk) is recommended at an estimated cost of
$~2,ooo.oo.
Council discussion regarding the location of this intersection in proximity to
the Fire Station ensued, and Mr. Paul Singer explained the various pedestrian
crossing signalization techniques and alternative locations for the crosswalk
itself. It was noted during discussion that the pedestrian crosswalk at Palais
receives a much heavier use as it is on route to the Loara High School and some
consideration was given to placement of a signal at this crosswalk, or at a
crosswalk established between the High School and Library location to serve both
the Loara High School and the Euclid Branch Library, Mr. Singer indicated the
Palais crosswalk would be a more expensive situation as it would require signali-
zation of an intersection.
76-869
City_Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976, 1'30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that experience has proven people will continue
to cross at the spot which appears the closest to their destination, regardless
of the location of the crosswalk.
Councilman Seymour moved that a full pedestrian signal be installed at the existing
Loara High School crosswalk and that the crosswalk at the Euclid Branch Library
be removed.
Prior to a second and/or voting on the foregoing motion, Councilwoman Kaywood
pointed out that Library Board Chairman, Elizabeth Schultz, would most likely
wish to comment on this situation and suggested the matter be continued one
week to allow her to do so, whereupon Councilman Seymour agreed and withdrew
his motion.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council
continued decision on signalized pedestrian crosswalk protection at the Euclid
Branch Library to the meeting of November 30, 1976. MOTION CARRIED.
AWARD OF CONTRACTS- Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 76R-742 through
76R-745, both inclusive, for adoption, awarding the contracts for work orders as
follows in accordance with the recommendations of the City Engineer. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-742: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE
BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PER-
FORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC iM-
PROVEMENT' 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.
(Clarke Contracting Corporation - $72,236.75)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-743: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE
BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, btATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PER-
FORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IM-
PROVEMENT' MANZANITA PARK PLAY' AREA PAVING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER
NO. 794. (Sea Foamed Lightweight Concrete Inc. - $11,175.59)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-744: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE
BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PER-
FORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IM-
PROVEMENT' PHASE I DEVELOPMENT FOR CANYON SITE #1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK
ORDER NO. 882. (Goodman & Peloquin - $182,875.01)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-745: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE
BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PER-
FORMING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IM-
PROVEMENT. ARBORETUM ROAD SEWER IMPROVEMENT, S/O QUINTANA DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1262. (John T. Malloy - $7,665.00)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- None'
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-742 through 76R-745, both inclUsive, duly
passed and adopted.
76-870
City Hall.~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23_, 1976., 1-30 P.M.
PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - 1250 GPM FIRE PUMPER- BID NO. 3141: The City Manager
reported on the informal bids received for the purchase of one 1250 GPM fire
pumper and recommended acceptance of the low bid from Clark Fire Apparatus Com-
pany in the amount of $86,019.00, including tax.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the low bid
of Clark Fire Apparatus Company was accepted and purchase authorized in the amount
of $86. 019.00, including tax. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for five minutes. (2:55 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order all Council Members being
present. (3:00 p.m.)
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2840: Application of Eugene and Norma
Whitcombe, to construct an accessory structure with waiver of permitted encroach-
ments into required yards on RS-7200 zoned property located at 2714 East Carnival
Avenue was submitted together with application for exemption status from the re-
quirement to prepare an EIR.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-185 reported that
the Planning Director had determined the proposed activity falls within the
definition of Section 3.01, Class 3, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to re-
quirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is therefore, categorically
exempt from the requirement to file and EIR and further, granted Variance No.
2840 for a maximum height of 6 feet, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the property owner(s) shall obtain any necessary building permit(s)
from the City of Anaheim.
2. That there shall be no utilities provided to the proposed structure, as
stipulated to by the petitioner.
3. That the proposed accessory building shall not be used for storage 'of
commercial equipment.
4. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
Nos. 1 and 2; provided, however, that the total height of the proposed structure
shall not exceed six (6) feet and said structure shall be redesigned to eliminate
the parapet wail and shall further comply with all Building and Fire Codes.
Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed by William
D. Ehrle, Agent for the applicant and public hearing scheduled November 9, 1976,
and continued to this date at the Applicant's request.
Miss Santalahti described the location, surrounding land uses and zoning of
subject property and noted that the applicant wishes to construct a 128 square
foot utility structure in a required side yard, 8-feet from the main residence.
The utility structure would abut a six-foot block wall on the south property
line. She pointed out that the Planning Commission Resolution required that
the structure be redesigned to eliminate the parapet wall and comply with
Building and Fire Codes.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Agent wished to address the Council.
Mr. Bill Ehrle, 2211 East Romneya Drive, displayed a diagram which was prepared
to show what Mr. Whitcombe intends to do. He explained that Mr. Whitcombe
wishes to erect his utility structure with head clearance. This could be
accomplished by erecting the front of the shed seven feet high and then tapering
the roof line down so that it would not exceed six .fee t at the wall and there-
fore, would not infringe upon the neighbor~ view. He Cited that commercially
available storage sheds average eight feet high at their peek. He concluded
that the petitioner is appealing and requests modification of Condition No. 4
of the Planning Commission Resolution, which limits him to a six-foot height.
76-871
City Ha_ll, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour referred Mr. Chester Kuls, 2713 Mardi Gras Avenue, whose
property directly abuts the subject property, to the diagram and the revised
plan indicating a maximum height of seven feet at the front of the shed only
and inquired if this had any effect on his opposition to the project.
Mr. Kuls reaffirmed his opposition to the construction of the shed which would
directly abut his property line, as previously set forth at the Planning
Commission hearing, giving as reasons that- (1) The shed was under construction
without any application for building permit being made; (2) That construction of
random structures such as this downgrade the neighborhood and may affect the
resale value of his own home; (3) That the applicant might use the shed for
motorcycle storage or for commercial purposes, either of which would create
excessive noise adjacent to his bedroom area.
In conclusion, Mr. Kuls urged that the variance be denied completely and the
structure dismantled as soon as possible.
In response to Councilman Roth, Mr. Kuls stated that he would, object to any-
thing that would extend over the height of the six-foot wall between his and
Mr. Whitcombe's property.
Mr. Whitcombe stated that he had redesigned the proposed utility shed to accom-
modate his neighbor; that the side of the shed next to Mr. Kuls' property
would be only six feet high and commented that Mr. Kuls' property is at a
grade two feet lower than his which would permit another level of blocks on
the wall between the two properties.
Mr. Bill Ehrle reminded Council that after 30 minutes' discussion of the matter,
the Planning Commission saw fit to approve the variance for this structure. He
added that Mr. Whitcombe intends to use the utility shed for non-commercial
purposes, primarily for storage of lawn equipment.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Thom closed the public
hearing.
Under discussion, Councilman Seymour stated that while a variance petition for
encroachment into a side yard setback is not an unusual request and might
ordinarily be granted if there is little or no opposition from the surround-
ing neighbors, he could certainly understand Mr. Kuls opposition insofar as
the st'ructure being aesthetically offensive to him.
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA_CT REP..O.R~_'~ On motion by Councilman
Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council ratified the determina-
tion of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the Sec-
tion 3.01, Class 3, 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. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution 76R-746 for adoption, granting Variance
No. 2840 subject to the' Planning Commission's recommendations, in. dluding the
six-foot height limitation set forth in Condition No. 4 of City Planning Com-
mission Resolution No. PC76-185. Refer to Resolution Book.
