1971/06/29 71-393
City Hall, Anaheim, Caltforni% - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M,
Because of the number in attendance, apparently for the public hear-
ing, Conditional Use Number 1074, scheduled as the third item on the Agenda
was taken out of order.
Pursuant to City Planning Co~mnission Resolution No. PC71-89, grant-
ing said conditional use permit, subject to conditions, Condition No. 10 read-
lng "That there shall be a maximum of 80 students permitted in the proposed
school and that at the end of two years, if the Petitioner requests an in-
crease, said consideration shall be made at an advertised public hearing
to determine whether or not any adverse effects have been experienced, and
whether an additional number of students should be permitted."
The City Clerk submitted and read letter received JUne 24, 1971, re-
questing continuance for a full Council, signed by Warren Schutz, representing
the East Anaheim Methodist Church, Reverend Fred Diehl, Anaheim Christian Day
School, and Norman Hahn, General Representative.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, said pub-
1Sc hearing was continued, as requested, to July 20, 1971, 1:30 P.M. MOTION
CARRIED.
.PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO, 70-71-54 - VARIANCE NO. 2253 - CONDITIONAT.
USE PER,T. NO. 1236 AND AREA qEVELOP~NT PLAN NO. 95:
AREA DEVELOp~NT PLAN NO.. 95: Includes those lots located on the west side
of EucIid Street, generally between Broadway and Orange Avenue.
The City Planning Co~nission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-106,
reco~nended amendment to Area Development Plan No.95, in accordance with Ex-
hibit "B", to replace Exhibit "A" previously approved, subject to the follow-
ing conditions:
1. That the owners of all affected parcels shall provide a 20-foot
wide vehicular accessway along the west boundaries of said parcels and 20-foot
wide vehicular accessway returns to Euclid Street, as depicted on Exhibit "B"
(as amended), as the parcels are proposed for co~ercia! development, or on
demand by the City; and that only three (3) permanent private vehicular ac-
cessway returns be permitted to Euclid Street to lessen the vehicular move-
ments onto this street.
2. That the locations shown on Exhibit "B" (as amended) are deemed
to be fixed access locations, so that property owners may be assured of the
huildable land that would he available to them when commercial development of
their property is anticipated.
3. That all accessways and access returns shall be installed upon
demand by the City, and that mutual easement rights to and over said vehicu-
lar accessways shall be granted to and exchanged by all property owners cov-
ered in Area Development Plan No. 95, upon demand by the City; said easement
rights shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney and then be
recorded with the Orange County Recorder.
4. That~the required vehicular accessways shall be paved in accord-
ance with the requirements of the Director of Public Works.
5. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the west
side of the 20-foot wide north-south accessway required along all properties
encompassed in the Area Development Plan.
6. That vehicular access rights, except at street and/or alley
openings shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim, provided, however, that
temporary access to Euclid Street from the individual parcels included within
Area Development Plan No. 95 shall be allowed until such time as the City de-
mands improvements of the private vehicular accessways; further provided that
the individual property owners shall enter into an agreement with the City of
Anaheim to close the temporary accessways that are not in conformance with
the location of the three (3) permanent access returns that are designated
on Exhibit "B" (as amended); and that portion of the temporary accessway, lying
within the front setback, shall be landscaped. Said agreement shall be re-
corded with the Orange County Recorder's office prior to the issuance of a
butldin~ permit on an individual parcel.
71-394
City Hall. Anaheim. California - CO~CIL MINUTES - June 29. 1971. 1:30 P.M.
RECLAS$IFiCAT%0~ NO, 70-71-54: To consider change of zone from R-A to C-l;
property located on the west side of Euclid Street, approximately 350 feet
north of Orange Avenue; further described as Parcel "B".
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-107,
recommended Reclassification No. 70-71-54, 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 Euclid Street (Parcels A and B) for street widening purposes.
2. That street lighting facilities along Euclid Street (Parcels
A and B) shall be installed as required by the Director of Public Utilities
and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the of-
fice 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 15¢ 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 a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the west
property line.
6. That a parcel map to record the approved division of subject
property.be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and then be re-
corded in the office of the Orange County Recorder.
7. That any parking area lighting proposed shall be down-lighting
of a maximum height of 6 feet, which lighting shall be directed away from the
property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area.
8. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
9. That drainage of subject property shall be provided in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer.
10. That subject property shall be developed in accordance with the
conditions and requirements of Area Development Plan No. 95.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro-
perty, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, above mentioned, shall be completed.
Th-e 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 180 days from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council
may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10, above mentioned,
shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
VARIANCE NO, 2253: To allow waiver of the minimum lot area (Parcel A,) to
permit an R-A parcel of less than on~ acre.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-108,
granted Variance No. 2253, subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Re-
classification No. 70-71-54, now pending.
2. That subject property shall be developed in accordance with the
conditions and requirements of Area Development Plan No. 95.
CONDITIONAL USE pERMIT NO, 12~6: To permit the establishment of an animal
clinic on Parcel "B".
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-109,
granted Conditional Use Permit Bio. 1236 to establish an animal clinic, with
waiver of minimum required 'building setback, subject to the following condi-
tions:
1. That this conditional use permit is granted subject to completion
of Reclassification No. 70-71-54, now pending.
