Loading...
1971/08/1771-493 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 10:00 A.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular Session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRE SENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton COUNCILMEN: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Alan G. Orsborn DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION: John Jo Collier DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS: Thornton E. Piersall DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES: Gordon W. Hoyt FINANCE DIRECTOR: M.R. Ringer STADIUM AND CONVENTION CENTER DIRECTOR: Thomas F. Liegler CHIEF OF POLICE: David B. Michel ACTING FIRE CHIEF: James J. Heying ASSISTANT LIBRARY DIRECTOR: Mary Lou Haire EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT, ANAHEIM VISITORS AND CONVENTION BUREAU: William F. Snyder GENERAL MANAGER, ANAHEIM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Larry Sierk Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order and advised the purpose of this meeting is to consider suggested project and program priorities for fis- cal years 1971-1976. PROJECT AND PROGRAM PRIORITIES: City Manager Keith Murdoch asked that the Council establish relative project and program priorities for the next five Fiscal Years to facilitate setting up the budgets for the coming years. Referring to the suggested list of project and program priorities previously submitted to the Council, he advised that the items are, for the most part, in addition to the ongoing program in-the currently approved budget and are based on the assumption that the programs in the currently approved budget have the highest priorities. He added that, although the suggested priorities are set up for the next five years, it is doubtful all of those listed could be accomplished within that time. Councilman Stephenson questioned the necessity for spreading out steel painting at the Stadium for the next five years. Mr. Murdoch advised that different areas of the Stadium require painting at different times, depending upon the amount of exposure; also, by repainting on a continuing basis ~eme of the work can be done by regular City maintenance employees. He added that at the moment there is only one painter working there and he is primarily doing touch-up work. Councilman Thom requested a recap of the amount of money anticipated to be available this fiscal year for these additional programs. Possible Additional Capital: Mr. Murdoch replied that the increase in water rates is expected to bring in about $400,000.00 during the portion of this fiscal year that they will be in effect, although it is anticipated this reve- nue will amount to about $600,000.00 a year from the~'on; the additional room occupancy tax should yield an additional $200,000.00 this fiscal year. He added that if a bond issue for purchasing the remainder of the electrical system from Southern California Edison Company is placed on an election ballot and is passed by the voters, this would release an additional $400,000.00 from this year's budget that then would be available for use, and the recently-adopted admissions tax would result in additional revenue of about $3,000,000.00 per year, alLhough, since it would not go into effect until Jan- uary 1, 1972, a conservative estimate for the remainder of fiscal 1971-72 would be $500,000.00. Mr. Murdoch noted that the Council had discussed the possibility of not putting the admissions tax into effect, in the event an electrical bond issue should be passed by the voters, and advised that the date of 7]-494 Cit. y Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- August 17, 1971, 10:00 A.M. January 18, 1972, has been suggested as appropriate for a Special Election, if this is what the Council wishes. Council discussion followed, and the City Clerk quoted Council ac- tion from the meeting of June 22, 1971, wherein a motion was made and carried to "Go on record, in the event the Electrical Bond Issue carries, it is the declared intent of the City Council to rescind Ordinance No. 2940, establish- ing an Admissions Tax." Mr. M~rdoch advised that, because of this Council action, they have not included any possible revenue from the admissions tax, even though it is probable it could be in effect for one month. Councilman Stephenson declared that he had understood the admis- sions tax definitely would be rescinded if the electrical bond issue passed. Councilman Pebley suggested that if the electrical bond issue is placed on the ballot at a special election, the effective date of the admis- sions tax could be extended one month to February 1, 1972. He added that he recalled at the time an admissions tax and electrical bond issue were discussed, he had recommended removing the admissions tax, at least for a year, in the event the bond issue was successful, and if it was deemed ne- cessary in two or three years, action could then be taken to establish an admissions tax. Referring to a possible electrical bond issue, Mr. Mmrdoch advised that the original projections on revenue anticipated if such an issue is suc- cessful, were computed in 1968, based on 1967 figures, and thus the $1,153,000. projected at that time actually would be a little less, possibly a net return of around $1,000,000.00 the first year; however, that amount would increase over a million dollars after the first year and increase even more after that. Recapping the anticipated additional revenues for Fiscal Years 1971- 72 for the projects'and programs under consideration this date, Councilman Thom noted a total of $700,000.00 could be available, and if an electrical bond issue was