~ES_0.LUTIO, N ..N.O. 76R-746' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2840.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Ka .ywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-746 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE_ .NO. 2855' Application of Bren Development Company;
Santa Ana Valley Irrig'a~:ion ComPany-; Edna, Bernardo and Jack Yorba for certain
code waivers to construct a commercial center on five acres of CL (SC) zoned
property located at the northwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial
Highway was continued to the meeting of December 7, 1976, as requested by the
applicants, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour. MOTION
CARRIED. '
76-872
Citjz Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23_,.. .1976 ~ 1'30 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2856' Application of Ida and Marion Rannow to con-
struct a produce market on the west side of Euclid Street, approximately 460 feet
south of Cerritos Avenue, on property zoned RS-A-43,000 with the following Code
waivers was submitted, together with application for exemption status from the
requirement to prepare an environmental impact report'
a. Permitted uses.
b. Minimum lot area.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC76-206, recommended
that an environmental impact report be required in conjunction with this project
and, further, denied Variance No. 2856.
Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed by Scott J.
Raymond, agent for the applicant, and public hearing scheduled this date.
The City Clerk advised that correspondence had been received and copied for the
Council from Mr. and Mrs. Jack Dales, 1726 West Cris Avenue, Anaheim, in opposi-
tion; Mr. Alfred B. Damron, Jr., 10681 Garden Grove Boulevard, Garden Grove,
92640, in opposition; and that a petition had been submitted containing approximately
109 signatures in opposition.
Miss Santalahti briefed the location of subject property and surrOunding uses.
She outlined the staff report and submitted to and considered by the City
Planning Commission and commented that the submitted plans indicate 56 parki~g spaces
to be provided with two access driveways on Euclid Street, whereas the staff
recommendation would be one driveway to be located opposite the centerline of
Cris Avenue. She related the reasons upon which the Planning Commission based
their denial.
The l-'[ayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent wished to address the Council.
Mr. Scott J. Raymond, 31802 Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, representing
Ida and Marion Rannow, owners of the property, and Mr. Herman Margulieux reviewed
the conditions recommended by the Inter-departmental Committee as listed in their
report dated October 27, 1976, and indicated that his clients are in complete
accord and agree to comply with Conditions Nos. 3 through 10. However, in connection
with Condition No. 1 which requires that they dedicate property all along the Euclid
Street and Cerritos Avenue frontage, they would agree only to dedication of property
on Euclid Street on the basis that the additional Cerritos Street dedication is not
appropriate to the Variance petition. With reference to Condition No. 2, which calls
for installation of sidewalks, curbs and gutters on both Euclid and Cerritos, they
disagree with installation of these improvements except for that portion of Euclid
Street affecting the property which is the subject of the Variance petition.
In support of the petition, Mr. Raymond cited that Euclid Street is a highly
commercial area; that in his opinion the proposed fruit stand would be more appre-
ciative to the area than the donut shop located across the street; that the applicants
are willing to provide a 20-foot planted buffer zone adjacent to the R-1 property,
as well as 80 feet of block wall along the south property line; in addition, they
would be willing to erect an 8-foot high block wall to separate the adjacent resi-
dential properties if 6-foot is considered inadequate.
In response to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Raymond indicated that they are willing to
terminate Variance No. 1949, which permitted four off-site signs and clarified that
they feel the expense involved in performing the street improvements as set forth in
Condition No. 2 far outweighs the total cost of the project in question. In addition,
he cited that the Rannow sisters still reside on their property and wish it to remain
intact.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council.
Mr. Benjamin Lujan, 1709 West Cr is Avenue, Anaheim, stated that he represents
the signers of the petition dated November 16, 1976 (approximately 109 signatures)
which was submitted to the City Council prior to the publid hearing, In support of
76-873
cit~_Hall_, Anah_eim,_ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976~ 1'30 P.M.
his opposition to the granting of Variance No. 2856, Mr. Lujan cited the configura-
tion of streets in the immediate area, noting that there is only one entry and
one exit for the adjacent tract of approximately 100 homes, one of these being on
Cr~s Avenue almost immediately opposite the proposed location of the fruit stand;
that traffic is congested on Euclid Street without a produce market; and that the
majority of the people living in the immediate area feel this fruit stand would
be detrimental to the safety and welfare of the entire neighborhood. He commented
that even with a 6-foot wall to separate his property from the fruit stand, he would
still be able to view the entire operation from his window.
Mr. Lujan questioned whether the litigation pertaining to the fruit stand operation
had been settled and was informed that it was still pending and would not be directly
involved with the outcome of this Variance petition.
With reference to Mr. Lujan's question regarding the EIR status of the project,
Mayor Thom advised that the Council has received two conflicting recommendations, one
from the Planning Commission indicating they feel there is a need for an environmental
impact report and one from City staff recommending that a negative declaration status
be approved, and the City Council would have to determine which of these recommenda-
tions it deems suitable in this instance.
Mr. Lujan read into the record a letter from Mr. Alfred B. Damron, Jr., 10681
Garden Grove Boulevard, Garden Grove, California 92640, in opposition to Variance
No. 2856. (Said letter on file in the record of Variance No. 2856)
Councilman Seymour ascertained from Mr. Lujan that since the time he had met with
him to discuss this application, at which time Mr. Lujan was agreeable to the
re-establishment of this business provided that the applicant would install an 8-foot
fence on the south property line; would provide a 20-foot landscaped buffer zone, and
that buildings be set back in accordance with City codes; and that curbs, gutters and
sidewalks and appropriate dedication on Euclid Street be provided; he had changed his
mind regarding the proposal.
Mr. R. L. Genther, 1584 Cris~ Avenue, Anaheim, stated his disappointment with functions
of the City in general, noting that when he moved to his present home fifteen years
ago, he was assured the entire area between Cerritos Avenue and Katella would remain
residential. He commented that a 20-year lease for a commercial operation such as
this is only the first step towards commercialization of the area.
Mr. Jack Dales, 1727 West Cris Avenue, Anaheim, expressed the opinion that this
re-established fruit stand would be operated as it was in the past.
Mrs. Eleanor Lujan, 1709 West Cris Avenue, Anaheim, stated that complaints regard-
ing the fruit stand operation began when Mr. Margulieux took over the operation and
the volume of business increased. She objected to the proposal under which the
applicants would improve with sidewalks, curbs and gutters only that property adjacent
to the proposed fruit stand site, inasmuch as this is a hazardous street for pedes-
trians, of which many are children traveling to and from a number of schools in the
area. Further, she pointed out that there is no traffic signal on Euclid between
Cerritos and Katella to assist a pedestrian attempting to cross Euclid Street.
Mrs. Alvin Kinsell, 1726 West Cris Avenue, Anaheim, stated that she has lived in
the area since 1958 and that the operation of the fruit stand in the past has caused
many problems, has been unsightly at times, and these facts should be carefully
considered by Council prior to voting on this issue.
In rebuttal, Mr. Scott Raymond commented that there were previously submitted peti-
tions containing signatures,numbering in the thousands,of people who wished the
fruit stand to remain open.
In response to comments from the audience, Mayor Thom remarked that the Council is
cognizant of the fact that the thousands of signatures referred to by Mr. Raymond
were largely signatures of people not living in the immediate area.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Mr. Hopkins suggested that the condition requiring ultimate dedication of right-of-way
on both Euclid and Cerritos be amended to read that deeds previously submitted to the
City of Anaheim in February of 1973, and which have been the subject of litigation,
be re-executed.