2. %~at subject property shall be developed substantially in accord-
ance with plans and specifications on file with 'the City of Anaheim, marked
Exhibit No. 1, R~vision No. 1.
3.' That Condition No. 2, above mentioned, shall be complied.with
prior to final building and zoning inspections.
71-395
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI~FOTES - June 2~, 1971, 1;30 P,M.
Mr. Charles Roberts reported Area Development Plan No. 95 proposes
a secondary means of access to Euclid Street, and was the result of the Front-
on S~udy conducted a few years ago to determine ho~ certain residential homes
frontin~ arterial highways could be convene d to cou~ercial uses. He stated
if each parcel within Area Development Plan No. 95 ~re alloyed access to
Euclid Street there could be from 13 to 26 accessways.
He further reported that when the original Area Development Plan
and zoning was recon~nended by the City Planning Comnission to the City Coun-
cil, as a result of the Front-on Study (Reclassification No. 67-68-99) it
was felt premature, and thereupon denied by the City Council. However, in
July, 1970, the Area Development Plan was readvertised in conjunction with
Reclassification No. 70-71-3, property approximately in the middle of the
Study area, at which time it was determined that accessways and alley to
the rear should be private accessways, and Area Development Plan No. 95,
Exhibit "A" was adopted.
The City Planning Co~nission now recommends that the original des-
ignation of access points to Euclid Street be emended to reflect a more ef-
ficient utilization of the land and still keep the number of.accessways to
Euclid Street to three, and thereupon recon~nends the adoption of Exhibit
"B", replacing Exhibit "~'.
Mr. Roberts advised that the City Planning Commission was of the
opinion that the C-1 zoning and requested use were appropriate.
Mayor Pro Tem Pebley asked if the Applicant or his Agent was sat-
isfied with the recon~nendations and conditions set forth by the City Planning
Co~ission.
Mr. Earl Millot, Architect for the property owner, replied in the
affirmative.
The Mayor Pro Tem asked if anyone wished to address the Council
in Opposition.
Mr. Richard Booher, 1140 Leisure Court, speaking on behalf of his
mother, Mrs. Ona Booher, owner of 417 South Euclid Street, addressed the
Council in opposition, particularly to Area Development Plan No. 95, in that
the required alley to the rear and front setback would reduce the property
to an unusable size of 62 feet by 69 feet. He questioned how the Plan could
be adopted when there are presently residential structures on the property.
In his opinion, even with land assembly, Area Development Plan No. 95 would
hinder their chances to sell the property. He thereupon requested the pro-
perty remain R-1.
Mrs. Cecil Cough, 421 South Euclid Street, representing Mrs. Booher
and the four homes on the west side of Euclid Street, addressed the Council
in opposition, advising that when Area Development Plan No. 95 was first
adopted they had no notification and no part in it, and hence no opportunity
to make their wishes known. She stated that since none of them received the
notices of the public hearing it was hard to accept the statement that 33
notices were mailed.
Hrs. Cough, in briefing the history of zoning in the area, noted
the original request for an optometry office was denied, and as a result,
the property had been left to detriorate; it was rented to seven postal em-
ployees and the house is technically known as a "crash pad," with parties
at ali hours; a deplorable situation which is repeatedly reported to the po-
lice.
She further felt that they who lived there were beir~ penalized by
not only the "hippies" at one end of the block, but the ~ulance service
at the south, which has for 15 months been operating illegally. She felt
it un£atr to permit 13 accessvays across the street and restrict their side
to 3.
71-396
City Hall, A~aheila, California - C~IR~CIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1;30
Hrs. Cough objected to Area Development Plan No. 95 and the require-
ment of the 20-foot alley to the rear, and stated as far as the four houses
were concerned they would simply like the Plan stricken from the books so
that their properties could be sold and development depend on a workable,
acceptable plan provided by the buyer.
To further clarify the desires of the four property owners, Council-
man Roth stated it was his understanding that they would like to develop the
property commercially, without the 20-foot alley requirement at the rear.
Mrs. C~ugh replied in the affirmative, and noted the accessways
are being shifted to meet whatever development occurs first, which further
substantiated the fact that a definite plan should not be adopted.
Mr. Roberts advised that although the arguments presented are good
ones, he felt obliged to support the Plan because, in his opinion, the Plan
has merits in that it does provide for an access to the rear of the property
to an area that will require development for parking. If existing structures
are left on the property, and no access to the rear is provided, the only
area for parking would be the front yards, which is contrary to zoning pro-
visions.
Regarding the four northern lots, the structures would have to be
removed and new comercial structures placed on the property if access and
adequate parking is provided on-site.
Regarding land assembly, Mr. Roberts stated if this is accomplished,
he felt the City Planning Commission would be agreeable to an alternative plan;
however, if each parcel is to develop individually, Area Development Plan No.
95 will provide access to the property and limit the number of vehicular con-
flicts onto Euclid Street, which is one of the points taken into consideration
by the City Planning Cormnission in their recommendation.
Councilman Roth asked the City Attorney if action could be taken
on the Reclassification, Variance and Conditional Use Permit, and deferred
on the Area Development Plan.