passed, this could increase by $400,000.00, making a total of approximately $1,100,000.00, and he suggested setting definite priorities based on an expected $1,000,000.00 at this time. Mr. Murdoch advised that the recently-announced Emergency Employ- ment Act of 1971 (Federal Project) would make available funds in the amount of $1,011,000.00 to Anaheim, to be used for City projects and special dist- ricts in Anaheim, of which there are thirty-plus, primarily School Districts, and that several of the programs in the list being considered today would be eligible. He presented a proposed priority list of programs which the City of Anaheim would undertake if sufficient funding were available to employ the additional personnel, and advised that this list would be submitted to the United States Department of Labor in the event Anaheim makes application to participate in this program. He added that if these Federal funds were made available to Anaheim, it would enable the City to do some of the things they should have been doing but did not have sufficient funds; for instance, it would make possible Item No. 1 on the list under consideration today, be- ing "approximately 8-million-square feet of street maintenance per year," although only about 6-million-square feet could be accomplished this fiscal year, at a cost of about $200,OOO.OO~ which is about 40% labor and 60% ma- terial; the labor force for this project would include quite a few unskilled and semi-skilled persons not now on the payroll who could be paid out of those Federal funds. Councilman Pebley asked if persons employed under this Emergency Employment Act of 1971 would have to be retained on the payroll, after the Federal Program was discontinued? Mr. Murdoch advised that such persons very likely would be hired as temporary employees and if the job still is in existence, and the employee is satisfactory, he could be retained after the program is discontinued. He added that part of the reason for the program is to provide jobs in areas where the employment is likely to continue. He stated that the Federal Program '71- 495 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 10:00 A.M. is set up so that Federal ~unds would constitute 90% of the total cost of the Project and Anaheim would furnish the other 10%, although the 10% could be in-kind services, such as supplies, supervision, etc. In reply to Councilman Roth's query as to whether there is any flexi- bility built into the Program, or if the City absolutely had to use the funds for the list of jobs submitted, Mr. Murdoch advised the Program is set up on a post-audit basis wherein they audit for approval what the funds have been used for, and thus the City has a decision-making responsibility. He added that if the City of Anaheim submits its projects to the Federal Government within 10 days from August 13, 1971, they should receive the initial alloca- tion of 20% of the total, or $200,000.00 by Labor Day. Assistant City Manager Robert Davis, who had met with the Department of Labor on this Program the previous week, explained the list of programs and types of participants that would be hired is required in the initial applica- tion. He added a list (copies furnished to Council) will be submitted cover- ing 25% of the jobs intended to be utilized in the funding. Mr. Davis further stated that at this time, probably only City programs will be submitted, since it is not known what the School and other Districts' programs are; the Federal Government allows 30 days before the final application must be submitted, and the full list would be presented at that time. He also stated that amendments not exceeding 10% of the original application, may be approved by the local Manpower Administration Office; if over 10%, the Secretary of Labor must ap- prove. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Davis advised that as far as Ana- heim is concerned, although this Program is set up on a two-year basis, it is funded only for the bmlance of Fiscal Year 1971-72, and this covers the ini- tial 20% application; if the unemployment rat~ drops below 4.5% by June 30, 1972, Anaheim would not be eligible to participate in Fiscal Year 1972-73. Thus, participants actually can be promised employment only to the end of this fiscal year. He added that one thing the City must commit to in its applica- tion for the grant is that the goal would be to retain 50% of those employed under the Program, and it is anticipated this could be accomplished through attrition, which is normally at the rate of 10%. He added that City employ- ment today totals about 1,500; a maximum of 80 persons would be permitted to be employed under this Program, and this would include special districts and other governmental agencies, as well as the City of Anaheim. Councilman Roth stated he felt it was important to be sure the neces- sity to retain these employees would not overburden the City. Councilman Pebley suggested all of these persons be advised at the time they are employed that the employment is only temporary. Mr. Mnrdoch handed copies to the Council and reviewed a Fact Sheet and conditions of the grant under this Program. He noted 'that if, at the end of this Program, it is not possible to place 50% of these employees in a per- manent position an effort is to be made to guide them into training programs, such as the Neighborhood Youth Corps, so they can be gainfully employed. Referring to the section on selecting participants, Mr. Murdoch ad- vised that these were not listed in order of priority since, although listed as Number 7, Vier Nam veterans actually were to receive top priority. Mr. Murdoch also advised only those persons