76-874
City _Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES_-_November 23~_ ~ 1'30 P.M.
Under Council discussion of the proposal, Councilman Seymour stated that while he
is inclined to support the re-establishment of this business operation, he is also
strongly of the opinion that if certain requirements for public improvements are not
met, he would not support the Variance.
Councilman Seymour thereupon set forth the following conditions which he felt to be
imperative to the approval of Variance No. 2856:
1. That the City Attorney and Mr. Raymond negotiate settlement of present pending
litigation.
2. That an 8-foot fence be constructed on the southerly property line to include
four lots along Cris Avenue upon written consent of the owners.
3. That a 20-foot landscaped buffer area be provided along the southerly property
line.
4. That ultimate right-of-way dedication be required on both Euclid and Cerritos,
as set forth in the Inter-departmental conditions; however, the street improvements
be required on Euclid Avenue only from Cerritos south to the southern extremity of
subject property, and that these improvements include curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
5. That the property be developed with a single access point aligned with Cris
Avenue, as recommended by the City Traffic Engineer.
6. Re-execution of the deeds previously submitted for right-of-way along Euclid
and Cerritos.
Mr. Raymond, on behalf of his clients, indicated that they would readily agree with
Conditions 1 through 3, but that it would be difficult for the property owners to
live with the street improvement requirement in front of their residence.
Councilman Seymour stressed that he felt this to be one of the most important
issues, in so far as public health and safety are concerned, and that he could not
approve the requested use if these dangerous pedestrian conditions were to. continue.
Following brief discussion, Mr. Raymond stated that he could agree to all conditions
proposed by Councilman Seymour, although reluctantly on the street improvements, and
further requested that the City Attorney be dissuaded from any further legal actions
he might be considering in conjunction with the continuing litigation.
In discussing termination of pending litigation between the City and Mr. Margulieux
and/or the Rannow sisters, Mr. Slaughter recommended that in view of assurances
given previously and not carried through, he would recommend that this litigation
continue util such time as there is substantial compliance with requirements of the
Variance, and in addition, the City should shortly receive a judgment in the amount
of $470.00 for court costs.
An alternate site for the fruit stand at the northwest corner of Cerritos and Euclid
was mentioned several times during the public hearing, but Mr. Raymond indicated
that this would not be at all acceptable to the property owners. He indicated that
they intend to relocate the fruit stand in approximately the same location, but
further to the west to allow for proper setbacks.
Following additional discussion during which Mr. Paul Singer corroborated that it is
his recommendation that only a single access point aligned with Cris Avenue be
permitted for subject property, as this would be the safest way to handle the particu-
lar traffic situation; and it was clarified for Mr. Lujan that the revised plans
which are under consideration are those which provide for a 20-foot buffer zone and
56 parking spaces, and one access drive on Euclid Street.
Councilman Roth assured homeowners in the audience that, should this project be
approved, the City Council is determined that all conditions imposed will be met
before the applicant may reopen his business, as these requirements must be fulfilled
prior to final building and zoning inspections.
76-875
City. H_all, ._Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23, 1976, 1'.30 .p...M.
In response to additional comments from the audience regarding the parking problems
generated in the surrounding residential area due to the previous operation of the
fruit stand, it was pointed out that although the spaces to be provided have been
reduced to 56 because of the 20-foot buffer zone requirement, this is still in excess
of the City's requirement and, in addition, Mr. Raymond stipulated that there would
be no off-site employee parking from this operation.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 76R-747 for adoption terminating Variance
No. 1949.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-747' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH VARIANCE NO. 1949, AND DECLARING
RESOLUTION NO. 68R-166 NULL AND VOID.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-747 duly passed and adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - 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 and i~ therefore, exempt from the requirement
to prepare an environmental impact report. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 76R-748 granting Variance No. 2856, subject
to the Inter-departmental Committee conditions, as amended, to include conditions
and stipulations thereto set forth during this public hearing, as follows'
1. That the owner(s) of subject property, said property currently being a portion
of an approximately 14-acre parcel of land, shall deed to the City of Anaheim a
strip of land 53 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Euclid Street
from Cerritos Avenue to the southerly boundary of subject property and a strip of
land 45 feet in width along the southerly side of Cerritos Avenue from Euclid Street
to a point approximately 985 feet westerly of Euclid Street for Street widening
purposes.
2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Euclid Street
from Cerritos Avenue to the southerly boundary of subject property, including
preparation of improvement plans and installation of improvements such as curbs and
gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facilities or other appur-
tenant work, shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accord-
ance with standard plans and specifications on file in the Office of the City
Engineer; that street lighting facilities along Euclid Street 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.
3. That the owner(s) of the 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.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans
on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as r.equired and determined to
be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of structural
framing.
6. That the subject property shall be served by underground utilities,
7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory
to the City Engineer.
76-876
City ..... Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES.- .Nove~be.r .2..3._, 19.76,...1'_3~0 P.M.
8. In the event that the subject property is to be divided for the purpose of sale,
lease, or financing, a parcel map to record the approved division of subject pro-
perty shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be recorded
in the Office of the Orange County Recorder.
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 all mechanical equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the
sound buffered from adjacent residential properties.
11. That any proposed parking area lighting shall be downlighted from view and shall
be directed away from the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the
area.
12. That an 8-foot high masonry wall shall be constructed along the south property
line with written consent of affected property owners, provided, however, if property
owners do not agree to the 8-foot block wall, a 6-foot block wall shall be con-
structed on that property, and a 6-foot high chain link fence, entirely interwoven
with vinyl strips, shall be constructed along the west property lines.
13. That a 20-foot wide landscaped buffer shall be provided along the southerly
property line.
14. That ingress and egress from subject property to Euclid Street shall be restricted
to one driveway, aligned opposite Cris Avenue, as approved by the City Traffic
Engineer.
15. That the City Attorney and Mr. Scott Raymond negotiate for settlement of pending
litigation between the City of Anaheim and Mr. Herman Margulieux, and/or the Rannow
sisters.
16. That deeds for dedication of property as outlined in Condition No. 1 hereinabove,
which were previously submitted, be re-executed.
17. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Revision No. 1 of
Exhibit No. 1 and Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3, provided, however, the a.forementioned
requirements specified in Condition Nos. 12 and 14 shall be met.
18. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, and 16, above mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior
to the time the building permit is issued, or within a period of one (1) year from
the date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further .time as the Planning
Commission and/or City Council may grant.
19. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 17, above mentioned., shall
be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-748- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2856.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood
ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBERS' None ~'
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-745 duly passed and adopted.
RECESS' By general consent the Council recess for five-minutes. (4'55 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS- Mayor Thom called the meeting to order all Council members being
present; (5'00 p.m.)
ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL' Mr. William Da ly, the City's delegate to
the Orange County Health Planning C'o~ncil reported on the designation of that body
as the health iplanning agency for. Orange County and ~commented on the many efficiencies
and cost savings that this should bring about.
76-877
City Hall, Anaheim, Califo..rni~.- CO. UNCI_L MINUTES ,November 23, 197.6, 1;30 P.M,
With Council concurrence, it was determined that Mr. Daly would make reports to
the Council on the activities of the OCHPC on a quarterly basis with updates more
often as necessary.