Mr. Geisler replied that if it is the Council's intent to have
limited access to Euclid Street this Plan would require action accordingly.
If there is no Plan, development will be similar to that along Brookhurst
Street, north of Lincoln Avenue, which was inherited from the County.
Mr. Geisler also noted that the Plan had been started with the
Tolar Real Estate Development. He further advised that the City Council
was not required to adopt the Plan, but the following question must be de-
ceded: Will co~nercial use of the property be permitted? If so, a plan
is desirable.
Mr. Geisler agreed it would be better if the property owners de-
veloped a plan to their liking, but in the absence of one, this Plan, even
though it may not be the best, was better than none.
Miss Paula Gough, 421 South Euclid Street, advised that this case
was to be her Government Project next year, and she wished to voice her op-
position to the proposed alley. She reported that six trees on their pro-
perty would have to be re~mved to provide for the required alley. She also
reported that the four houses in question are going together and do have a
plan, but that the City will not allow enough time to put the plan together.
offer.
Mayor Pro Tem Pebley asked if anyone else had any new evidence to
Mrs. Brkich, 434 Falcon Street, requested additional information
relative to the proposed animal hospital, and advised that the ~u~ual drive-
way betmeen the real estate office and the proposed animal hospital was di-
rectly to the. rear of their ho~e. She asked if the wall could be raised
from 6 feet ~o 8 feet, to cut down on the noise factor.
71-397
Anaheim, Cal!forni.~ - COUNCIL ~r~rf~ - June 29. 1971. 1:30 F,~.
Plans were posted on the wail of the City Council Ch~bers and Mr.
Nlllot, Architect, reported it is to be a first class hospital surrounded by
a concrete block wall, soundproof system in ceiling and walls, with some glass
only in the waiting room area, all other $1ass to be $1ass blocks where light
is required. He further advised that it is a six-kennel hospital, with no
outside kennels, or runs.
Mrs. Beverly Llndstrom, o~ner of 401 South Euclid Street, advised
that they purchased the property in 1962 as R-l, and had plans to use the
dwelling as an optometry office. As to renting the property for a home, she
advised that they receive at least one-third less than this four-bedroom
house with swimming pool would bring anywhere else other than a street like
Euclid Street; that about a year ago the property was put on the market and
did not sell; this because it is neither R-1 nor C-1.
In conclusion, Mrs. Lindstrom stated they favored Area Development
Plan No. 95 and would favor a blanket coemercial rezonin~ on Euclid Street,
and requested that Council action be taken soon.
The Mayor Pro Tem determined sufficient evidence had been heard,
and thereupon declared the hearing closed.
Council discussion was held relative to the possibility of ap-
proving the Reclassification, Conditional Use Permit and Variance, and
deferrin~.action on Area Development Plan No. 95; however, requiring con-
di~ional dedication of access rights .similar to the requirement mede on
the Tolar property, as both Exhibits "~' and 'B" constitute losical plan-
ninE. Noted also vas the fact that Exhibit "A" is currently approved, and
the plan by which development in this area has proceeded.
Mr. Murdoch noted that the Council is considering not only access
from Euclid Street, but also a provision of extension of a private alleyway
to the next parcels both north and south.
Mr. Geisler reported with the two center parcels havinE access to
Euclid Street, if the Area Development Plan is nov abandoned there is no
possibility'of development according to Area Development Plan No. 95, Ex-
hibit "A" or "l", ever cominE into fruition. He questioned, vithomt a
specific plan of development, the Council's authority to la~o~e a require-
ment on a property owner to provide access to an adjoining propert~ owner.
With a very definite obligation to the public not to create an untanable
traffic dondition it is quite questionable whether co0~aercial utilization
of the property should be permitted with all individual parcels hawinE ac-
cess to Euclid Street.
Mr. Geisler stated that this was the purpose of the Plan - it may
not be good, but it can be modified or changed if the property 'ouners submit
a better plan; if the Plan is elimimted, the Council has eliminated any plan
cominE into fruition.
Noted also was, until there is conversion for cc~ercial purposes,
there is no i~position of any of the requirements on the residential proper-
ties.
RESOLUTIO~ NO, 71R-2811 Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-281 for
adoption, authorizinE preparation of necessary ordinance chan~in$ the zone
as reco~mmnded by the City Planning Co~mission.
Refer. to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDIHC Ah'D ~KTERMIN-
I~ THAT TITLE 18 OF THE AHAHEIM ~IINICIPAL CODE IELATIBC TO ZOWII~ SB~ULD BE
AI~I~KD AND THAT THE B(NI~DARIES OF CERTAIN ZOHES SHOULD BE CILqlB~D. (70-71-54-
C- 1, Parcel "B" only)
· oll Call Vote:
71=398
City F~ll. ~aahelm, Cal~fornia - CO~ClL M~rfg~ - June 29, 1971, 1;~0 ?,M,
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: C01~ClLMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tam declared Resolution No. 71R-281 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-282: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-282 for
adoption, granting Variance No. 2253,as recommended by the City Planning
Conmission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A ,RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 2253.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL~'N:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Rmth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-282 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-283: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-283 for
adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1236, as recomended by the
City Planning Co~nission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 1236.
Roll Call Vote:
AYE S: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-283 duly passed and
adopted.