living within the City of Anaheim are eligible to be employed under the Anaheim grant, even though some of the special districts and school districts are also in other cities. zKg~_nc_y_vEmployment Act of 1971 - Participation: The City Council, by gen- consent, directed the City Attorney's office to prepare a resolution, ~u~h~rizing participation in this Federal Program. Referring 'again to the list of Suggested Project and Program Priori- tie~ wt. Ymrdoch reiterated that by ~sing funds from the Emergency Employ- mem~ ~ct of 1971, Item 1, Street Maintenance, would be less than the $200,000. listened, b~t it could not be determined at this time how much less. 71-496 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971~ 10:00 A.M. Special Election - Electrical Bond Issue: Referring to Item 2 - Special Election for Electrical Bond Issue, Mr. Murdoch advised that about half of the $45,000.00 noted is for fees for a Bond Counsel. He stated that, in his opinion, purchasing the remaining Edison Company distribution system facilities is most important. Councilman Pebley asked how large a Bond Issue was anticipated? Mr. Murdoch replied that although he was not now prepared to recommend a precise amount, the acquisition of the remaining facilities, together with the integration of the system with our present one, and pro- viding for a Bond Issue and Financial Consultant would require in the neigh- borhood of $8,000,000.00; a Bond Issue of this size would result in approxi- mately $1,000,000.00 per year to the General Fund, with the first year's revenue amounting to approximately $860,000.00, based on an anticipated 7½% increase in customer loads. This, however, would not allow for a rate reduction. Mr. Murdoch further advised that if the Council wished to go into long-term financing of the Capital Improvements, in the neighborhood of $2,000,000.00 per year, a three-year schedule could be set up; also, if the Council desired to provide for a rate reduction a larger Bond Issue would be necessary, such as an additional $6,000,000.00. He asked that the Council be prepared to express their wishes within the next month. Councilmen Thom, Stephenson and Pebley advised they preferred as small a Bond Issue as possible, preferably holding to the original $8,000,000.00. MOTION - SPECIAL ELECTION: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Clerk was instructed to commence preparing for a January 18, 1972 Election, formal Resolution to follow. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. Visitor and Convention Bureau: By general Council consent, expanding the Visitor and Convention Bureau budget for increased convention service, sales and advertising was approved. Councilman Thom expressed approval on condition the Chamber of Commerce's request for expanded industrial and commercial promotion also be approved at this time. Chamber of Commerce: Mr. Murdoch advised that the Chamber of Commerce has indicated an amount of $6,400.00 for the Halloween Festival, and he believed $5,000.00 would be appropriate to be budgeted for this; it appears the Tour- nament of Roses Float has been eliminated. Thus, the Chamber of Commerce required budget for Phase I of its program would be $28,510.00, which is $3,510.0~ more than that in the currently-approved budget, and there still is the item of City Maps. Larry Sierk, Executive Vice-President of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, advised that previously only a reprinting of the present City Map (the City Engineer's map) had been included in the projected budget; however, they would like to update the map, as they are doing with all of their publications and go to four-color printing, with the back of the map used for advertising the community, rather than for service station or res- taurant advertising. He added that updating the map as they would like would cost an additional 5¢ apiece, or a total of 23¢ each, and this would not have to be done again for another two years; the projected cost includ- ing distribution, would be $6,900.00. Mr. Murdoch advised that discussion has been held with the Chamber of Commerce and Visitors and Convention Bureau, concerning using the City Maps to a greater extent, such as making them available on an on-call basis at conventions, and thus an increased 10,000 maps may be necessary; however, he recommended only 5,000 extra be ordered at the onset and $1,500.00 be added to the Phase I budget. 71-497 ~it¥ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 10:00 A.M. Mr. Sierk advised these maps would not be dated, and thus could be used until it was necessary to update again. The Council agreed the Chamber of Commerce budget should be increased from $25,000.00 to $30,000.00, to accommodate Phase I of their proposed increa- sed program. Replying to a query on the Halloween Festival, Mr. Murdoch advised that, in the past this was included in the contract between the City and the Chamber of Commerce, and thus has been listed as a separate item and handled by a transfer of funds; this year it is added to the budget. Referring to Phase II of the Chamber of Commerce proposal, re Eco- nomic Development, Councilman Thom advised he has heard many comments support- ing the concept of an Economic Development Coordinator, such as the Chamber of Commerce has proposed. Mr. M~rdoch suggested that this may be more substantial than the Council now is prepared to consider. He suggested a meeting be held with those people active in the industrial and promotion business, and whose livelihood depends on it, to find out from them more specifically what they need from the City and the Chamber to carry the primary responsibility. Mr. Murdoch