Loading...
1975/11/2575-1017 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch INTERIM ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William Griffith DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts CITY ATTORNEY: Alan Watts PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ronald Thompson STADIUM~ CONVENTION CENTER, GOLF COURSE DIRECTOR; Tom Liegler OPERATIONS MANAGER CONVENTION CENTER: Ed Stotereau CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ACTING PARKS, RECREATION & ARTS DIRECTOR: Dick Kamphefner TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer ZONING SUPERVISOR: Annika Santalahti Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed members of the audience in attendance. INVOCATION: Reverend Johnny Carlson of the West Anaheim United Methodist Church gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Calvin L. Pebley led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unanimously approved by the City Council: Melodyland Ministries Week - November 23 through 29, 1975. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held October 14, 1975, were approved as corrected on motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Council- man Seymour. 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 Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $458,317.05, in accordance with the 1975-76 Budget, were approved. CO-SPONSORSHIP - KIWANIS CLUBS FRIENDSHIP AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM (MITO CITY~ JAPAN): Mayor Thom recognized Mr. Hal Parker, representing the Anaheim and Greater Anaheim Kiwanis Clubs, who described the Friendship and Cultural Exchange Program initiated by the City Council of Mito City, Japan, and through which a group of 28 educators and businessmen will visit the City of Anaheim on December 26, 1975. He reported that it is hoped that this potential 3-year program might develop into a sister-city relationship. The plan is to emphasize educational interests the first year; cultural interests the second year and politics and business in the third. Mr. Parker requested that the City Council consider co-sponsorship of a portion of the program with financial participation to the extent of one-third of the $1,000 budget; and that they co-host the luncheon planned at the Anaheim Convention Center on Saturday, December 27, 1975. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council authorized a maximum expenditure of $350 from the promotional budget to co-sponsor the Friendship and Cultural Exchange Program with Mito City, Japan together with the Anaheim Kiwanis Clubs. MOTION CARRIED, PROMOTIONAL BUDGET - MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSES: Mr. Tom Liegler recalled that at the time the Arthur Young & Co. recommendations resulting from the Management Practices Audit of the City's golf courses were presented, the hiring of a permanent golf course manager was discussed. He reminded Council Members that 75-1018 City H.all~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. he had suggested that the employment of such a manager (in the potential salary range of $30,000 to $40,000) be delayed and that instead,some funds be expended on the basic elements of golf course operation such as paint, soap and grass seed. One of these basic elements necessary for successful operation of the golf courses is a marketing ability so that they might communicate with the Orange County public. Mr. Ed Stotereau, Operations Manager at the Anaheim Convention Center, made a presentation to Council summarizing the marketing program they plan to implement '--~ as is described in his memorandum dated November 11, 1975 to Tom Liegler (copy of said memorandum on file in the office of the City Clerk). The total cost for the promotional materials is $7,800.00. Mr. Pat Patterson, Chairman of the Golf Course Advisory Commission, reported that the Commission had reviewed this presentation and feels that the advertising planned is on the right track. He stated that if play is to be increased at the two courses, it will first require some revenues be expended on marketing. He reminded Council Members that just last week a 50-cent across-the-board green fee increase was approved for the H. G."Dad" Miller Course which should result in $49,000 additional revenue. Mr. Murdoch pointed out that the promotional directions proposed pursuant to the memorandum of November 11, 1975 would be utilized in addition to what has already been initiated - the publicity on the Convention Center Marquee, use of a centralized telephone number for golf reservations, and inserts placed in utility billing distribution. In response to Councilman Seymour's question as to whether or not methods of measuring the effectiveness of various advertising campaigns have been developed, Mr. Liegler advised that they do already employ a coding system on all coupons, brochures, etc., through which they know exactly from which segment of the popula- tion and geographical area the returned coupon cam~ and therefore they can give an accurate accounting as to where their patrons come from. This system would also be employed to measure the effectiveness of the advertising tools proposed in the promotional budget. He reported that they have already received a good response as a result of advertising inserts placed in the utility billing distribution. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council authorized the transfer of $7,800 from the Council Contingency fund for promotional budget purposes at the Anaheim Hills and H. G. '~Dad'~ Miller Anaheim Municipal Golf Courses in accordance with the proposed budget submitted this date and outlined in Mr. Stotereau's memorandum of November 11, 1975. MOTION CARRIED. CLARIFICATION, TRANSFER OF DEBT OBLIGATION - ANAHEIM HILLS GOLF COURSE: Mr. Liegler stated that the Arthur Young & Co. in their report to the City Council on the golf courses mentioned a bookkeeping procedure to remove the debt obligation for land which is not actually used as a portion of the Anaheim Hills Golf Course. He noted that the Golf Course Commission has also unanimously recommended that the Council make such amendment, but that he could find no public record of the Council taking such action. Mr. Murdoch suggested that prior to Council taking any such action they have the specific numbers involved. Mayor Thom requested that a staff recommendation relative to transfer of the debt obligation on surplus properties not utilized as a part of the Anaheim Hills Golf Course be presented for Council consideration within the next two weeks. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-603 - AUTHORIZING APPLICATION AND SIGNATOR - TITLE X GRANT; Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-603 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION TITLE X GRANT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND FILE SAID APPLICATION. 75-1019 City H.al%~ Ana. heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25, 1975~ 1;30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-603 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-604 - FRONTERA NO. 2 ANNEXATION (UNINHABITED): Pursuant to authority granted by the Local Agency Formation Commission, Resolution No. 75-131, Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 75R-604 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED FRONTERA NO. 2 ANNEXATION. (one acre located west of Glassell, south of Frontera) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-604 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT: Application filed by Mr. Jack D. George on behalf of the Garden Grove Firemen's Association and Tustin Firemen's Association for permit to conduct public dance on November 30, 1975 at the Anaheim Convention Center was submitted and granted subject to provisions of Chapter 4.16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code as recommended by the Chief of Police, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Seymour. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-605 - EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS: (Property line return at the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Sunkist Street.) In accordance with recommendation of the City Engineer, Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-605 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND DIRECTING THE ACQUISITION BY EMINENT DOMAIN OF REAL PROPERTY FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Ricker) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-605 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-606 - WORK ORDER NOS. 764-B AND 862: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 75R-606 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUC- TION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT~ LINCOLN AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, W/O SUNKIST STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDERS NOS. 764-B & 862; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES~ DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUC- TION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened December 24, 1975, 2:00 P.M,) 75-1020 City ~jl_,l.