.F~.SOLUTION NO. 71R-284; Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-284 for
adoption, amending Resolution No. 70R-392, approving Area Development Plan
No. 95, Exhibit "B", replacing formerly adopted Exhibit "N', in accordamce
with the City Planning Commission's rec~mnendations, amending Condition ~o.
2 thereof to read as follows:
"2. That the locations Shown on Exhibit "B" (as araep~ed) are deemed
to be temporarily fixed access locations, so that property owners may be as-
sured of the buildable land that would be available to them when co~rcial
development of the property is anticipated. However, on proper application,
further modification of said Plan may be considered by the City Council."
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AREA
DEVELOP~ PLAN NO. 95, EXHIBIT "B", AS AMENDED.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNC~:
ABSENT: COUNCILI~N:
ltoth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tam declared Resolution No. 71R-284 dUly passed and
adopted.
71-399
City H~llI ~aheim, Californi$ - COUNCIL ~II~R~S - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M~
PUBLIC ~ARII~ - VARI.A!~CE NO.. ~259; Submitted by the Phoenix Club, Incorporated,
for a dance hall permit vith on-sah liquor sales to the public in an exist-
ing private club, located on R-A zoned property on the east side of Douglass
Road, approximately 750 feet north of Katella Avenue, (1566 Douglas Road.)
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-99,
denied said variance.
Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Connission was flied
by Anion Dumhart, Attorney for the Applicant, and public hearing scheduled.
Mr. Roberts noted location of subject property and existing uses
in the surrounding area. In s,,rm~artzing the hearing before the City Plan-
ning Co~nission, he reported that the Chb operates as a private dub, and
is licensed by the A.B.C. only for the sale of alcoholic beverages to mem-
bers. The Applicant intends to change the license classification to that
of a bona fide eating place to satisfy some requirements of the A.B.C.,
which license would then permit on-sale liquor to the general public.
Mr. Roberts further reported that the Applicants h~ve indicated
that the front portion of the building where the bar is located would be
technically open to the public; however., the dance hall portion, located at
the rear of the building would be strictly for the use of the members of the
Club, and that they will not encourage non-member use of the building.
Mr. Roberts then listed reasons for denial by the City Planning
Commission.
Mr. Anion Dumhart, 13920 Beach Boulevard, Attorney representing
the Phoenix Club, advised that this is a private club operated not for pro-
fit, and fully intends to remain a private, non-profit club. The techni-
cality with the A.B.C. has forced the application for a general, on-sale
license.
Mr. Dumhart stated,in reviewing the AnaheimMmnicipal Code with
the City Attorney, it was discovered that the Club as ft is, and is intended
to be operated, does not fit into any present zoning classification. Public
dance hall was determined to be the nearest to the type of operation by the
Club; however, they really did not fit into that category, nor did they in-
tend to operate as a public dance hall.
Mr. Dumhart further explained that the A.B.C. requires the holder
of the public license to admit a member of the public to the establishment
or a portion thereof to buy a drink, if that is desired, and if a member of
the public demands his legal right of entry to purchase a drink, he will be
admitted to the bar area only, and this will be the only change in their
operations. All other affairs of the Club, such as dances, etc., will be
restricted to members and guests in the company of members.
In conclusion, Mr. Dumhart advised they have no objections to con-
ditions recommended by Staff, in the event the variance is approved.
In anwwer to Council questioning, Mr. Dumhart advised that the
Phoenix Club was incorporated in 1960, and the Anaheim property developed
in 1965. Prior to 1965, the Club met in temporary quarters, first in the
Elk's Club in Buena Park and subsequently in Stanton.
Councilman Thom asked for further explanation of the "legal tech-
nicality.''
Mr. ~,mhart replied that apparently an A.B.C. agent obtained access
to the prn~ses and purchased a drink in violation of the Club license. He
further advised that the problem was not so much access, but if a member
brinSs a 8neet, under the Club license the guest cannot legally purchase a
drink.
71-400
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL HINtlTEs - June 29, 1971, 1;30
The Mayor Pro Tem asked if anyone wished to address the Council in
opposition.
Mr. Eugene Scarsbrough, 1474 Douglass Road, owner of the Golden Coach
Mobile Home Park, directly north of the Phoenix Club, advised that their ob-
Jections are a matter of record and that they have not changed their position,
that they are violently opposed to the public license. He further advised
that they were in no way opposed to the Phoenix Club and the manner in which
it has been operated as a private club.
Regarding the statement made that there would be no change in the
Club's operation, Hr. Scarsbrough stated their concern was that they cannot
now control their mm members, particularly on large events, so how could it
be controlled if open to the public? He related damage done to his property
as a result of club activities, and also called attention to the inadequate
parking in the event of a large affair.
Mr. Scarsbrough further reported that there would be no way to keep
the public out of the dance hall area, because the bar opens onto the dance
area, and although it may be relatively difficult to gain admittance.at this
time, it must be realized that there will be changes in the Club's officers
and changes in Club policies.
Mr. M~rdoch noted that the Applicant's Agent has indicated agreement
to the Staff's recommended conditions of approval and that one of the nota-
tions of the Staff, No. 7, reads as follows:
"7. If it is determined that the proposed use is appropriate, the
Planning Commission may wish to consider whether there would be any advantage
to the City to restrict the Club's activities to its present method of opera-
tion. Such a restriction would preclude a public dance hall with on-sale li-
quor in the future, should the property be sold or the operation altered."