displayed promotional material that now is available to these people, and advised that the Chamber of Commerce has more; however, he did not feel suf- ficiently prepared to present the program at this time. Mr. Sierk requested some indication of what the ultimate goal of the City would be on Phase II and what commitments can be made. Councilman Roth replied no indication as to dollar commitment could be given until they have more knowledge of what the program will be. He sug- gested those industrial realtors in the business of promoting the industrial community, such as Dunn Prbperties or Oranco be asked to present their ideas and needs. Mr. Sierk again requested a decision on whether the City wished to back an Economic Development Department, to which the Council replied no deci- sion could be made until more information was available. Councilman Pebley recalled that, at one time, former Mayor Pearson, who owned a trucking firm, and others in the business spent their own time and money promoting the City and bringing in industry, and thus he felt those who would profit from new industry should be urged to participate at this time. Council discussion followed, and it was agreed this would be a de- sirable program if it worked; Councilman Thom urged that it be undertaken. Mr. Mmrdoch was of the opinion that the recoranended $112,000.00 for Phase II is a greater program than necessary. Councilman Thom suggested half of that amount be committed for par- tial implementation. Mr. Murdoch advised that until he had discussed the concept with those whose livelihood depended on industry promotion he could not recommend a dollar amount nor a specific program; however, he felt that if the program was properly put together it would be successful. Mr. Sierk advised that at this time they are proposing a five-man, Economic Development Board, representing retail, manufacturing, commercial, etc., functioning a five-segment program, which would include: 1. Existing business, and aids to their expansion. 2. Inventory of land and buildings available. 3. Budget and financing control. 4. Prospecting and a program of taking care of industrial men and developers who "dig up" prospects in places such as New York. 5. Brochures, research, and advertising the program. 71-498 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971~ 10:00 A.M, Councilman Pebley asked for a list of persons proposed for this five-man board, and advised that, in his opinion, it must be made up of men who own industrial land in Anaheim. By general Council consent, the Council agreed they supported the concept of economic development as a high priority item; however, at this time they could not set a dollar amount. Mr. Murdoch advised that he, Alan Orsborn and Larry Sierk would discuss it further before making a recormnendation to the Council. Legacy of Parks Program: Mr. Murdoch stated he felt it advisable to set aside some additional funds to carry out development of Reid, Manzanita, Hansen, Riverdale and Imperial-Lincoln Parks. General greement was indica- ted. Contingency Fund: Mr. Mmrdoch recommended the Contingency Fund be increased to $300,000.00; primary urgency being that with the expansion of the Conven- tion Center it is possible something may have to be worked out with property owners involved, or advances may be required for architectural fees, etc.; also, occasionally an opportunity arises to purchase a parcel of desirable property and the Council should be capable of taking advantage of it. The Council, by general consent, agreed to expanding the Council Contingency Fund as recommended, although it was agreed it may have to be cut to $250,000.00, depending on the cash flow available. Development - Anaheim Beach: Mr. Murdoch advised that although some City funds will have to be used for Anaheim Beach, it is expected these funds will be reimbursed during the course of the fiscal year. Parks and Recreation Director John Collier advised that it is an- ticipated approval.of the land and funding will be forthcoming around Janu- ary 1, 1972. He further advised that although the money set aside for the project by the Orange County Water District is increasing, no funds can be spent until matching funds are received from the Federal Grant, hence no ~nies can be recovered for work dorm on the pro~ect before it is funded. CouncJ]~a.r~ Roth asked that: t:!~e Council 'be kept advised by memo of the progress of Anaheim Beach, Swing Shift ~ Mechanical Haint:enance: ~. Murdoch suggested that if funds are available, an additional maintenance man be added for the swing shift, an item that had bce:i~ ?emc,~cd fr~,m 7!~? ~rr~.nt h,dget h~cause of lack of funds. Noting ~hat two mechanical maintenance men for the swing shift are included in the list to be s~bmitted to the Department of Labor, he advised that if these funds are available they would like to employ two maintenance men, continue the e~lo~ent of one at least, and maybe the second in a couple of years. He added that currently they are using some people from the STEP program and probably will have to ~ove one or two of those persons over to this new program. Library: Councilman %~hom suggested Stem 9 (restore Library book purchase and book binding cut) and Item 32 (restore Library audio-visual program) should be combined and, before any progress into any new area is made, res- toration of those ~ervices ~uch as Item 8 (mechanical maintenance man), 9 and 32 should be brought t~ ~he ieve] ~hey were prior to the necessity for cutbacks. In reply to Mr~ Murdoch, Councilman Thom stated he felt restora- tion of ali the Library sera,ices should have priority over Item 10 (rein- statement of one c~'e'~ eq~ivalent to property maintenance.) Councilma~ Stepb~o~ ~tated he reit that reinstating one crew to property maintenance wou~d ~ ~ve a h~gbe~~ priority than restoring audio-visual service to the Library. Mr. Murdoc]~ ~.