SISTER CITY PROGRAM- MITO CITY JAPAN' Mr. William Daly gave a brief verbal re-
port on the highlights of the recent trip by the Anaheim delegation to Mito, Japan,
as part of the Anaheim-Mito Sister City Program. He reported that Molly McGee of
the Anaheim Union High School District Board of Trustees served as Official Historian
and photographer for the trip and will present slide lectures. In addition, he
noted that a group from Mito will be visiting Anaheim during tile month of December
and the Anaheim Kiwanis Club will be hosting a luncheon at which the Sister City
papers will be ratified. Mr. Daly cordially invited the Council Members to attend
the luncheon which will be held Tuesday, December 21, 1976, in the Grand Ballroom
of the Disneyland Hotel from 11'30 a.m. to 12'45 p.m.
THEATRICAL DINNER HOUSES, INTERNATIONALE PROPOSAL.. On motion by Councilman Roth,
seconded by Councilman Kott, the proposal to lease City-owned property located
at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street was further
continued at the request of the Applicant to the Council meeting of December 28,
1976. MOTION CARRIED.
SOLICITATION PERMIT - AMERICAN NATIONAL VOLLEYBALL ~ssoCIATION. On motion by
_ .
Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the app~'i~Cation submitted by
American National Volleyball AssOciation for a permit to sell tickets door to door
for exhibition Volleyball matches through December 25, 1976, was denied. MOTION
CARRIED.
SIGN PERMIT NO. 1511 - EXTENSION OF TIME: (Mr. David E. Ryan, Penta Pacific Pro-
perties, 918 Town and Country Road, Orange, 92668, applicant) On motion by
Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council granted a one
year extension of time expiring November 23, 1977, for Sign Permit No. 1511, said
sign located at 1100 North Gilbert Street, subject to the posting of an additional
cash deposit of $200 to guarantee removal of the sign, as recommended by ~he Plan-
ninz Department. MOTION CARRIED.
T_RACT 8~09, REVI.SION 2 - SPECIFIC PLaiNS. (Butler Housing Corporation, developer)
Specific plot plans, floor plans and elevations for Tentative Map Tract No. 8409,
Revision 2, which would establish 57 RS - 7 200 (S C) zoned lots on property located on
the east side of Anaheim Hills Road, south of Santa Aha Canyon Road, were submitted
together with report from the Zoning Division.
Councilman Seymour advised that he is the sales agent for the development immediately
adjacent to Tract 8409 and would, therefore, excuse himself from discussion and/or
voting on matters relating to this property, as he may have a p'ossible- conflict of
interest. Councilman Seymour left the Council Chambers. (5'35 P.M.)
Miss Santalahti commented that due to the fact that this tract was orig'tmally approved
prior to adoption by the City of a Trails Element to the General Plan, and was sub-
ject to a generalized condition regarding provision for a riding and hiking trails
easement, it is now recommended by the Trails Committee that an easement on the SAVI
canal be retained, but the trail not be established until the property to the north
is developed, at which time the easement could be extended along the east side of
Anaheim Hills Road to intersect with the Santa Aha Canyon Road trail. The trail
along the east:~'ly boundary of Tract No. 8609 would be developed.
Councilwoman Kaywood questioned whether there has been any consideration-, given to.
alleviating the potentially hazardous situation of aligning Arboret'um Road to intersect
with an interior street, and it was noted that the City Engineer has been working with
the developer on that problem.
Mr. James Stroop, 427 Weik Avenue, Bell, California, owner of peoperty located at
20246 Santa Ana Canyon Road, wished t:o place on record his objections to the fact
that eleven to twelve property owners in the vicinity have roadway easement rights
to property contained within the northerly portion of Tract No. 8/400, and that h~
and other.property owners oppose the requested abandonment of their easement rights.
He further renmrked that the existing road is only 54 feet wide, whereas a 64-foot
width is the City's standard. He explained that an aleernative mean8 of access to
76-878
City Hall., .A. naheim, ~Ca!iforn. i~a - C...0UN_CIL MINUTES -...N0vem. ber 23, 1976,_ !:.30 ~..M,,
these properties would be available by means of a roadway connecting to Quintana
Drive, which would allow them to travel out to Santa Ana Canyon Road.
Mr. Maddox read a letter from the title company indicating that the roadway easement
east of Tract No. 8409 has been used by prescription onlY, and will be moved to the
northerly 25 feet of Lot Nos. 1, 20 and 21 of Tract No. 8409. Further, that the
45-foot road easement is shown only on records of survey maps, and is not conveyed
to the present users by any document of record. Court opinions consent to the moving
of such prescriptive easements as long as access is not interrupted to the users of
same. It was pointed out that this road easement is included in three lots of
Tract No. 8409 and that no structures would be permitted which would interfere with
these roadway rights.
Mr. Maddox further pointed out that there is a proposed tract east of Arboretum Road
which would provide the connection to Quintana Drive across the old SAVI canal,
directly to Santa Aha Canyon Road, thereby providing these property owners the
alternate access mentioned earlier.
Mr. Weik reiterated that he felt the approval of Tract No. 8409 denies certain of
his property rights.
~: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Kott, the City Council
approved specific plot plans, floor plans and elevations for Tract No. 8409, Revision
No. 2, as submitted. To this motion, Councilwoman Kaywood voted "No". Councilman
Seymour abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
CONDITIONAL USE. P.ERMIT N0. 14.!5 - TERMINATION._ In accordance with the request of
John W. Huffman, Butler Housing Corporation, to comply with Condition No. 17 of
Tract No. 8409, Revision No. 2, Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 76R-749 for
adoption, terminating Conditional Use Permit No. 1415. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO._76. R-749i A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1415 AND
DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-459 NULL AND VOID.
Roll Call Vote.
AYES. Kaywood, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' None
ABSTAINED- Seymour
ABSENT' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-749 duly passed and adopted.
~jlqAL MAP. TRA~T. NO. 8409. - REVISION_ NO. 2' Developer, Butler Housing Corporation;
tract located east side of Anahiim Hills Road, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road, con-
taining 57 RS-7200(SC) zoned lots.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Kott, the proposed subdivision,
together with its design and improvement was found to be consistent with the City's
General Plan and the City Council approved Final Map Tract No. 8409, subject to the
Mayor and City Clerk signing the tract map as~.!owners of vested interest, as recommended
by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated November 22, .1976. .To this motion Council-
woman Kaywood voted "No". Councilman Seymour abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour returned to Council Chamber. (5'45 P.M.)
CO.NSENT..CALENDAR ,ITEMS. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom,
the following actions were authori~.ed in accordance with report~ and recommendations
furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda'
1. AMUSEMENT DEVIC. E.S., DINNER-DANCE. AND P_U_BLIC_ DANCE PERMITS. The following permits
were granted subject to the recommendations of the Chief' of` Police.
a. Amusement Devices Permit to allow two pool tables, one pong table, one cigarette
machine and two ~inball machines at Yhe Flowing Well, 405 South Brookhurst. (Marvin
Saver, applicant)
· 76-879
City Ha%..1, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November. 23, 1976~ 1:30 P.M.
b. Amusement Devices Permit to allow one tennis video game table and one toss ball
game at Pappys, 1029-31 North Magnolia. (Woodrow W. Johnson, applicant)
c. Dinner-Dance Permit to allow dancing 8:30 P.M. to 1:30 A.M., Sunday through
Saturday, at the Sheraton Anaheim, 1015 West Ball Road. (Bob Van' Bergen, applicant)
d. Public Dance Permit to allow the Sabor Car Club to hold a public dance at
Martin Community Hall, La Palms Park, Friday, November 26, 1976 between 9:00 P.M. and
1:00 A.M. (Eliseo A. Acosta, applicant)
_2: CORRESPONDENCE- The following correspondence was ordered received and filed'
a. Notice of ~ublic hearing set by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California on December 13, 1976 at 10'00 A.M. in the Anaheim Public Library regarding
an application by The Coordinators to operate a sightseeing tour between Anaheim and
Newport Beach; and application by Gray Line Tours Company to extend operations as a
passenger-stage corporation.
b. Monthly reports for the month of October, 1976 - Police and Customer Service
Division.
c. Canyon Area General Planning Task Force minutes of November 9, 1976.
d. Community Redevelopment Commission minutes of October 27, 1976.
e. Project Area Committee minutes of October 26, 1976.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUT!0.N NO. 76R-7.50 THROUGH_76R-75_2. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution
No. 76R-750 through 76R-752, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the
reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council~ Member and as
listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda.