Mr. Fmrdoch thereupon asked if the Applicant was also in accord with
this provision.
Mr. Geisler advised that the provision referred to wo~ld be for the
exception of necessary revisions in connectton with the on-sale liquor license.
Mr. Geisler further advised that it was his understanding that they
did not want their dances open to the public. The question is, they do not
really meet the definition of a private dance, thus the reason for the appli-
cation for a public dance hall, but restricted to members only; the same man-
ner of operation they have had.
Mr. Nurdoch stated that if the Variance is approved, No. 7 should
be a condition of Council approval.
Mr. Dumhart replied that they had no objection to this restriction;
that their only concern is to qualify for the A.B.C. license.
Mr. Scarsbrough asked if the bar is open to the public, what addi-
tional parking arrangements are to be made, since parking is presently inade-
quate.
Mr. Roberts reported that parking provisions presently meet Code
minimum standards.
Nr. William Hauenetein, 1400 South I)~mslass (resident of the adjoin-
lng mobile home pe~k, ~p~ce 73) stated that during the h~aringhe has heard
statements made relative to ~he difficulty in obtaining admittance to the
Phoenix Club, m~! that one umst be a~er. He reported he was not a member;
however, on s~e~ral occasions he has gone into the Club with a Stoup of other
people. In his opinion, the Club has been operating illegally in the past.
Mayor-Pro TemPebleywas of the opinion' that sufficient evidence
had been presented, and with the concurrence of the City Council, declared
the haart~ closed.
71-401
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
_RESOLUTION NO. 71R-285: At the conclusion of further Council discussion,
Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-285 for adoption, granting Var-
iance No. 2259, subject to the following Interdepartmental Con~ittee recom-
mendations, as amended:
1. That street lighting facilities along Douglass Road 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 instal-
lation of the above-mentiomed requirement.
2. That the sidewalks, curbs and gutters and driveways shall be
installed and repaired along Douglass Road as required by the City Engineer
and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the of-
fice of the City Engineer.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
4. That fire hydrants shall be installed as required and deter-
mined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department.
5. That subject property shall be developed substantially in ac-
cordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim,
marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
6. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, above mentioned, shall
be complied with prior to the approval of the ABC license or within 180 days,
whichever occurs first.
7. Subject to restriction of the Club's activities to its present
method of operation, restricted to members and their guests only, except
for the necessary revision for an on-sale license. Such restriction to pre-
clude a public dance hall with on-sale liquor in the future, should the pro-
perty be sold.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 2259.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-285 duly passed and
adopted.
RECESS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, a 5-minute
Recess was declared. MOTION CARRIED. (3:50 P.M.).
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Pro Tem Pebley called the meeting to order, all members of
the Council being present, with the exception of Councilmen Stephenson and
Dutton. Business before the City Council resumed. (4:00 P.M.).
PUBLIC HEARING - STREET LIGHT.LNG ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 1965-2-B (TRACT NO. 2451):
Public hearing was held, pursuant to Resolution No. 71R-225, duly published
in the Anaheim Bulletin, June 17, 1971, and notices posted in accordance
with law, on proposed Street Lighting Assessment Maintenance District 1965-
2-B.
The Mayor Pro Tem asked i£ anyone wished to address the Council
either for or against said District; there being no response, declared the
hearing closed.
RESOL~3~ION NO. 71R-286: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-286
for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
71-402
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, !971,. 1:50 ~,..M,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAF~IM FINDING A~D DETER-
MINING THAT NO I~OTESTS, EITHER WRITTEN OR O~AL, WEI~E MADE I~ THE I~OCEED-
INGS F(~ THE IMPROVEMENTS CONTEMPLATED TO BE MADE BY THE CITY O~ AI~AMEIM
UNDER THE STREET LIGHTING ACT OF 1931 -- STREET LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NO. 1965-2-B. (Tract No. 2451)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-25& duly passed
and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - STREET LIGHTING AS~SESSMENT DISTRICT 1.965-..3=.B (.~ACT NO.
Public hearing was held, pursuant to Resolution No. 71R-226, duly published
in the Anaheim Bulletin, June 17, 1971, and notices posted in accordance
with law, on proposed Street Lighting Assessment Maintenance ~strict 1~65-
3-B.
The Mayor Pro Tem asked if anyone wished to address the Coumctl,
either for or against said District; there being no response, declared the
hearing closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-287: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-257 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETEI-
MINING THAT NO PROTESTS, EITHER WRITTEN OR ORAL, WERE MADE IN THE PROCEED-
INGS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS CONTEMPLATED TO BE MADE BY THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
UNDER THE STREET LIGHTING ACT OF 1931 -- STREET LIGHTING A~SESS~NT DISTKICT
NO. 1965-3-B. (Tract No. 2876)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
AB SENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-287 duly passed and
adopted.
TENTATIV~ TRACT NO. 7370: Request of C.J. Queyrel, Anacal Engineering Co~any,
was submitted to change Condition No. 1 of approval of Tentative Tract No.