~eminded the Council that the list of suggested priori- ties covered a p~og~'am of ~t ]east five years and stated that beginning with Item No. 12, mo~t ~,t the 'i ~ a~e ~d<~itional or ~ew programs. 71-499 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17~ 1971~ 10:00 A.M. Mayor Dutton invited a representative from the Library to present their views. Assistant Library Director Mary Lou Haire advised that there are approximately 3,600 33-RPM phonograph records and 100 16-MM films in storage that were purchased for the audio-visual program; the records include classi- cal and other music, dictation discs, and foreign language records, and the films were to be used by families and clubs and organization discussion groups, and include quite a few Disney films. She added that funds for the film program were cut before the pro- gram could be put into operation and thus there is no record of how much use would be made of it; however, several records had been used by PTA and other social groups, although no circulation breakdown has been made to give exact figures. Replying to Council questioning, Mrs. Haire advised that the $25,000. indicated for the audio-visual program would include an additional professional employee for the program, some equipment, inspection and repair of the films, since it is necessary to constantly check, clean and repair films after each use. She added that at this time Anaheim is the only Library in Orange County that does not offer an audio-visual program. Mrs. Haire further advised, in reply to questioning, that the book budget is the prime priority of the Library; that she did not know of anything that could be cut from the Library budget easily to allow for the reinstatement of the audio-visual program, unless it would be the Bookmobile service, and she would not recommend such a step since the Bookmobile serves areas where no Li- brary facilities are available. However, she stated she felt restoration of the audio-visual program should take priority over expansion of the Bookmobile service. Councilman Thom again stated he felt it was more important to restore a service that once was o~fered than to expand any program already in existence. Mr. Murdoch suggested that simply restoring a service as it was ori- ginally would, in effect, be a reduction in the level of that service in view of the expanding population. He added that since there is labor involved in both the Bookmobile and audio-visual programs, they would both qualify for the Emergency ~mployment Act of 1971; that expansion of the Bookmobile program was included in the initial list to be submitted to the Department of Labor and it would be possible to also add the audio-visual program. He further advised that at the time the audio-visual program was eliminated it was only after analysis by the Library Board and Staff; this was the one item they felt they could get along without best. That is why one activity is listed as No. 9, the other No. 32 on the list of suggested project and program priorities. Councilman Thom suggested allocating an additional $75,000.00 to the Library budget to "restore or update existing services." Since it was determined that no absolute allocations could be set until definite funds were available, discussion on Library services was dis- continued. ADJO~NT: Councilman Stephenson moved to adjourn. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 12:10 P.M. Signed City Clerk 71-500 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton COUNCILMEN: None CITY MANAGER: Ketth A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order. INVOCATION: Reverend Meehan, of the Anaheim Friends Church, gave the In- vocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Mark A. Stephenson led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: The following Proclamation was issued by Mayor Dutton and unanimously approved by the City Council: "American Business Women's Week" - October 18 - 24, 1971. MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council regular meeting held July 27, 1971, were approved on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Pebley. Councilman Dutton abstained. MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Thom 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 Councilmen, unless after read- ing of the title, specific request is made by a Councilman for the reading of such ordinance.or resolution. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City, in the amount of $881,332.88, in accordance with the 1971-72 Budget, were approved. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-55 AND VARIANCE NO. 2268: Submitted by Albert J. Yorba, requesting a change of zone from City of Anaheim R-A and County of Orange Al, to City of Anaheim R-2, to develop a 318-unit, two-story statutory condominium complex on the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue, west of Imperial Highway, with waivers of: a. Minimum number of required parking spaces. (Withdrawn) b. Minimum required covered parking space size. (Withdrawn) c. Minimum required distance between buildings. (Withdrawn) d. Maximum building height within 150 feet of single-family zone. The City Planning Comission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71- 134, recon~nended said reclassification be approved, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 2. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to the completion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim. 