_RESOL~TION N.Q. 76R-750 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DE~DS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Henry M.
Deutsch, et ux.; Anna Harner; Phillip Kouri, et ux.; Frances E. Barnes' Carmine F.
Esposito, et ux.; Olga Fort, et al.; Edward H. Hernandez, et ux.; A. W. Eberhard,
et ux.; Jessie W. Bonkosky; Francisco L. Garcia, et ux.' Neoma Curran; Dominga
Carreon, et al.; Oswald C. Ulrich, et ux.; James C. Smith, et ux; Maggie Inez Rossi;
Nicholasa V. Veyne; Alex C. Martinez; Andres Olivares; Peter A. Brocnik, et ux; Consuelo
Delgadillo; Alvina C. Luce; Reyes Aros Valencia, et ux' Don A. Morrissey; Don A. Morriss,
Don A. Morrissey; Don A. Morrissey; John P. Muse; Robert E. Inge Realty Trust)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-751- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FU~ISHING OF ALL PLANTi 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 COM-
PLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT' SOUTH STREET STREET IMPROVEMENT,
W/O OAKSTONE WAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NOS. 780-B & 871. (Sully-Miller
Contracting Company)
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-752' 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 I~PROvEMENT, TO WIT' TWILA REID ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 812. (Arrow Builders, Inc.)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 76R-750 through 76R-752, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
ORDINANCES' Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3620 for adoption. Refer to
Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3620' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SUBSECTION
16.16. 030. 020 OF TITLE 16, CHAPTER 16.16, AND ADDING NEW SUBSECTIONS 16.16.030. 020
AND 16.16.040.690 TO TITLE 16, CHAPTER 16.16 RELATING TO FIRE ZONES. (Fire Zone 2)
76-880
City.. Hall, Anaheim,. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23~ 1976 ~ 1:30 P.M,
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3620 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3621- Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3621 for adoption. Refer
to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3621' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AbfENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-52, RM-2400)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEIiBERS · None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3621 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3622' Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3622 for adoption. Refer
to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3622' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-30(7), RS-7200)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3622 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3623' Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3623 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3623' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-50(1), RS-HS-10,000)
Roll Call Vote-
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT- COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3623 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3624' Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 3624 for adoption. Refer
to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3624: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-55(2), CL) "
Roll Call Vote'
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS- Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3624 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANcE*NO. 3625' Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3625 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
76-881
City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - November 2.3~ 1976~ 1:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 3625: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-46(6), RS-A-43,000, Red Gum-
Coronado Annexation)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3625 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NOS. 3626 THROUGH 3630: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos. 3626
through 3630, both inclusive, for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 3626: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-10(1) CH)
ORDINANCE NO. 3627: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(74) CR)
ORDINANCE NO. 3628: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(77) CR)
ORDINANCE NO. 3629: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-47(16) ML)
ORDINANCE NO. 3630: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (75-76-35 RM-1200)
THE CHURCH OF ANAHEIM - POSSIBLE BUILDING AND ZONING CODE VIOLATIONS: Mr. Keith
Huffman, 1924 Cheateau, submitted a petition signed by 275 Anaheim residents who
are seriously concerned about the repeated Building and Zoning Code violations
observed in the single-family residential neighborhood located in the area roughly
bounded by Euclid Street, Ball Road, Broadway and almost to the west of Brookhurst
Street. They attribute the noticable increase in traffic congestion, parking pro-
blems, noise and higher density population to the establishment of The Church of
Anaheim located at West Ball Road.
Mr. Huffman explained that there are numerous other churches in the immediate
vicinity but none have generated the difficulties encountered in the reSidential
neighborhood as a result of The Church of Anaheim. He remarked that there have
been home additions and enclosure of patios, conversion of garages without City
building permits and that there are a number of unrelated individuals living in
the homes and apartments. He cited that a convention held by the Church last
August attracted thousands of participants and that this kind of traffic and
density should not be inflicted upon a single-family residential area, but should
be held at a facility designed for large groups such as the Anaheim Convention
Center. He urged that the City Council look into these problems and enforce the
Building and Zoning Codes.
Mrs. Ray, 1927 Chateau, added that she has attempted to report these violations to
both the BuildingDivision'and Planning Department without satisfaction. She stressed
that she felt these people to be dedicated to their religion and that the neighbors
are not opposed to the Church per se but to what the Church is doing to their
neighborhood.
Councilman Seymour moved that the City Council direct that: (1) The City contact
The Church of Anaheim and ask for their cooperation relative to the holding of
conclaves, conventions or regional meetings in a more suitable location elsewhere
in the City; (2) That the City Attorney research existing City ordinances to determine
if there is any regulation which would permit the City to take a legal action to
preclude this type of activity; (3) That the Zoning Enforcement Officer investigate
all complaints of illegal structure additions and process these in the normal fashion;
(4) That the Zoning Enforcement Officer investigate any and all complaints relative
to occupancy violations; (5) That further the City Clerk was instructed to respond
to all those signators on the petitions at the appropriate time with a copy of the
report as to what has transpired. Councilman Thom seconded the motion, and added
that he felt it should have high priority and immediate attention. MOTION CARRIED.
76-88'2
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 23~ 1976~ 1'30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that part of the difficulty experienced by com-
plainants in obtaining follow-up and investigation is due to the fact that
the City Planning Department has been understaffed and overworked for two
years now.
HOUSING REPAIR PROGRAM: Councilman Seymour reported that pursuant to a com-
plaint he had received regarding the City Housing Repair Program, following a
thorough investigation, he considers the Program to be a success and the problems
minimal. He pointed out, however, that he did have concern regarding the capital
allocation for materials, of up to $4,000 maximum, and would prefer some action
be taken to preclude speculative activity with resultant profit to be gained by
the seller due to repairs completed under this program.
Councilman Seymour therefore moved that the Housing Director, Rosario Mattessich,
be instructed to report back to the Council with a recommendation
relative to the possibility of placement of a lien against these properties
in the amount spent on improvement materials and further as a benefit to others,
when the property is sold,that this money be returned to the same Housing Repair
Program Fund. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
HUMANE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF ANIMALS: Councilman Seymour introduced Miss
Laurie Allison who briefly addressed the City Council regarding the current
method used by the Orange County Animal Shelter to dispose of unwanted animals.
She polled the Council for their opinions and briefly outlined her concerns
that animals be treated in a more humane manner.
At the conclusion of her presentation, Councilman Seymour suggested that Miss
Allison, now that she has had the benefit of the Council's thoughts, put to-
gether a report encompassing her opinions and beliefs, and submit same for
Council review as this could then be forwarded to the County Board of
Supervisors which is the local Agency having jurisdiction over animal control
services.