~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MEMBERS - November 25~..1975~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-606 duly passed and adopted. PARKING RESTRICTIONS FOR STREET SWEEPING - PILOT PROGRAM: In connection with a request submitted by the Board of Directors of Anaheim Village III Homeowners Association to the City Council at their meeting of October 21, 1975 for parking restrictions in the 1900 block of Glenoaks and Greenleaf Avenues, the repOrt from the City Engineer regarding the Street Sweeping Committee recommendation was presented. Said report indicates they recommend a pilot program be approved to restrict parking in three study areas of the City during days and hours of street sweeping. One area will include the 1900 block of Glenoaks and Greenleaf Avenues and the other two areas will be determined by the Street Maintenance Superintendent. During Council discussion of the pilot program proposal, Councilwoman Kaywood inquired as to what types of advertising are planned to inform the public of the parking restrictions. Upon ascertaining from Mr. Singer that they intend to use utility billing inserts and perhaps a newspaper article, Councilwoman Kaywood suggested they also utilize the City Newsletter. In response to Councilman Seymour, Mr. Singer reported that the pilot program will be kept in operation for a minimum of three months and maximum of six months before further report and recommendation on the outcome of same is presented to the City Council. Mr. Watts clarified that although the recommendation indicates that the two other pilot areas would be determined by the Street Maintenance Superintendent, __. since this must be implemented by Ordinance amending the Anaheim Municipal Code, he would assume that the Street Maintenance Superintendent will make these recom- mendations to the City Council for implementation. Mr. Singer explained that once recommendation on the area has been forwarded from the Street Maintenance Superintendent to the Street Sweeping Committee the request for ordinance to implement same would be forwarded from the Traffic and Engineering Office to the City Attorney's Office. Councilman Seymour stated that he would encourage the adoption of these three pilot areas as suggested as this would provide the City the means by which they could serve those areas where the majority of property owners do not object to the parking restriction and wish cleaner streets. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council approved the implementation of a pilot program to restrict parking in three study areas of the City for street sweeping purposes as recommended by the City Engineer and Street Sweeping Committee. MOTION CARRIED. PARK IN-LIEU FEE FORMULA - INCREASE: Mr. Dick Kamphefner introduced Mr. Bill Weiss, 4044 Mapletree Drive, Anaheim, Chairman of the 1968 Citizens' Capital Improvement Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation and author of the in-lieu formula currently in use. Mr. Weiss explained that the in-lieu formula is based on population density, cost of land and the cost of basic development. In 1969 when the City Council voted to implement the in-lieu fee formula it was adopted at 50% of their recom- mendation and subsequently has been raised to 100% of the 1969 recommendation, He remarked that he understands the fee has not been increased in the past several years and because of the increases in the cost of land acquisition and development, at the present time the costs are paid partially from the in-lieu fees but also from the general fund. Mr. Weiss recommended, as a citizen of the City of Anaheim, that the in-lieu fee be increased to equal the actual costs placed on the City for acquisition of park property and that this fee be reviewed regularly so that the costs for park property are paid by those developing land. 75-1021 Ri.fy H~..1.1~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mayor Thom noted that recommendation was forwarded from the Planning Com- mission that the Council increase the formula by one-half of the 90% proposed by Parks and Recreation Department. During discussion, Councilwoman Kaywood questioned the reference in the October 29, 1975 Planning Commission minutes regarding the number of acres to be provided per thousand of population. Mr. Kamphefner advised that there is a master plan for 1~ acres per thousand, however the City presently has acquired 2.45 acres per thousand, It appears eventually the acreage figure will round out to 2.04 acres of park land per thousand of population acquired and developed by 1990. In response to Councilman Seymour, Mr. Kamphefner reviewed the justifica- tions presented for the proposed 90% increase in the in-lieu fee formula. He advise~ in further reply to Councilman Seymour, that he had not calculated the amount of money an increase of ½ of the 90% would cost each individual home- owner, but that the full 90% increase would impose a one-time cost of $578.76 per single-family home. There was also some discussion as to how this increased fee would compare to other Orange County cities and Councilman Seymour pointed out that it appears the Cities of Brea, Costa Mesa, Fullerton~ Orange, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano and Santa Ana would have fees lower than the' City of Anaheim if the entire increase were approved. Councilman Seymour stated that he could not agree with either the Parks and Recreation recommendation for an increase of 90% or the City Planning Com- mission recommendation to increase ½ of the 90% for the following reasons: (1) He would first like to see what the 1976 Capital Improvement Committee comes up with in this regard; (2) He is concerned about the credibility gap with the public as far as the implementation of Arthur Young & Co. recommendations in Parks and Recreation is concerned, since these recommendations reportedly would generate $300,000.00 savings annually; (3) The fact that in the County of Orange there is a 30 to 33% unemployment factor in the construction trades and these additional fees will be passed onto the home buyer. This action in concert with actions taken by other governmental agencies continually escalating the prices of homes will certainly not hasten the recovery of the construction industry. Therefore, Councilman Seymour stated he would strongly oppose this recommendation. Mayor Thom stated that he could not quite agree with Councilman Seymour's comments, that he has felt the in-lieu fees have lagged behind what they should be since 1968. He stated that he currently would be willing to increase in-lieu fees as recommended by the City Planning Commission, but feels that in the near future the entire 90% recommendation will be justified. Councilman Sneegas remarked that while he disapproves of the philosophy of discounting these costs which add to the price of a home since the future buyer will pay for them in the price of that home, he feels the City is in a dilemma since it is certainly not recovering sufficient funds to provide the necessary park space. He stated that he could not vote favorably on the full 90% increase, but has resigned himself to the necessity of raising fees to the amount recom- mended by the Planning Commission. Councilman Pebley indicated that he concurred with Councilman Sneegas. Mayor Thom moved that the Parks and Recreation in-lieu formula be increased as recommended by the City Planning Commission, i.e., ½ of the 90% increase pro- posed by Parks and Recreation staff. Councilwoman Kaywood referred to the comments made by Mr. James Barisic of Anaheim Hills, Inc. at the Planning Commission discussion relative to the fact that the increase in fee, if it were $578, would be escalated to $1,000 by the time it is passed on to the home buyer, and noting that he was in the Council Chamber requested that he explain the statement. Mr. James Barisic responded that while he could not accurately predict a $578 fee would be increased to $1,000, the fee would be considerably more by the time it is passed on to the homeowner since the developer had to mark his product up, usually by 15 to 18%, and interest is added to this. 75-1022 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. Further, Mr. Barisic remarked that he basically finds it hard to disagree with the recommendation for increase but does feel that the 90% recommendation is a rather steep increase at once which presupposes the cost of land at about $50,000 an acre. He felt the recommendation for ½ of the 90% would be more reasonable and realistic as it presupposes the cost of park