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 a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the west and northwest (adjacent to the school property) lines; 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 a 6-foot masonry wall along the northeast and east property lines. 71-501 _~it¥ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M 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 the interior walls of the proposed carports shall be stuc- coed; that enclosed storage cabinets shall be provided along the rear wall of each carport; and that adequate bumper guards shall be provided to protect the interior walls of the proposed carports from damage. 9. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Ana- heim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be ap- propriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 10. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro- perty, Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above mentioned, shall be completed. The pro- visions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said c~nditions are complied with within one year from dmte hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant. 11. That Condition Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, above mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections. 12. That the completion of these reclassification proceedings is con- tingent upon the granting of Variance No. 2268 and Tentative Map of Tract No. 7416, Revision No. 1. 13. Prior to filing of the final tract map, the applicant shall sub- mit to the City Attorney for approval or denial a complete synopsis of 'the pro- posed functioning of the operating corporation, including but not limited to the articles of incorporation, by-laws, proposed rules and regulations, methods of operation, funding, assessment, methods of management, bonding to insure maintenance of common property and buildings, and such other information as the City Attorney may desire to protect the City, its citizens, and the pur- chasers of the project. 14. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council ap- proval of the final tract map, and, further, that the approved covenants, con- ditions, and restrictions'shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. Included in the CC&Rs shall be the provision that the community associa- tion and/or the individual owners shall have the responsibility to have the trash containers placed at the curbs of the public streets for pick-up. 15. That the developers of subject property shall provide along the west property line adjacent to the established R-1 homes, either single-family homes or in lieu thereof, a 20-foot densely landscaped strip of land which shall be in addition to the required rear yard, in order to provide an ade- quate buffer strip between the apartment complex and the single-family homes. 16. That plans for the development of duplexes, proposed for the westerly portion of the property, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit, as stipulated to by the petitioner. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-135, granted said variance, in part, granting Waiver "d", subject to the following conditions, Waiver "a", "b", and "c" having been withdrawn by the petitioner: 1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Re- classification No. 70-71-55, now pending, and Tentative Map of Tract No. 7416. 2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in con- formance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, mar- ked Exhibit NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts noted the location o£ subject pro- perty, the existing uses and zoning in the immediate area, and advised that a sraall portion of subject property known as the Adobe Wall Subdivision still is in the County, although annexation proceedings are under way. He also stated, in reply to Council questioning, that there is no indication, thus far, that subject property is in the immediate flood hazard area. Albert Yorba, Applicant, explained that the subdivision, or develop- ment is named after the Adobe Wall that was constructed many years ago to keep stock and wild animals out when the land was used for an orchard and garden. 71-502 City Hall. Anaheim, California -.COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971., 1:30 P.M. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant and Agents were satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission, to which he received an affirmative reply from Dave Langlois, Vice-President of William Lyon Develop- ment Company. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council in op- position. Bill Lockyer, 1724 Concerto Drive, asked if Sonata Lane is to be blocked off to the proposed condominium? Mr. Roberts advised that the City Planning Commission had recom- mended a modified cul-de-sac be installed at the end of Sonata Lane, so there would be no vehicular movement between the proposed R-2 development and the existing R-1 tract to the west; however, they have indicated a pedestrian ac- cessway should be provided for children from the multiple-family project to get to and from school. In reply to Mr. Lockyer, Mr. Roberts advised that there would be no two-story duplexes within 150 ~eet of the single-family homes to the west of subject property, and the City Planning Coranission had recommended no structure be closer than 25 feet from the R-1 boundary line if duplexes were built along that line; however, the City Planning Commission had.suggested single-family houses could be built along that west boundary line, in which: case they would