HALLOWEEN FESTIVAL COMMITTEE: Councilman Roth referred to correspondence re-
ceived by the City Council from the Halloween Festival Committee and following
brief discussion it was determined that Mayor Thom would obtain a list of the
officers of the former Committee and request them to meet informally with the
City Council prior to a regular Tuesday meeting to discuss joint participation
in future ttalloween Festivals.
NEOCCS CITIZEN PANEL: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman
Seymour, the City Council appointed Janice Hall, President of the Westridge
Homeowners Association, 545 Tumbleweed Drive, and Mary Dinndorf, President
of the Santa Aha Canyon Improvement Association, 131 South La Paz Street, to
the North East Orange County Circulation Study (NEOCCS) Citizen Panel. MOTION
CARRIED.
RECESS- Councilman Roth moved to recess to the Fremont Junior High School,
608 Lincoln Avenue, at 7'00 p.m. Councilman Kott seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED. (6-40 P.M.)
76-883
Fremont Junior High School~ Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL MINUTP~§
November 23.., 1976, 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: Malcolm Slaughter
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Norman Priest
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR: Knowlton Fernald
ASSOCIATE PLANNER: G. Coulter Hooker
ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Bill Cunningham
SPECIAL COUNSEL: Eugene B. Jacobs
ASSISTANT SPECIAL COUNSEL: Bruce Balmer
FINANCIAL CONSULTANT: Gary Jones
CONSULTANT: Vicki Endow
PRESENT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth
and Thom
ABSENT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS: None
PRESENT: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS: Fry, Oseid, Bay,
Dinndorf and Moss
ABSENT: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS: Morris and Mendez
AFTER RECESS- After recess, Mayor Thom called to order 'a joint meeting of the
Anaheim City Council, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, and the Community
Redevelopment Commission, for the purpose of holding a public hearing before
the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency on the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelop-
ment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha and the subsequent Environmental
Impact Report for the Amendment.
Acting Chairman Moss called the Redevelopment Commission to order.
Before proceeding, Councilman Roth stated that prior to taking office as a
Councilman in April, 1976, he disclosed that he owned property at 1000 East
Lincoln Avenue, which is located within the boundaries of Project Alpha, in
partnership for approximately 10 years. Due to this fact and upon advice of
legal counsel, Councilman Roth abstained from discussion and voting on all
matters to be considered at the joint meeting.
Councilman Roth left the auditorium (7'45 P.M.)
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA AND SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 189'
A joint public hearing by the Ci'ty Council, the Redevelopment-Agency and the
Community Redevelopment Commission to consider the proposed Second Amendment
Lo the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha and subsequent
Environmental Impact Report No. 189.
Mayor Thom declared this the time and place for public hearing regarding the
proposed Second Amendment to Redevelopment Project Alpha as specified in the
notice of public hearing published and mailed pursuant to the California Re-
development law, noting the record contains the following documents'
1. Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha as adopted July 19, 1973,
and amended July 20, 1976.
2. Proposed Second Amendment as changed to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelop-
ment Project Alpha.
3. Report to City Council on the Second Amendment, as changed, to the Redevelop-
plan including in separate documents' A) The report and recommendation of
the Planning Commission. B) The summary of activities and 'information pre-
sented to the Project Area Committee. C) The subsequent environmental impact
report for the proposed amendment.
4. The report and recommendation of the Project Area Committee.
Mayor Thom announced that a written Agenda would govern the course of the
meeting and that all persons who wished to speak would be afforded the oppor-
tunity to do so, having been duly sworn in by the City Clerk; white forms were
distributed to all persons who. wished to indicate their approval, opposition,
or to take no position on the proposed amendment and subsequent environmental
impact report, upon which it was requested that they also indicate whether
or not they wished to speak at the hearing.
76-884
Fremont Junior Hish School, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES
November 23, 1976~ 7' 30 P.M.
Al! staff members and consultants who would participate in the presentation
and/or discussion of the proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan were
duly sworn in by the City Clerk.
Mr. Norman Priest, Executive Director, stated that while he was fairly new
with the Agency and the City, he had reviewed the record of Project Alpha
carefully and in his experience had found very few such projects so well
scrutinized and so thoroughly brought to the public. As a result the pro-
posed Second Amendment was the best thinking of staff, as well as input of
those people who attended the long series of public meetings.
Mr. Knowlton Fernald, Community Development Director, emphasized for the
people in the audience that the proposed amendment did not make all of
the decisions that needed to be made over the next several years, but it set
long range goals relative to general land use and circulation patterns. He
indicated it was the framework for the Redevelopment Project as it would be
implemented during the years to come.
Mr. Fernald emphasized that to get to this point, citizens of the City and
particularly of the Project area were involved in the process in every way
possible which process included private developers, property owners, residents
and businessmen.
He explained that subsequent to the submittal of a concept plan in December, 1975,
the subject plan was modified particularly in view of the City Council's state-
ments to redirect the process and goals of the Agency in response to input from
citizens.
Mr. Fernald elaborated on the public forums that followed and the resultant
copsensus plan presented by the Project Area Committee (PAC) which plan was
documented at the direction of the Redevelopment Commission in order to bring
it through a series of public hearings. That same consensus plan was also
prepared as an amendment to the City's General Plan and subsequently approved
by the City Council on November 16, 1976.
Mr. Fernald stated that the proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendment being con-
sidered this evening was reviewed and recommended by the Project Area Committee
as well as the City Planning Commission. The proposed plan also included modi-
fication in the text of the plan to bring it up to date in that later hearings
would be necessary to finalize both public and private projects and to deal
with matters such as precise road alignments.
Relative to the subsequent EIR, Mr. Fernald stated that it examined the environ-
mental impact of the Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan Alpha and that the draft
subsequent. Environmental Impact Report dated September, 1976, was prepared in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and circulated to more
than 26 persons, organizations and public agencies for review. He indicated
that subsequent comments received were outlined in Chapter 15, 16 and 17 of the
subsequent EIR.
Mr. Fernald then briefed the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, Redevelopment
Commission and the audience of the summary portion of the subsequent Environ-
mental Impact Report as well as all of the proposed amendments to the Redevelop-
ment Plan for Project Alpha, Amendments 1 through 14, contained in part II,
"Report to the City Council on the Second Amendment as changed to the Redevelop-
ment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha" dated October 6, 1976. For reference,
he also showed slides of the location of the Redevelopment Project illustrating
the two non-contiguous areas involved but stated the primary concern at this
meeting was the downtown area surrounded by Harbor Boulevard, Broadway, Cypress
and East Streets.
In conclusion, Mr. Fernald emphasized that in light of having spent a great
deal of time and effort on the development of the proposed plan with extensive
citizen participation in its design, they were ready to move on the implementation
phase upon favorable consideration.
76-885
Fremont Junior High School, Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL MINUTES
November 23~ 1976, 7' 30 P.M.
The Mayor called for oral comments, statements and questions on the subsequent
Environmental Impact Report for the Amendment.
Prior to each individual giving testimony, they were duly sworn in by the City
Clerk.