7370 to eliminate requirement of approval of the Santa Ana River by the Orange
County Flood Control District standards, or until a favorable Flood Hazard
letter is obtained from the Orange County Flood Control District.
Tract located on the north side of the Riverside Freeway, east of
Lakeview Avenue, and contains 41 proposed R-1 lots.
Also submitted were excerpts of the City Planning C~matsston meet-
ing of April 19, 1971, and City Engineer's recomendation that appeal and re-
vision as requested be denied.
The City Engineer noted the location of subject tract am~ a~vtse4
that the bridge across the River at Lakeview was constructed by the County
at a lesser length than the normal Channel width, and because of the limited
length of the bridge it would deflect the water from the north side an4 cause
eddies, which would be a hazard to said tract.
Mr. Qu~yrel addressed the Council, advising that at the time the
tentative tract was approved by the City Council he stood and was not recog-
nized, that he wanted at that time to appeal Condition No. 1.
He reported that the County, in their construction along the River,
has created problems for all developers in this area; however, his letter
was written because he felt it unfair to impose a condttien ~ this tract
r~ot imposed on the others.
71-403
City Hal!, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTgS - June 29, 1971, 1;30 P.M~
Mr. Queyrel was of the opinion that the reason the letter was writ-
ten by the Flood Control District was that improvements are being made on
the dikes up to Lake~iew this surm~er, with improvements planned from Lake-
view Avenue to Imperial Highway next year. However, the folly of it all
was that after the dikes are improved the flow capacity will allow no free-
board at all, and will actually create a hazard to adjoining tracts.
Recognizing any approval of a tract map requires a flood hazard
letter, Mr. Queyrel was of the opinion that the City's condition of approval
could have been the normal condition and that reference to obtaining a flood
hazard letter could have been omitted.
In the .discussion that followed, Mr. Maddox agreed that when you
are considering how a river will act under flood conditions it is .a matter
subject to differences of opinion. He thereupon suggested the issue be de-
ferred to allow further discussions with Mr. Queyrel.
Mr. Queyrel felt the City Engineer never would have.reconanended this
condition other, than. to uphold the position taken by the Flood Control Dist-
rict. He thereupon agreed to a continuance.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, request
relative to Tract No. 7370 was deferred to the meeting to be held 3uly 20,
1971. MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST - PARKING: Petition signed by Miss Mildred Williams and other residents
in the vicinity of the new Bank of America Building, located at the southeast
corner of Broadway and Harbor Boulevard, objecting to all-day parking by bank
employees and requesting signs be posted restricting parking to "Residents
Only," and letter submitted by the First Presbyterian Church, requesting areas
adjacent to the Church property be restricted to 2-hour parking limit were
submitted.
ReverendPaul Keller, Assistant Pastor of the First Presbyterian
Church, advised that they are greatly hampered in the functional use of the
Church property in that the area is occupied by all-day parkers, and that
they are required to park several blocks away to accomplish what would be a
two-minute errand or delivery to the Church. For these reasons, they request
a 2-hour parking limit be established from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. weekdays.
He further advised that the Church had no off-street parking at the present
time; however, it is anticipated that one of the three dwellings on Clementine
Street,owned by the Church, will be removed from the property, which will pro-
vide some parking for the staff, but this will not solve the total problem.
Reverend Keller further advised that on weekends and evenings the
lower level of the bank's parking structure is left open and is used by their
membership without charge.
In answer to Council query, Mr. Murdoch reported the situation has
been discussed with the bank manager, who does not care to make any changes.
Further, the situation involves more than the two churches in the area; there
is quite a residential area which is rather compact, with practically no drive-
ways or off-street parking at all,in that it is one of the older sections of
the City.
Mr. Murdoch felt limited parking will have to be provided; however,
questioned whether a 2-hour parking limit as a practical matter would accomp-
lish the purpose, since a 2-hour limitation is made to order for one move in
the morning and one move in the afternoon. He asked if a 1-hour parking limi-
tation from 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. would accomplish the results desired?
Reverend Keller was of the opinion that the 1-hour parking on the
Broadway side of the Church would be better than the 2-hour limitation.
Mr. Murdoch further advised that this problem has been explored for
several months; however, a satisfactory solution has not been reached.
At the conclusion of the discussion, Mr. Fmrdoch was requested to
further study the apparent problem, to be brought back to the City Council
for further considerattonwith a report and recom~endation.
71-404
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P,M.
TENTATIVE TRACTS NOS, 7458, 7459 AND 7460: Action by the City Council on subject
tracts was continued from the meeting of June 22, 1971, at the request of the
Developer, Harvey A. Berger. Tracts located between Esperanza Road and La
Palma Avenue, northeast of Imperial Highway.
At the request of Harvey A Berger, received at open meeting, Council
action on Tentative Tracts Nos. 7458, 7459 and 7460 was further continued for
two weeks, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Roth. MOTION
CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-288 - AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 5056: In accordance with recom-
mendation of the City Engineer, Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-
288 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED
PROPOSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE
FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL
UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING
ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT:
THE MAGNOLIA AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM SANTA ANA FREEWAY TO LA PALMA
AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 5056. (R.J. Noble Company -
$94,993.40)
Roll Call Vote:
AYE S: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-288 duly passed and
adopted.