land at $30,000 per acre. Because of the inflationary economy, however, he recommended that the fees be reviewed annually or even every 6 months. At the conclusion of discussion, Councilman Seymour requested the Council Members to reconsider placing this additional burden on the homeowner and defer the increase until such time as the Parks and Recreation Department has fully implemented the Arthur Young & Co. recommendations, which might create the savings needed to defer such an increase until economic conditions are more favorable. Councilwoman Kaywood stated that at the present time vandalism in the parks costs the City $1,000 per month. She remarked that people need and demand parks and that there is no way to go back and acquire the land once it is developed. She therefore feels an increase of ½ of the 90% proposed is a good compromise. Mr. Murdoch stated that the major Arthur Young & Co. recommendations for Parks and Recreation Department relates to the use of part-time personnel and that has been fully implemented. The remaining recommendations are in the process of implementation. MOTION: Mayor Thom amended his foregoing motion to instruct staff to prepare the necessary ordinance to increase the park in-lieu fee formula by ½ of the 90% recommended in the Parks and Recreation proposal, in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendation. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. To this motion Councilman Seymour voted "no'~. CONTINUED DECISION - TENTATIVE MAPS TRACT NOS. 8866~ REVISION 2~ AND 9097: Developer George Heltzer; property located between Romneya Drive and La Palma Avenue, west of State College Boulevard; Tract No. 8866 containing 45 proposed RS-5,000 zoned lots and Tract No. 9097 containing 118 proposed RS-5,000 zoned lots. Decision on the tentative maps was continued from the meeting of November 18, 1975 due to concerns expressed by interested citizens living in the subject area regarding the expansion of Edison Park. Mr. Cal Queyrel of Anacal Engineering, representing the developer, advised that a tentative map for Tract No. 8866 (Revision 1) was approved by the City Council on October 7, 1975 and since that time 90% of the planning and engineering drawings have been completed. He noted that Condition 2 of those conditions imposed at the time of approval of that map allows the applicant to request development in more than one phase. He advised that they propose to proceed in two phases, the two segments of the project being separated by Baxter Street, with the first development to be on that segment located to the east of Baxter Street. In response to Mayor Thom's inquiry as to whether or not the developer had any intentions of dedicating additional acreage for park purposes at this time, Mr. Queyrel recalled that this was discussed at the original zoning public hearing at which time Mr. John Collier, the former Parks, Recreation and Arts Director, expressed the opinion that an approximate 1 acre addition would not substantially improve Edison Park and it would be more advantageous for the City to accept park in-lieu fees which could be better used in the park itself or at Sycamore Junior High School. Councilman Seymour clarified that when Mr. Collier made this statement he was referring specifically to the land offered for dedication which was a strip approximately 50 feet by 300 feet along the south edge of the park; his opinion was based on the size, configuration and location of the land offered for dedication. Councilwoman Kaywood noted also that the dedication discussed at that time was based on a price of $85,000 per acre. The Mayor recognized Mr. Jerry Moore, 1141 North Acacia Street, Anaheim 92805, who read to the Council a prepared statement dated November 22, 1975, copies of which were submitted prior to the meeting and furnished each Council Member. (Complete copy of Mr. Moore's statement on file in the Office of the City Clerk) 75-1023 .Cit}, Hall~..Anaheim? California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. The major points contained in Mr. Moore's presentation were; (1) That permitting use of hillside street standards gives him additional space to add to his lots for which the City should receive something in exchange. (2) That the City has not yet approved a final tract map for the project. (3) That the E.I.R. originally submitted is not valid as it was prepared for a multiple-family project with its own recreational amenities whereas the developer now proposes single-family homes without any recreational amenities. (4) That the references made in City reports to the use of Sycamore Junior High School as a recreational area are not valid, since this is first of ali. a school property and usage of it as a park is of secondary priority. (5) The total park acreage recommended by the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department for the Edison Park service area is 17.25 acres~ and the Edison Park service area is currently 12 acres deficient. (6) That approximately 1,250 signatures were submitted from citizens interested in expansion of Edison Park, who feel they need the land before it is developed and impossible to acquire, and not dollars in park in-lieu fees. At the conclusion of his presentation Mr. Moore proposed 3 different methods through which additional amenities might be provided the Edison Park service area: (1) Add 9.75 acres to Edison Park by deleting the construction of the storm drain and applying those funds to purchase 6 acres at $50,000 an acre; 2 addi- tional acres could be acquired by a 1-acre dedication from the developer in place of in-lieu fees and the other dedicated as a trade-off for being permitted to develop with hillside street standards. (2) Trade off hillside requirements, which if permitted, would amount to 1½ acres gain in space for this developer in return for a 1 acre dedication and an additional acre could be purchased with the in-lieu fees. He would still require that the developer construct the storm drains under this proposal. (3) Require the developer to go back to the multi-family project and include park amenities within the complex; and still require in-lieu fees and construction of storm drains. One of the points discussed with Mr. Moore and clarified by Council during his presentation was the unique joint usage of park and school facilities in Anaheim which is accomplished by a Joint Powers Agreement and which provides twice as much park space as the City would otherwise enjoy. It was also explained by Mr. Murdoch that in-lieu fees began 25 years ago and at that time it was determined these could be used to develop any park in the City's General Plan. These fees are placed in an in-lieu fund and used specifically for capital expenditures related to parks, such as acquisition, development or improvement, and not for maintenance. He reported that recently one of the Arthur Young & Co. recommendations was that in-lieu funds be earmarked for use in the areas from which they are generated, however the City has not yet developed a precise methodology for identification of fund sources by area. Mr. Jerry Williams, 1313 Maplewood Street, Anaheim cited figures for use of Edison Park during baseball season by Little League and girls Bobby Sox teams, not to mention independent teams and adults who live in the area and like to play ball. He remarked that it is a matter of survival of the fittest on these ball fields with everyone fighting for space. He also mentioned the possibility of injuries because of the overlapping playing fields. Mr. Williams commented that Edison Park has only the barest minimum necessities provided in a park and to his knowledge there has never even been a sign indicating that it is Edison Park. He advised that the citizens would appreciate one or two acres or any additional space which could be provided, and would use it undeveloped, playing in the dirt if necessary. He voiced the opinion that children's welfare should be a prime concern in this situation. Mr. Queyrel responded on behalf of Mr, Heltzer that when he did initially inquire about subject property he was not informed of the necessity for the $300,000 storm drain and in addition to this, Mr. Heltzer has agreed to pay for the improvements along the expansion of Baxter Street on the park frontage, He noted that originally the developer had approval of twice the number of units currently proposed as a planned unit development and he feels the RS-5000 development will be an improvement on the property. In response to comments presented by Mr. Moore, Mr, Queyrel stated that normally a public hearing is not held for approval of a tentative map. He stated that if forced to they would develop the project all at once, but feel they do have the right to ask for a phased development since it is a standard practice provided for in the conditions of approval for Tentative Map 8866, Revision 1. 