William S. Woods, 1400 Dana Place, Fullerton, Chairman of the Project Area
Committee (PAC), explained that his group consisted of 16 volunteer citizens
established as a committee by the Redevelopment law to serve as an intermediary
between residents, tenants and business people in the Project area. He indicated
that PAC had diligently studied the many ramifications of Redevelopment in
Anaheim and considered each of its facets individually at the meeting in which
they voted on the proposed amendments, 11 members were present and in each
instance the vote was 11 to nothing in favor of the amendments.
The Mayor then called for written communications received in favor of adoption
of the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan fo.r Redevelopment
Project Alpha'
1. Mr. John Flocken, President, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, 130 South Lemon
Street - letter dated November 23, 1976.
2. Mr. Larry King, 218 South Florette Street, representing the Ana-Modjeska
Players.
Although Mr. King did not wish to speak, he noted in his comments that the
Second Amendment on anti-bias made no reference to either the handicapped or
the aged, both of which were on the bias exclusion lists of other such projects.
The Mayor then called for those in favor of the proposed Second Amendment to
the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha who wished
to address the joint meeting and the following individuals gave all comments
in favor of the proposed amendment: Mr. David S. Collins, 952 Flore Street,
Anaheim; Lt. Col E. F. Rhoads (RET.), 122 North Vine Street, Anaheim.
Both Mr. Collins and Mr. Rhoades were emphatic in stating that it was time
to move forward on the project with zest, zeal and great dispatch.
Mayor Thom called for written communications received in opposition to the
adoption of the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelop-
ment Project Alpha- Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Edwards, 1107 W. West Avenue No. F
Fullerton, representing the Church of His Holy Presence - Grace Chapel (Sout~
Gate, California); Mr. Adolph Philip Miller, 1859 Random Drive, Anaheim.
Mayor Thom called for all statements and questions by persons opposed to the
adoption of the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Rede-
velopment Project Alpha and the following addressed the Council: Mr. Edwin
Peterson, 526 West Chestnut Street, Apt. A, a tenant and resident in the area
representing Redwood Realty; Mr. George H. Lange, with a business address at
106 North Claudina Street, Anaheim, representing property owners in the Pro-
ject Alpha area of Anaheim; Dr. John Mullender, 1730 Roanoke, Placentia,
Associate Superintendent of the Placentia Unified School District; Mr. John
J. Murphy, Rutan and Rucker, 401 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, repre-
senting the Placentia Unified School District.
Dr. Mullender stated that he was instructed by the Board of Education of the
Placentia Unified School District to present a statement and ask Mr. John
Murphy, legal counsel, also representing the District, to read the statement.
Mr. Murphy indicated thati the Board of Education of the Placentia .Unified
School District wished to emphasize that it did not take issue with Anaheim's
efforts to rehabilitate the downtown area, but the only issue and position it
requested be conveyed was the manner proposed to finance rehabilitation.
Mr. Murphy read the prepared statement, (on file in the City Clerk's Office)
the substance of which was the fact that approximately 80% of the tax increment
funds going to Project Alpha thus-far had come'from the northeast industrial
section which lies almost entirely within the Placentia Unified School District,
thereby resulting in a tax increase for the property owners of PUSD. The
School District was interested in finding solutions to what they considered to
be a dilemma.
76-886
Fremont Junior High School, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES
November 23~ 1976, 7:30 P.M.
In closing, Mr. Murphy stated for the record, opposition to the further°
implementation of Project Alpha so long as it included the northeast industrial
section of Anaheim and urged deferral of the Second'Amendment until either an agree-
ment between the Agency and the District was reached or until the Second Amend-
ment was revised to exclude from Alpha the territory within the Placentia
Unified School District.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak.
Mr. Thomas Catterson, 856 North West Street, Anaheim, stated he was concerned
that the Redevelopment Plan would be successful in bringing about more smog
and pollution than now existed. He noted that a great deal of effort was made
to inform the people of the Redevelopment Plan and he was surprised that such
an effort was not made simpler by putting the matter on the ballot so the
electorate cohld vote on it.
There being no further written or oral comments received in favor, opposition
or taking no position on the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for
Redevelopment Project Alpha and subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 189,
the Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
Acting Chairman Moss declared the public hearing before the Community Redevelop-
ment Commission closed.
The Mayor asked if any Agency Members wished to ask questions or needed further
information or clarification of the final subsequent EIR; there was no response.
ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. ARA76-38: Councilman Seymour offered
Resolution No. ARA76-38 for adoption, certifying the subsequent EIR relative to
the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. ARA76-38: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA AND DE-
TERMINING THAT THE AMENDMENT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT OR SUBSTANTIAL
ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. (EIR No. 189) '~
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS: Roth
The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA76-38 duly passed and adopted.
The Mayor asked if any Members of the Council or Redevelopment Commission
desired to ask questions or neededffu~ther information or clarification of
the proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan or subsequent EIR or
related documents.
Mr. Priest suggested that it would be appropriate to respond to certain
questions raised and that he and Mr. Fernald would speak to them from an
operational standpoint, and Mr. Jacobs and Mr. Hopkins from a legal stand-
point.
Relative to the question of including the provision for the aged and handi-
capped, Mr. Jacobs indicated that this was not required by law but he had seen
these categories included in other recent projects.
Mr. Priest referred to the matter of the church on Broadway which he presumed
was the one to which the people representing the Church of His Holy Presence
was speaking. He explained that discussion had been held with the Pastor and
members of the Church indicating the Agency's willingness to work with them
76-887
Fremont Junior High School, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES
November 23~ 197.6~ 7' 30 P.M.
on the assumption that the Church was structurally sound. Mr. Priest
was of the opinion that it would be possible to coordinate the matter with
the overall development.
Mr. Jacobs indicated that if the Church could not remain, it would be properly
paid for and possibly relocated so there would be no financial sacrifice as
alluded to in the comment received. He added that if it were found to be
structurally sound and remained in the area, there would be added value with
the surrounding neighborhood having been rehabilitated.
Mr. Priest spoke to the concern of both Mr. Collins and Rhoads that the Agency
should move forward as rapidly as possible. He explained that initial negotia-
tions were proceeding and that relative to Lincoln Avenue, its precise align-
ment would be going before the Planning Commission in the not too distant future.
Mr. Jacobs emphasized that the proposed changes did not require Lincoln to
be moved north or sout~ but that precise alignment would be worked out with
individual property owners and developers who might come in.
Mr. Priest indicated that relative to the comment by Mr. Lange on the use of a
parcel of property suggested to be changed from commercial to residentia~ thereby
bringing about inverse condemnation, the proposed plan specifically provided
that compatible commercial uses along Lincoln may remain in those locations
where it would be physically possible to do so. He asked that Mr. Fernald
give the background which led to the designation of the area as residential.
Mr. Fernald explained that in the concept plan, the area in question--the
vicinity of Harbor Boulevard, Lemon Street and Anaheim Boulevard--was considered
to be the one for intensive commercial development considering its location.
In the final analysi~ however, the block of residents involved expressed a
strong desire to have the areas remain residential which resulted in finding
that. determination.
Mr. Jacobs referred to the comment made by Mr. Lange concerning inverse con-
demnation and stated that if the Agency purchased the subject property, it
would be purchased as commercial property and not residential thereby necessitating
purchase at commercial prices, if the owners decided to keep th.e property and
subsequently decided to build on it, they would have to build residential.
Stewart Moss wanted it made clear that what was taking place at the meeting was
not a rezoning action. Mr. Jacobs explained, however, .that adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan would require rezoning to take place at an appropriate time.
Mr. Priest then asked Mr. Jacobs to speak to Dr. Mullender's concern dealing with
the financing of the project which essentially involved the interpre.tation of the
Redevelopment law.