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS:' Councilman Pebley offered Resolutions Nos. 71R-289
and 71R-290 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-289 - WORK ORDER NO. 1227: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NE-
CESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: THE SUNKIST STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT FROM HOWELL AVENUE TO BALL ROAD,
IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1227. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS,
PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORI-
ZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID
PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF.
(Bids to be Opened - July 22, 1971, 2:00 P.M.)
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-290 - WORK ORDER NO. 1231: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE ANDNE-
CESSITY REQUIP. E T~E GONSTRUCTION A/qD COPIPLETION OF A PUBLIC IPfPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: THE LA PALMA AVENUE SEWER IMPROVEMENT FROM APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET EAST
OF TO APPROXIMATELY 2,950 FEET EAST OF IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, IN TfIE CITer OF AlqA-
HEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1231. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF SAID PUBLIC I~5~ROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLAI~S, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.;
~ AUTHORIZING AlqD DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING
SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - July
22, 1971 - 2:00 P.M.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCIL~N:
ABSENT: COUNCILI~N:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolutions Nos. 71R-289 and 71R-290
duly passed and adopted.
71-405
..City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M,
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: Upon receipt of certification from the Director of
Public Works, Councilman Thom offered Resolutions Nos. 71 R-291 through 71R-
293, both inclusive, for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-291 -,WORK ORDER NO. 611-B. 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 FOL-
LOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE RIO VISTA STREET - STREET IM-
PROVEMENT FROM APPROXIMATELY 65 FEET SOUTH OF TO APPROXIMATELY 1,045
FEET SOUTH OF FRONTERA STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO.
611-B. (R.J. Noble Company)
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-292 - WORK ORDER NO. 612-B: 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 PER-
FORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE BEACH BOULEVARD STORM DRAIN AND STREET
IMPROVEMENT, CARBON CREEK CHANNEL TO ORANGE AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
WORK ORDER NO. 612-B. (K.E.C. Company)
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-293 - WORK ORDER NO. 1230: 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 PER-
FORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE JACKSON STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT FROM
RIO VISTA STREET TO 400 FEET EAST OF PARK VISTA STREET, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1230. (Mike Dabovich)
Roll Call Vote:
AYE S: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolutions Nos. 71R-291 through 71R-
293, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-294 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT. Councilman Pebley offered Resolution
No. 71R-294 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN
DEEDS AND ORDERII~G~THEIR RECORDATION. (John M. and Margie J. King, Dean M.
and Velma L. Logsdon; Western Avenue Southern Baptist Church of Anaheim;
The Colwell Company)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-294 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-295 - COMMENCEMENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN: On recomendation of
the City Attorney, Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-295 for adop-
tion.
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, O~ REAL
PROPERTY FOR HIGHWAY EASEMENT AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. (Kraemer Street)
71-406
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
AB SENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-295 duly passed and
adopted.
PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - ELECTRICAL gANGES FOR SCHOOLS: The City Manager reported
that telephone negotiations for purchase of 14 Electric Ranges for the Anaheim
Schools replacement program had resulted in the low quotation from General
Electric Company in the amount of $4,332.04, including tax, installation and
delivery, and therefore recommended this purchase be authorized.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, purchase
was authorized from General Electric Company in the amount of $4,332.04, in-
cluding tax, installation and delivery. MOTION CARRIED.
WATER SAMPLES - ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES CONTRACT: On recommendation of the City
Manager, Councilman Roth moved that a contract with Associated Laboratories
be authorized, for bacterial analysis of water samples through the City, from
July 1, 1971 through June 30, 1972, at $2.90 per sample. Councilman Thom
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY: Claim submitted by Allstate Insurance Company, on behalf
of Dolores Forsyth, for purported personal property damages sustained on or
about May 6, 1971, involving a City vehicle, was denied as recormuended by the
City Attorney~ and ordered referred to the insurance carrier, on motion by
Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-296 - W,W, JAYCOX CONTRACT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolu-
tion No. 71R-296 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO A CONTRACT RELATING TO
TRASH COLLECTION. (JAYCOX)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-296 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-297 - ANAHEIM DISPOSAL CONTRACT: Councilman Pebley offered
Resolution No. 71R-297 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO A CONTRACT RELATING TO
TRASH COLLECTION (C.V. TAORMINA, DBA ANAHEIM DISPOSAL COMPANY)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-297 duly passed and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO, 71R-298 - SAFETY STRIPING SERVICE CONTRACT: Councilman Pebley of-
fered Resolution No. 71R-298 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
71-407
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO A CONTRACT SAFETY STRIPING
SERVICE. (7th Amendment)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and I)utton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-298 duly passed and
adopted.
ORDINANCE NOS. 2944 AND 2946 - INCREASE IN SANITATION CHARGES: On recon~nendation
of the City Manager, Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance Nos. 2944 and 2946
for first reading, increasing Sanitation Charges 25¢ per unit for residen-
tial pickup and increasing commercial rates from $2.50 to $3.00 for 3-time
per week pickup, and from $4.00 to $5.00 for 6-time per week pickup.
ORDINANCE NO. 2944: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 10,
CHAPTER 10.12, SECTION 10.12.020 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
SANITATION AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM -- CHARGES.