75-1024 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 197.5~ 1:30 P.M. In reply to Council questions, Mr. Watts concurred that the developer does have the right to comply with conditions of approval and develop this property in accordance with Tentative Map Tract No. 8866, Revision 1, as it has already been approved. Mr. Watts further counseled that the subdivision ordinance does provide that at the time of approval of a tentative map, (and in his opinion any amendment thereof) the Council has within its discretion the ability to determine whether or not to elect to receive the park in-lieu fees or the land. Mr. Watts assured Councilwoman Kaywood that despite the fact that the action l~sted on the agenda for October 7, 1975 was to continue Tentative Map Tract No. 8866, Revision 1, and the Council took action to approve same, he sees no problem whatsoever with the legality of this action. Mr. Queyrel reiterated that in his opinion the decision as to whether or not the City would accept in-lieu fees or dedication of land was rightfully made on October 7, 1975 and it would be too late to make that decision now since, pursuant to the earlier approval, planning and engineering drawings have been completed. Councilman Sneegas observed that the situation realistically is that if the City Council does not approve the two tentative maps allowing the developer to phase his project, what they will, in effect,do is force the developer to complete the project all at once, and consequently preclude any possibility of acquiring part of this land in the future. On the other hand, if only a portion of the development is built, chances are there may be the possibility of land acquisition in the future and therefore a two-phase development would be in the best interests of all concerned. Mr. Queyrel stated that if it is the Council's decision to require land dedication rather than in-lieu fees, they would withdraw the request for this development in two tentative maps and proceed with construction of the entire project in one phase right after the first of the year. Councilwoman Kaywood stressed that when this project was originally considered,__. one of the justifications given for approval was that the project would provide its own recreational amenities and the residents would not place a great demand on Edison Park. However, now that the concept has changed to single-family homes without recreational facilities, this justification is no longer valid. She questioned whether there is some way the developer might be able to include some recreational area in the project so that it will not compound the existing problem at Edison Park. Mr. Queyrel replied that the individual homeowner has the prerogative of placing recreational amenities in his own yard or patio and that traditionally in single-family neighborhoods, children play in front and rear yards. In his experience, parks are used more for organized athletics than for neighborhood playgrounds. After considerable discussion, Mayor Thom called for a decision on the matter and indicated that he, as one Council Member, would not vote favorably on the split into two tentative maps without requiring that the developer dedicate land rather than pay in-lieu fees. Councilman Sneegas reiterated that this action, in his opinion, would cause the developer to construct his project in one phase thereby removing any possi- bility of the City acquiring a portion of the land in the future. He urged the Council to instead allow the developer to split. Mr. Queyrel indicated that he intended to withdraw the two tentative maps, but prior to his actual request, Councilman Seymour interjected that it is clear to him that the Council had made a mistake in connection with this project. They should have had the benefit of the input received these past two weeks prior to that decision. He recognized that the development of this property and its attendant problems have been expensive for the developer. He indicated that in order to save an acre of..ground for the badly needed expansion of Edison Park, he would be willing to meet with the developer and pay a premium price, if necessary, above and beyond the park in-lieu fees due by adding to these from the Council Contingency Fund to attain whatever reasonable price is necessary and consummate an immediate sale. He suggested that the developer consider the sale of the last row of lots, as he could then realign the cul-de-sacs at the next row of lots. 75-1025 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25,_ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Queyrel stated that he was not able to regpond to thig offer on behalf of Mr. Heltzer. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council continued decision on Tentative Maps Tract Nos. 8866, Revision 2, and 9097 to the meeting of December 2, 1975, to be considered under unfinished business. MOTION CARRIED. Prior to going on to the next item, the Mayor recognized Mr. Moore and Mrs. Margaret Hueler, 1015 Liberty Lane, Anaheim. Mr. Moore pointed out that it is the developer who will benefit from having property adjacent to a park. Mrs. Hueler spoke in favor of turning the strip of land to be acquired 90° along Baxter Street to La Palma and utilizing this for picnic facilities and other more traditional park purposes, thereby separating these areas from the ball fields. She pointed out that this would also permit more homes to have a view of the park. In connection with the expansion proposals for Edison Park, Mr. Murdoch requested that the Parks, Recreation and Arts Department staff review these to- gether with the present configuration of ball fields at the park to determine that whatever land is acquired will be practical and usable. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 75-76-2, VARIANCE NO. 2733 AND E.I.R. NO. 156: Application by Raymond Spehar for a change in zone from RM-1200 (SC) to CL (SC) and the following code waivers to construct a commercial shopping center north and east of the northeast corner of La Palma Avenue and Imperial Highway was submitted together with E.I.R. No. 156: a. permitted display surface of a shopping center identification sign. b. minimum building setback, c. prohibited roof-mounted equipment. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-213 recom- mended that E.I.R. No. 156 be certified as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and further recommended approval of Reclassification No. 75-76-2 subject to 11 conditions. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No, PC75-214 recom- mended that E.I.R. No. 156 be certified as being in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and granted Variance No. 2733 in part, (b) being un- necessary, subject to 3 conditions. The Deputy City Clerk submitted a petition containing 64 signatures in opposition to the proposed reclassification and variance. Miss Santalahti described the surrounding zoning and land uses and reported that the applicant proposes to develop a commercial shopping center which would include a supermarket, drug store, retail stores, professional offices and a bank. The development would include a 64-foot wide public street on the easterly boundary of the property to provide access to the remaining RM-1200 property to the north. She described the code waivers requested and reported on the recom- mendations and justification therefor presented in the Planning Commission resolutions. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent wished to address the Council. Mr. Raymond Spehar, 913 Paloma Place, Fullerton, advised that he had pre- pared a presentation intended to demonstrate the need for an additional shopping center in that area inasmuch as one is completed and another under construction close by. He noted that this need was established to the satisfaction of the City Planning Commission. He stated that they expect to draw patronage for the proposed shopping center from the area to the north of La Palma Avenue, since freeways have been demonstrated to act as a barrier to a neighborhood shopping center. Consequently, the other two centers will draw primarily from the area south of La Palma Avenue. He referred also to page ~ of E.I,R. No. 156 which addresses the need for an additional shopping center. Councilwoman Kaywood referred to the staff evaluation of E,I.R, No. 156 which lists four items (4a through d) which the Review Committee found to be of environmental significance and requested reply from the applicant in connection with these. 