Mr. Jacobs explained that subsequent to the meetings between members of the
School District, Redevelopment Agency, Council Members, Agency staff and his
staff, it was his understanding that a list of facilities was to be prepared by
the School District and submitted' to the ' Agency. He indicated there waS apparent-
].y some confusion as he was awaiting such a list before proceeding.
Both Dr. Mullender and Mr. Jacobs agreed that there was a communication gap
relative to the draft agreement to be provided by the City.
Mr. Jacobs emphasized there was no clash with the Placentia Unified School
District and while they were not totally opposed to the method of financing
the Redevelopment Project by the use of a tax increment, they wanted to be
certain it was not detrimental to them. He was confident that negotiations
were at a point where a quick solution would be found. ·
Mr. Jacobs explained that the Code Section referred to in the statement previ-
ously read by Mr. Murphy did not undercut the basis for adoption of the Project
and, in fact, broadened it. He stressed that the northeast industrial area
was not included for the sole purpose of obtaining an allocation of taxes with-
out substantial justification for inclusion. The area was included for
Code purposes. He further stated that the matter was somewhat irrelevant in
light of the first alternative suggested in the prepared statemen% which alter-
native could be worked out expeditiously as soon as the necessary data was
provided by the School District.
76-888
Fremont Junior High School~ Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTE8
November 23~ !976~ 7' 30 P.M.
Mr. Jacobs then briefly remarked on additional comments that were made' (1)
Negotiations with the shopping center people were for the purpose of ascer-
taining that the cost for such a center would be justified, (2) Under the
Redevelopment proces~ as opposed to a Federal p roces~ useful life buildings
are kept unless there is a better financial use, (3) Store front rehabilita-
tion such as being proposed in Garden Grove was not applicable in Anaheim,
(4) The project was truly a public/private contemplated situation; public
expenditures were only to the exten.t that they would bring about public/private
solutions to the problems.
Mayor Thom explained that the very clearly stated goal of the Agency, Council
and Commission was a plan flexible enough to accommodate what the private sector
could and would do relative to Redevelopment in Anaheim and that the function of
their respective bodies was to provide those tools in law in order to be able
to work with the private sector in planning an orderly redevelopment process.
He explained that working in cooperation with the private sector was the only way
such a project would survive economically as long as the plan was also in the
general parameters of community desires.
Relative to the realignment of Lincoln, the Mayor emphasized that it may or may
not be aligned but it would be dependent upon a proposal the Council,
Agency and Commission would be considering. He reiterated that, the plan
provided the flexibility to accommodate a. project the citizenry and the private
sector may want.
Concerning smog and pollution, the Mayor indicated that the environmental
impact report spoke to the matter but further consideration would be part
of future discussion and decision making when the appropriate time arrived.
Mr. Jacobs interjected that if the verbiage' relative to the "aged" and "handi-
capped"were to be added, that they be added under Amendment 6, after the world
"sex" on the bottom of Page 3, as well as Amendment 10 on the fourth line
of the bottom of Page 5 after the word "sex", and recommended that the Commission
might want to speak to the change and make a motion recommending same.
On motion by Commissioner Bay, seconded by Commissioner D±nndorf, the
Redevelopment Commission included the words '~ge~" and 'handicapped' ~o Amendments
6 and 10 of the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment
Project Alpha at the location so designated by legal counsel. Commission Members
Morris and Mendez were absent. MOTION CARRIED.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, both the
Redevelopment Agency and the City Council included the words "aged' and 'handi-
capped"to Amendments 6 and 10 of the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment
Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha at the location so designated by legal
counsel. Councilman Roth absent. MOTION CARRIED.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CRC76-17' Commissioner Bay
offered Resolution No. CRC76-17 for adoption certifying a final subsequent
EIR to the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelop-
ment Project Alpha.
RESOLUTION NO. CRC76-17: A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRON-
MENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA AND DETERMINING THAT THE AMENDMENT WILL
NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT OR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON-
MENT.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COMMISSION MEMBERS' Bay, 0seid, Fry, Dinndorf and Moss
NOES- COMMISSION MEMBERS- None
ABSENT' COb~ISSION MEMBERS' Morris and Mendez
76-889
Fremont Junior High School, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES
November 23~ 1976~ 7'30 P.M.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CRC76-18: Commissioner
Fry offered Resolution No. CRC76-18 for adoption, approving the Second Amendment to
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Alpha and recommending the City
Council adopt said Second Amendment.
RESOLUTION NO. CRC76-18' A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF g2qAHEIM APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA AND RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF g2qAHEIM THAT SAID AMENDMENT BE ADOPTED.
Before a vote was taken, Commissioner Bay wanted his views known
relative to the way in which he saw the Second Amendment changing the
Redevelopment Plan. He explained that four changes were involved: (1) It
eliminated the previous tourist oriented, commercial-recreation areas to
preserve the residential areas of the City, (2) It increased the flexibility
of the Plan to what he called design to development which he considered to
be the best way to plan anything that was going to take 30 years to complete,
(3) Because of the added flexibility, it increased the Agency's power and
put the prime responsibility of the effectiveness of the plan on the Rede-
velopment Agency, which is the Council, and on the COmmission, (4) It now
defined and increased public owned improvements thereby making it clear
that there would be community improvements included in the Plan.
A vote was taken on the foregoing Resolution.
AYES- COMMISSION MEMBERS' Bay, Oseid, Fry, Dinndorf and Moss
NOES: COMMISSION MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COMMISSION MEMBERS' Mendez and Morris
ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 76R-753' Councilman Seymour offered
Resolution No. 76R-753 for adoption certifying the final subsequent EIR
to the proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Rede-
velopment Project Alpha. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 76R-753' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AN~EIM CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL II--ACT REPOR~ FOR THE
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA
AND DETERMINING THAT THE AMENDMENT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
OR SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. (EIR No. 189)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS' Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Roth
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 76R-753 duly passed and adopted.
Mr. Jacobs recommended that the proposed ordinance be given first reading
tonight and in the interim he would work with the Placentia Unified School
District. At the time of the second and final reading if there was any
reason to do so, the matter could be deferred.
ORDINANCE NO. 3631- Councilman Kott offered Ordinance No. 3631 for first
reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 3631' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3190, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 3567,
APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ALPHA.
_ADJouRNMENT- COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION- Commissioner Fry moved
to adjourn, Commissioner Dinndorf seconded the motion. Commissioners Morris
and Mendez were absent. MOTION CARRIED. (9:10 P.M.)
The Mayor thanked the Project Area Committee, the Redevelopment Commission
and the Planning Commission for the many hours spent in the redirection of
the redevelopment effort and, because of the absence of a great surge of
citizenry opposed to the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan, it was
,
76-890
Fremont Junior High..S.c.hoo..1, .Anah,eim, California -.COUNCIL.M!.NUT.~_S
November 23, ,1,,976, 7 :..30 P.M.
an indication that there was majority approval of the citizenry to proceed
with due speed on the Redevelopment Plan.
ADJOURNMENT - AI~AHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY' Mr. Kott 'moved to adjourn.
Mr. Seymour seconded the motion, l~lr. Roth was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT- CITY COUNCIL'
Seymour seconded the motion.
(9' 14 P.M.)
Councilman Kott moved to adjourn, Councilman
Councilman Roth was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNED' 9' 14 P.M.
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK/SECRETARY