ORDINANCE NO. 2946: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AI~NDING TITLE 6,
CHAPTER 6.21, SECTION 6.21.140 OF THE ANAHEIM~3NICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
RUBBISH AND WASTE MATERIALS -- CHARGES FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on
motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom:
Orange County Mosquito Abatement District - Minutes - May 20,
1971.
City of Yorba Linda - Resolution No. 295 - Requesting the
Orange County Board of Supervisors to immediately proceed
with the acquisition of land for Yorba Park.
Before the Public Utilities Commission - Application of
Southern California Gas Company for (a) a general increase
in its gas rates, (b) for authority either to include a pur-
chased gas adjustment provision in its tariffs or to imple-
ment an enlarged advice letter procedure for reflecting in
its rates changes in purchased gas costs, (c) for authority
to modify the service agreements under Schedules G-58, G-58A
and G-61, and (d) for authority to consolidate and otherwise
modify certain of its tariff schedules.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 2945: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 2945 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 4.29.030 OF CHAPTER
4.29 OF TITLE 4 OF THE ANAHEIM ~I/NICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUSINESS REGU-
LATIONS (MASSAGE PARLORS)
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-Z99 - EMFLO~MENT OF MIKE TAU$IG, CHORAL FESTIVAL DIRECTOR:
Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-299 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution BooRf
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND MIKE TAUSIG, AN INDIVIDUAL. (Choral Festival Orchestra)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNC ILME~:
NOES: COUNCIL~:
ABSENT: COUNCIL~N:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-299 duly passed and
adopted.
71-408
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 71R-300 - SOILS TESTING AGREEMENT: Councilman Thom offered Reso-
lution No. 71R-300 for adoption.
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 COUNTY OF ORANGE EXTENDING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT FOR SOIL AND
MATERIAL CONTROL TESTS, DATED AUGUST 2, 1960, FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS
COMMENCING JULY 1, 1971, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1976.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-300 duly passed and
adopted.
JOINT MEETING - CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND VISITORS AND CONVENTION BUREAU: Council-
man Thom requested a joint meeting with the City Council, Anaheim-Chamber of
Con~uerce and the Visitors and Convention Bureau to discuss and clarify bud-
gets.
By general Council consent, a tentative joint meeting was scheduled
for July 13, 1971, 10:00 A.M.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commission at
their meeting held June 14, 1971, pertaining to the following applications,
were submitted for City Council information and consideration:
VARIANCE NO. 2266: Submitted by Mervin A. and Shirley A. Danforth, proposing
to convert an existing garage to a playroom on the first floor and a bedroom
on the second floor, and to construct a new one-car garage and carport else-
where on the lot which is zoned R-i, located on the east side of Adria Street,
south of Chanticleer Road; and further described as 1426 South Adria Street,
with waivers of:
a. Minimum required front setback. (Modified)
b. Minimum required side yard. (Withdrawn)
c. Minimum required garages.
d. MInimum distance between buildings.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-115,
granted said variance, subject to conditions.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1243: Submitted by Peter and Audrey Warnoff, to
permit on-sale beer in an existing billiard parlor on C-1 zoned property
located on the north side of Ball Road, west of Beach Boulevard; further
described as 3015-3017 and 3019 West Ball Road.
The City Planning Co~nission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-116,
granted said conditional use permit, subject to conditions.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1143: Submitted by Grace Romo and Alice Sotomayor,
requesting an extension of time for the expansion of an existing child nur-
sery to permit a maximum of 56 students and 6 staff members on R-1 zoned pro-
perty located on the east side of East Street, south of La Palma Avenue; fur-
ther described as 744 North East Street.
The City Planning Commission, by Motion, granted a six-month exten-
sion of time, subject to conditions.
The foregoing actions were reviewed by the City Council and no fur-
ther action taken.
PROPOSED STREET NAME CHANGE - ORA~SE STREET TO LA CRESTA AVENUE: City Planning
Commission Resolution No. PC71-120 was submitted, recommending the adoption
of a street name change for Orange Street to La Cresta Avenue.
RESOLUTION NO, 71R-301; Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-301 for
adop~ion.
71-409
City Hall, Amaheim, California - COUNCIL M~NUTES - June 29, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CHANGING THE NAME
FOR ORANGE STREET TO LA CRESTA AVENUE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Roth, Thom and Pebley
None
Stephenson and Dutton
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution No. 71R-301 duly passed and
adopted.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: At the request of the City Manager, Councilman Peb-
ley moved to Recess to Executive Session. Councilman Roth seconded the mo-
tion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:00 P.M.).
ADJOURNMENT: At the conclusion of Executive Session and upon return of all Coun-
cilmen to the Council Chambers, with the exception of Councilmen Stephenson
and Dutton, Councilman Thom moved to adjourn. Councilman Rdth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOIIRNED: 6: 25 P.M.
Signed ,~~--~ ~. /~~, ~-~
City Clerk
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - July 6, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Thom
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley and Dutton
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim
was called to order by the City Clerk and adjourned for lack of a quorum
to the next regular meeting, July 13, 1971, 1:30 P.M.
ADJOURNED: 1:30 P.M.
Signed
City Clerk