75-1026 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1;30 P.M. Mr. William McCulloch, 4320 Campus Drive, Newport Beach, Architect for the project, reported that the median island on La Palma Avenue (as referred to in item 4b of the evaluation of E.I.R. No. 156) has been discussed with the Traffic Department and that such an island is planned to be installed. There was brief discussion as to at whose expense this island would be installed and Mr. Maddox indicated there had been to date no d~scussion with the developer regarding this expense, but that a similar median island installation was recently required at the developer's expense and such condition might be added to subject reclassification by the Council if they so desire. Mayor Thom stated that what concerns him is the zone change requested in this petition from residential to commercial, in light of the existing apProved commercial centers in the immediate area. He inquired whether there has been any discussion by the Canyon General Planning Task Force relative to commercial sites in Planning Area B, and it was indicated that to date no discussion or review in this vein has taken place Mayor Thom noted that there are four different plaza-type commercial projects already approved and/or under construction in this area and he would be concerned as to the impact this center would have on perspective residential land usage in the immediate area. He noted that apparently the residents of the area are con- cerned as well over the possibility of establishing strip or spot commercial zoning as evidenced by the petition submitted in opposition. Councilman Sneegas commented that the petition contained 64 signatures of individuals who, according to the addresses, would appear to all reside at the nearby mobile home park, where there are some 300 potential signers. He stated that it leads him to wonder what happened to the remainder of these people. He also noted that the petition contained no area to indicate a choice of being in favor or opposition, just opposition. Councilwoman Kaywood remarked that she would like to avoid strip commercial zoning such as has occurred on west Lincoln Avenue. Mr. Spehar stated that the petition represents only the mobile home park and not the entire canyon area; that a portion of this parcel with frontage on La Palma Avenue is already zoned commercial and he is requesting to extend it northerly; and that he has two major supermarkets definitely interested in this site, and 40 potential lessees for retail stores. Mr. Spehar stated that when Fairmont Boulevard is completed it will tie into Yorba Linda Boulevard with a railroad overpass at Esperanza Road and they expect there will be 2,000 families who would patronize subject location as a result of that action. Mayor Thom stated that he would prefer, prior to coming to a decision on Reclassification No. 75-76-2, that the City Planning Commission review a General Plan Amendment on subject property and also that the Canyon General Planning Task Force review the site and give some input as well, Councilman Sneegas disagreed with Mayor Thom's position, noting that the Planning Commission has already reviewed the reclassification proposal. He expressed the opinion that there is a need for competition in the area, and that additional competition would ultimately be of benefit to the customers since this tends to keep prices down and it is basically competition on which business thrives. He remarked that he felt it is possible to overdo a good thing when it comes to controlling the extent of commercialization in the canyon area; and that such restrictive controls are detrimental to the free enterprise system. Councilman Seymour stated that he felt the question which has to be answered before making a decision on the reclassification of subject property as requested is what conditions have changed to cause this fairly dramatic shift from the general plan. The Master Plan calls for more of a neighborhood type shopping center at this location versus the type being proposed. Councilwoman Kaywood noted that as it appears now, that property located between the railroad tracks to the north and this proposed commercial development to the south would make a miserable living environment and the General Plan Amend- ment might establish a commercial use for the entire area. She noted that most of the residents in the canyon have indicated they want a rural area without shopping and other conveniences on every corner. 75-1027 ~it~ Ha. ll~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or in opposition to Reclassification No, 75-76-2 or Variance No, 2733; there were no speakers for or against either petition. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council requested staff prepare a General Plan Amendment of the area and the property which is the subject of Reclassification No. 75-76-2 and Variance No. 2733 for review by the City Planning Commission and continued Reclassification No. 75-76-2, Variance No. 2733, E.I.R. No. 156 to 'be heard.together with said General Plan Amendment~ and further requested that the Canyon General Planning Task Force have an opportunity to review this situation and make a recommenda- tion to the Council. To this motion Councilman Sneegas voted RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for a 10-minute break. (4:20 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilman Seymour. (4:30 P.M.) PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 75-76-10~ VARIANCE NO. 2743: (Tract No. 8910) Application by Roland T. Reynolds for a change of zone from RS-A-43,000 to RS-7200 and the following code waiver to establish a 39 lot subdivision at 505 South Sunkist Street was submitted together with Tentative Tract No. 8910 and applica- tion for negative declaration status from the requirement to prepare an E.I.R.; a. requirement that single-family residences rear on arterial highways, The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-215, recom- mended that the City Council declare subject project exempt from the requirement to prepare an E.I.R. and further recommended approval of Reclassification No. 75-76-10 subject to the following conditions. 1. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commence~. ment of structural framing. 2. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 3. That completion of these reclassification proceedings is contingent upon the granting of Variance No. 2743. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-216 recom- mended that the City Council declare subject project exempt from the requirement to prepare an E.I.R. and granted Variance No. 2743 subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 75-76-10. 2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9; provided, however, that the building setbacks of Lot Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 26, and 27, as shown on Exhibit No. 1, shall have a minimum setback of forty (40) feet adjacent to Sunkist Street, per City Council Policy No. 538, unless the City Council grants relief from said policy and permits 25 to 36-foot setbacks for said lots. Included in City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC75-216 was recommenda- tion that Council Policy No. 538 be waived in connection Tract No. 8910. Miss Santalahti reported that subject property is surrounded by single- family residences in the RS-7200 zone. The applicant proposes a 39-unit RS-7200 zoned single-family subdivision with a gross density of 4 units per acre. The lot sizes range from 7200 to 12,000 square feet with an average of 8,000 square feet. The applicant proposes to construct single-story structures with 3 and 4 bedrooms ranging in size from 1500 to 2000 square feet. Ail streets would be built in conformance with City standards. The plans indicate that the proposed development would conform with all R§-7200 site development standards with the exception of 2 units (lots 26 and 27) which would side onto Sunkist Street which is a secondary arterial highway. The garages would maintain a minimum setback of 25 feet from the street. 75-1028 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P'M' Miss Santalahti advised that the Planning Commission had approved the variance requested to permit the two side-on lots on the basis that there are already existing side-on units on Sunkist Street and had recommended waiver of Council Policy No. 538 in connection therewith to permit the 25 to 36-foot set- back from an arterial highway, on the basis that other properties are already developed with similar setbacks. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and wished to address the Council. Mr. Cal Queyrel, Anacal Engineering, representing the developer, described the street alignment proposed in Tentative Tract No. 8910 which is intended to create an offset in the traffic so that it would not flow directly out onto Sunkist Street. He noted that the two side-on lots proposed would have a 25-foot side yard setback and the others would average 37 feet. He cited other setback measurements in the area to demonstrate that a precedent has been established for such waivers. Mr. Queyrel submitted the acoustical report on the project prepared by Bio-Acoustical Engineering Corporation, 1101 East Bryan Street, Suite F, Tustin 92680, dated November 13, 1975 and explained that this discloses there will be no problem with traffic on Sunkist Street as a noise factor in connection With this project. He stated that the current noise level readings are 64 dba adjacent to the roadway and the wall proposed by the developer would attenuate this noise so that even if the traffic count doubled in ensuing years there would be no problem. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or opposition; there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the require- ment to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-607: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-607 for adoption authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (75-76-10, RS-7200) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, ?ebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None tEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-607 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-608: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-608 for adoption granting Variance No. 2743 subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2743. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-608 duly passed and adopted. 75-1029 City Hall.~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. TENTATIVE MAP TRACT iNO. 8910: (Reclassification No. 75-76-10 and Variance No. 2743): Developer Bernard & Spengler; property located on the west side of Sunkist Street, south of Lincoln Avenue; containing 39 proposed RS-7200 zoned lots. The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held October 29, 1975, approved said tentative map subject to the stipulation that the petitioner is aware of the sound attenuation requirements for residential developments pro- posed adjacent to arterial highways, etc., and that said requirements must be complied with, and further subject to the following conditions; 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8910 is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 75-76-10 and Variance No. 2743. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivision, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 4. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 5. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appro- priate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. That, in accordance with City Council policy, a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the east property line separating Lot Nos. 8 through 12 and Nos. 26 and 27, and Sunkist Street, except that for corner Lot Nos. 26 and 27, said wall shall be stepped down to a height of thirty (30) inches in the required front yard setback. 9. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of landscape maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 10. That if permanent street name signs have not been installed, temporary street name signs shall be installed prior to any occupancy. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council approved Tentative Map of Tract No. 8910 on the basis that the proposed subdivision,together with its design and improvement, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 75-76-12: Application by George D. Griffith for a change in zone from R§-A-43,000 to CL to construct a commercial office complex on property located on the south side of La Palma Avenue, west of State Collage Boulevard, was submitted together with application for negative declara- tion status from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC75-231, recom- mended that the City Council declare subject project exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report and further recommended approval of Reclassification No. 75-76-12 subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a strip of land 53 feet in width from the centerline of the street along La Palma Avenue for street widening purposes. 2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along La Palma Avenue including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facilities, or other appurtenant work shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and speci- fications on file in the office of the City Engineer; that street lighting facilities along La Palma Avenue shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the Director of Public Utilities; and that a bond 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 subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along La Palma Avenue for tree planting purposes. 75-1030 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. 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 required and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to com- mencement of structural framing. 6. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties. 7. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities. 8. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the south and west property lines. 9. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 10. 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. 11. That the owner(s) of subject property shall request that Planning Commission terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 262 and that City Council terminate Variance No. 2421. 12. That subject property shall be developed precisely in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1; provided, however, that the proposed centrally-located driveway on La Palma Avenue shall be aligned with the driveway access of the future commercial shopping center to the north across La Palma Avenue; that a median divider shall be installed in front of the subject property along La Palma Avenue in conformance with City standards; that the two (2) remaining driveways proposed to La Palma Avenue shall be right-turn only driveways; and that plans for said street and driveway improvements shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval, as stipulated to by the petitioner. 13. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 11, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 14. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 12, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. Miss Santalahti described the surrounding land uses and zoning. She advised that the applicant proposes to construct a commercial office complex comprised of a one-story savings and loan building and a two-story office building in conjunction with development of a bank on the adjacent eastern parcel. The total area proposed is 22,000 square feet and the project is in con- formance with all site development standards of the CL zone. She advised that the petitioner has stipulated to aligning the centrally-located driveway on La Palma Avenue with the driveway access of the future commercial shopping center to the north and to installing a median divider in front of subject property along La Palma Avenue in conformance with City standards and maintaining the two remaining driveways proposed on La Palma Avenue as right-turn only driveways. The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent was present and satisfied with the recommendations made by the City Planning Commission. Mrs. Helen Sweet of Tait & Associates, 900 Orangefair Lane, Anaheim, representing the property owner, responded affirmatively. It was pointed out during discussion that the City generally requires such median islands to be landscaped and equipped with sprinkler systems by the developer prior to the City's accepting the responsibility for maintenance thereof. Mrs. Sweet indicated that this would be agreeable to the developer, The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council either in favor or opposition to the proposed reclassification and there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Pebley~ seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council finds that this project will have no significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. 75-1031 .City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975, 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-609: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 75R-609 for adoption authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission with amendment to Condition No. 12 as follows to reflect that the median island shall be landscaped and sprinkling system installed at the developer's expense: Condition No. 12. Property shall be developed precisely in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit No. 1; provided however that the proposed centrally-located driveway on La Palma Avenue shall be aligned with the driveway access of the future commercial shopping center to the north across La Palma Avenue; that a planted median shall be installed in La Palma Avenue in front of the subject property as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard'plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, and that reason-. able landscaping, including irrigation facilities, shall be installed in accord- ance with the requirements of the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance; that the two (2) remaining driveways proposed to La Palma Avenue shall be right-turn only driveways; and that plans for said street and driveway improvements shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval, as stipulated to by the petitioner. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (75-76-12, CL) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-609 duly passed and adopted. FIREWORKS DISPLAY PERMIT - MEDIA MAX: Application filed by Mr. R. Sousa, General Manage~ California Fireworks Display Company, for permit to allow public fireworks display sponsored by Media Max, Inc., at Anaheim Stadium on December 13, 1975, at 8:30 P.M. was submitted and granted as requested on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley. To this motion Councilwoman Kaywood voted '~no':. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 582 - TERMINATION: Request of John R, Townsend, owner, Pacific Vinyls, for termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 582, in accordance with conditions of approval of Variance No, 2736 which was granted to establish an auto upholstery shop on the same property located at the southeast corner of Western Avenue and Ball Road was submitted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-610: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 75R-610 for adoption terminating Conditional Use Permit No. 582. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 582 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 64R-534 NULL AND VOID. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None TEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-610 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-611 - ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION - PARCEL MAP NO. 50]: In accord- ance with recommendation submitted by the City Engineer, Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 75R-611 for adoption authorizing the acceptance of 15 feet of dedication on Sunkist Street for street and public utility purposes as shown on Parcel Map No. 501 submitted by General American Life Insurance Company. 75-1032 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ i:30____~P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR STREET AND UTILITY PURPOSES. (Parcel Map No. 501). Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None tEMPORARILY ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-611 duly passed and adopted. PERMISSION TO USE CITY-BUILT FLOAT - FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH: Request of Reverend Ragon T. Flannery, First Christian Church, dated November 2, 1975 to use the City-owned Halloween float as a stationary platform on which a live nativity scene would be depicted within the church, was submitted together with reports from the Property Maintenance Superintendent and City Attorney's Office. Report of the Property Maintenance Superintendent indicates that if the Halloween float is to be used for any other purpose, that the maximum amount of time permitted be 30 days inasmuch as the City's emergency generator is built into the float for lighting. It is therefore recommended that if the float is rented, it be for a maximum period of 30 days at $1.00 per day, plus a $20.00 delivery and $20.00 return fee. During brief Council discussion the charges recommended were questioned as to whether or not they would adequately cover the City's actual costs in moving the float, since it was felt by Council Members that the City should not absorb any of the costs of this proposal. The City Attorney suggested that a letter agreement might be prepared indicating that the lessee would be billed for the City's actual costs in con- nection with delivery and removal of the float plus $1.00. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Attorney was directed to prepare a letter agreement for rental of the City's Halloween float to the First Christian Church for a fee of $1.00 per day, with maximum rental period of 30 days, and further subject to the lessee paying the City's actual costs for delivery and return of said float. Councilman Seymour temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. REQUEST - STREET SIGN - CHERRY TREE LANE: Request of Mr. Robert W. Gaerte, 518 Cherry Tree Lane, Anaheim 92806~ for installation by the City of a street sign on Cherry Tree Lane, a private street, was submitted for Council consideration, together with reports from the City Attorney's Office and Property Maintenance Superintendent. Councilman Seymour returned to Council Chamber. (4:55 P.M.) Mr. Murdoch pointed out, as noted in the City Attorney's memorandum, if the Council wishes to install the street sign at City expense, this would require an amendment to Section 15.08.040 of the Anaheim Municipal Code which places the responsibility for the sign on the owner or owners fronting on and utilizing the vehicular access from the private street. Conversely, if the property owners on Cherry Tree Lane are willing to pay the cost for installation of such sign, which amounts to $44.63, the City could install same. During brief discussion the Council indicated that due to the large number of private streets being introduced into the City in condominium projects and mobile home parks, they would prefer not to amend the ordinance. Mr. Gaerte was recognized by the Mayor and was asked whether or not the property owners on his street would be willing to underwrite the expense for the sign, to which he replied that he felt the City should install the sign and explained that the property owners have replaced their street sign many times. He remarked that he did not know whether or not the remaining property owners would be willing to pay their share of the $44.63 cost for installation of the sign. 75-1033 City Hali~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25~ 1975~ 1:30 P.M. At the conclusion of discussion, Mr. Gaerte was notified that the City would install a street sign on Cherry Tree Lane if the property owners under- write the expense of same, amounting to $44.63, and that they might notify the Public Works Director when they wish the sign'installed. PARKING RESTRICTIONS - DEL RAY MOBILE HOME PARK: Request of Evelyn Watson, Manager of the Del Ray Mobile Home Park for parking restrictions on Manchester Avenue between Katella and Orangewood Avenues was submitted~ together with reports from the City Attorney's Office, Police Department and City Engineer recommending such restrictions be enacted. ORDINANCE NO. 3486: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 3486 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14~ CHAPTER 14.32, SECTION 14.32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING. (Manchester Avenue between Katella and Orangewood Avenues, no parking) PURCHASE OF MATERIALS: The City Manager reported on informal bids received for the purchase of materials for the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department, and recommended acceptance of the low bids submitted as follows: Bid No. 3021 - 2500 cubic yards of nitrogen stabilized fir - United Soil Products, $11,262.50 including tax~ Bid No. 3021 - 10 tons mag amp, coarse grade - Robinson Fertilizer Company, $10~790.80 including tax. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the bids submitted by United Soil Products and Robinson Fertilizer Company were accepted and purchases authorized in the amounts of $11,262.50 including tax and $10,790.80 including tax, respectively. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3484: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 3484 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTIONS 18.01.080, 18.01.130 AND 18.03.091 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 18.01.080, 18.01.130, 18.03.091 AND 18.03.092 TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ZONING. (Definitions and Termination or Modification of Conditional Use Permits and Variances) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3484 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3485: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3485 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (74-75-33 - R>~-2400) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS; NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3485 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3487: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3487 for first reading, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-30(6) - RS-7200) 75-1034 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25, 1975~ 1:30 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda' 1. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred to the insurance carrier. a. Claim submitted by Duane Barnes for injuries purportedly sustained as a result of actions of Anaheim Police Officers at the Anaheim City Jail on or about August 4, 1975. b. Claim submitted by Mary Lou Padilla for injuries purportedly sustained as a result of the condition of floor at Anaheim Stadium on or about August 15, 1975. c. Claim submitted by Mark Hayden Parenteau for injuries and damages pur- portedly sustained as a result o£ the condition at the intersection of Grand and Coolidge on or about September 9, 1975. d. Claim submitted by Elinore Mustard for damages purportedly sustained as a result of electrical supply furnished by City of Anaheim on or about September 24, 1975. e. Claim submitted by Burton W. Baxter for damages purportedly sustained as a result of voltage supplied by City of Anaheim on or about October 12, 1975, f. Claim submitted by Janann Brewer for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions of City vehicle on or about November 4, 1975. g. Claim submitted by Barbara J. Silverman for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions of Anaheim dump truck on or about November 6, 1975. 2. AMUSEMENT DEVICES PERMITS: The following permits were granted subject to the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Amusement Devices Permit for 59 assorted amusement device machines at Fun City~ 2500 West Lincoln Avenue (Vernon H. Brubaker, Applicant). b. Amusement Devices Permit for 59 assorted amusement device machines at Fun City, 2437 Ball Road (Vernon H. Brubaker, Applicant). c. Amusement Devices Permit for 59 assorted amusement device machines at Fun City, 1151 North Euclid Avenue (Vernon H. Brubaker, Applicant). d. Amusement Devices Permit for 1 juke box at The Alibi, 821 &Brookhurst Street (Edward D. Elmore, Applicant). 3. CORRESPONDENCE:. The following correspondence was ordered received and filed' aG Canyon Area General Planning Task Force - Minutes - November 3, 1975. b. Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - October 22 and 29, 1975. c. Financial and operating reports for the month of October, 1975: Police Department d. PAC (Alpha) - Minutes - October 28, 1975. e. City of Newport Beach - Resolution No. 8639 - Urging the Orange County Board of Supervisors to give serious consideration to Ontario International Airport as the solution to the future air transportation needs in Orange County. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NOS. 75R-612 AND 75R-613: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 75R-612 and 75R-613 for adoption in accordance with the reports~ recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: Refer to Resolution Book: RESOLUTION NO. 75R-612 - WORK ORDER NO. 752-A: 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 TRANS- PORTATION INCLUDING POWER~ FUEL AND WATERs AND THE PERFOrmaNCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE LINCOLN AVENUE MEDIAN ISLAND II~PROVEMENT, IN THE CITY oF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 752-A. 75 -1035 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25, 1975~ 1;30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-613 - WORK ORDER NO. 1260: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERNINI~N~G THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT~ TO WIT: THE PERALTA HILLS DRIVE SEWER IMPROVEMENT, S/O LAKEVIEW, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1260; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF: AUTHORIZING THE CON§TRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.: AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened December 18, 1975 2:00 P.M.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 75R-612 and 75R-613 duly passed and adopted. REAPPOINTMENT - MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT BOARD: Councilwoman Kaywood moved that Josephine Moretti, 2500 West Keyes Lane, Anaheim 92804, be reappointed to the Orange County Mosquito Abatement District for the ensuing term ending December 31, 1977. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ANA-MODJESKA PLAYERS PRODUCTION: Councilwoman Kaywood urged that Council Members and citizens support the Ana-Modjeska Players by attending their most recent production, "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum" being performed at the Loara Playhouse, as she found it amusing and exceedingly well done. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCEDURE - 1976 CITIZENS'CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE: Council- woman Kaywood introduced the subject of the procedures to be used in formation of the 1976 Citizens Capital Improvement Committee. Following brief discussion the Council determined that similar procedures should be employed as in 1968, i.e., that letters be forwarded to each elementary school P.T.A. and to parochial schools, soliciting recommended names of citizens to participate, as this would ensure a wide geographic distribution of potential Committee Members, to service groups and other interested organizations such as homeowners associations. It was further determined that the scope of the work to be performed would be related to capital improvements in the City only and not to programs and that the Committee portion of the work would require six months' time, beginning in January 1976. The City Manager's Office was directed, by general Council consent, to forward the letters requesting recommendations for potential committee members. REQUEST FOR EVENING MEETING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1575: Councilman Seymour moved that the public hearing scheduled on Conditional Use Permit No. 1575 for December 9, 1975, 2:30 p.m., as a result of appeal of City Planning Commission action by the applicant, be held at 7:30 that evening, in accordance with requests from interested property owners. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. ~!~w CARPIED. RESOLUTION NO. 75R-614 - ENDORSING ALTERNATIVE 6 - SANTA ANA RIVER FLOOD PROTECTION AGENCY: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 75R-614 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, EXPRESSING PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE 6 OF THE FLOOD CONTROL PLAN DEVELOPED FOR THE SANTA ANA RIVER BY THE U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 75R-614 duly passed and adopted. 75-1036 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 25, 1975a 1:30 P.M. GLOVER STADIUM RENTAL: Request for approval to lease Glover Stadium for a United States versus Australia rugby game on January 31, 1976, was submitted by Larry Sierk on behalf of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce and approved on motion by Councilman ?ebley, seconded by Councilman Seymour, subject to payment of the normal rental fee for such use. MOTION CARRIED. STIPENDS FOR ESTABLISHED COMMISSIONS: Mayor Thom noted that there are several City Commissions established by ordinance whose members do not receive any stipend or honorarium for their hours spent in attendance. He felt that it is important to recognize the efforts of those who serve on the Library Board, Cultural Arts Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Golf Course Advisory Commission by awarding them a stipend, much the same as the City Planning Commission'receives. The consensus of Council opinion was that a stipend in the amount of $25.00 per regularly scheduled meeting (not to include adjourned regular meetings, work sessions and/or joint sessions) should be given to Commissioners in attendance. During discussion it was further clarified that the Council did not feel those who serve on more than one Commission should receive a stipend for each, but rather for their primary appointment. It was also determined that the stipend would not be given to those Commissioners not in attendance at any particular meeting. Councilman Sneegas indicated agreement but also requested that an annual cost summary be prepared showing how much this will cost the City. At the conclusion of discussion, Councilman Thom moved that the City Attorney prepare the necessary documentation to implement the awarding of stipends to the Library Board, Cultural Arts Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Golf Course Advisory Commission, in the amount of $25.00 per regularly scheduled meeting attended; and further directed that a cost analysis of same be prepared and for- warded to the City Council. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Pebley moved to recess to Executive Session. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:26 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present (7:10 P.M.). ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Seymour moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 7:10 P.M. ALONA M. HOUGARD, CITY CLERK ,i ,,