comply with the zone code, and could be two-story. He added that,as of this time, plans have not been submitted for development of the western portion. Mr. Lockyer stated that he did not feel the proposed development would preserve the integrity of the existing community, which consists solely of single-family homes at this time; that the higher density of the proposed development would create more problems for the Police Department than a single- family development,.and put a larger burden on the Fire Department. He added that, at present, there is only a very minor police patrol of the area. He also contended the proposed development would place an additional burden on the already-crowded Placentia Unified School District, which has been con- sidering the necessity of half-day sessions. Replying to Council questioning on Police protection, Mr. Lockyer advised there had been a delay of one hour in response to a call about a prowler recently, and they had been advised there was a 15-call backlog at that time. He also advised he felt there would be more children in the proposed development than a single-family development because there are 318 units in- dicated, whereas only 120 single-family homes could be constructed on the same property. Mr. Lockyer also contended that the proposed complex would result in an apartment and transient situation, as is the case with a similar pro- ject about a mile away, since often condominiums are difficult to sell, they are then leased and sub-leased. Councilman Roth expressed the opinion that today's situation makes it economically infeasible to build all R-1 and R-2 homes, and a condominium concept takes a person out of an apartment and gives him something to own; als0, since exterior maintenance is provided, a better appearance is assured. Mr. Lockyer stated he had not seen where existing condominiums had achieved these results; however, he agreed he would prefer condominiums to an apartment complex. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone else wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. 71-503 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-364: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-364 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commis- sion. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- ING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (70-71- 55 - R-2) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley and Dutton Thom None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-364 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-365: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-365 for adoption, granting Variance No. 2268, in part, subject to conditions as recom- mended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2268, IN PART. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNC ILMF, N: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley and Dutton Thom None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-365 duly passed and adopted. TENTATIVE MAP - TRACT NO. 7416: Developer - William Lyon Development Company, Inc. Property located on the north side of Orangethorpe Avenue, west of Imperial Highway, and contains 5 proposed R-2 zoned lots. (70-71-55, Variance No.2268) The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held July 12, 1971, approved said Tentative Map, subject to the following conditions: 1. That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7416 is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 70-71-55 and Variance No. 2268. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, 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 the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map, and, further, that the approved covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. Included in the CC&Rs shall be the provision that the community association and/or the individual owners shall have the responsibility to have the trash containers placed at the curbs of the public streets for pick- up. 6. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 7. That the vehicular access rights, except at street and/or alley openings to Orangethorpe Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 71-504 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M 8. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the build- ing permit is issued. 9. That drainage of Tract No. 7416 shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 10. That a perpetual maintenance agreement be submitted to and ap- proved by the City Attorney's office and filed and recorded with the Orange County Recorder's office for the maintenance of median islands located at street intersections with Orangethorpe Avenue, as per City Council Policy No. 532. 11. That a modified cul-de-sac shall be provided at the terminus of Sonata Lane, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 12. That an area be established in the vicinity of the community recreation area to be used for the storage and disposal of refuse from the commonly-owned areas. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, Tentative Map, Tract No. 7416 was approved, subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. To this Motion, Councilman Thom voted "No." MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 71-72-2: Initiated by the City Planning Com- mission for a change of zone from County of Orange 100-CI-10,000 and R2-1,500 to City of Anaheim R-A, for property located on the south side of Lincoln Ave- nue, west of Brookhurst Street. (Lincoln-Monterey Annexation). The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-138, recommended said reclassification be approved, subject to the following con- dition: 1. That these reclassification procedures are granted subject to completion of annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts recommended that since Reclassi- fication Nos.71-72-2 and 71-72-4 pertain to the same property, they be con- sidered together. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 71-72-4. Initiated by the City Planning Commission for a change of zone from County of Orange 100-CI-10,000 to City of Anaheim C-1 for Parcels Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, and from County of Orange R2-1,500 to City of Anaheim R-3 for Parcel No. 4. Property located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, west of Brookhurst Street. (Lincoln-Monterey Annexation). The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-139, recomended said reclassification be approved, subject to the following condi- tions: 1. That these reclassification proceedings are granted subject to the completion of annexation of subject property into the City of Anaheim. 2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facili- ties, or other appurtenant work shall be complied with as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer: at the time the property is developed. 3. That the owners of subject property shall install street light- ing on all streets within the area, as required by the Director of Public Utilities at the time the property is developed. 4. That a preliminary title report shall be furnished prior to the adoption of the ordinance rezoning each parcel of the property, showing legal vesting of title, legal description, and containing a map of the property. 5. That drainage shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 6. That ordinances reclassifying the property shall be adopted as each parcel is ready to comply with conditions pertaining to such parcel, pro- vided, however, that the word "parcel" shall mean presently existing parcels of record and parcel or parcels approved by the City Council for a lot split. 71-505 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M, Mr. Roberts noted the location of subject property and the existing uses and zoning in the irmnediate area and summarized the hearing held before the City Planning Commission. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-366: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-366 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- ING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (71-72-2 - R-A) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-366 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-367: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-367 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- ING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (71-72-4 - C-1 and R-3) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-367 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 71-72-3 AND VARIANCE NO, 2276: Submitted by James A. and Vera R. Auest, requesting a change of zone from R-A to R-3, to convert an existing 2-bedroom guest house into an apartment; property located on the east side of Acacia Street, north of La Palma Avenue; and further de- scribd as 1108 North Acacia Street, with waiver of: a. Minimum required floor area. The City Plannin$ Comm~ission, pursuant to Resolution No. FC71-136, reconm~ended said recl~ssification be approved, subject to the following con- ditions: 1. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Acacia Street for street light- ing purposes. 2. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the sum of 15¢ per front foot along Acacia Street for tree planting purposes. 3. That fire hydrants shall be installed as required and deter- mined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department. 4. That all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties. 71-506 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. 5. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 6. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro- perty, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, above mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within 180 days from the date hereof or such further time as the City Council may grant. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-137, granted said variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of Re- classification No. 71-72-3, now pending. 2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in ac- cordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim, mar- ked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2. Zoning Zupervisor Charles Roberts noted the location of subject pro- perty, existing uses and zoning in the in~nediate area, and summarized the hear- ing held before the City Planning Commission. Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant was present and wished to ad- dress the City Council. Mrs. James Auest, 1108 North Acacia Street, Applicant, referring to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission on the reclassifi- cation application, asked when street lights would be installed if she paid the assessment, as recommended by the City Planning Commission (Condition No. 1); also, since the City had replaced an existing parkway tree at the time the street improvements were made, why it was now necessary to pay 15¢ a front foot for tree-planting purposes (Condition No. 2)? The City Manager suggested that since the trees already have been planted in the parkway, Condition No. 2 has been met and should be deleted in this action. Regarding street lighting, Mr. Murdoch advised that City policy is to make these installations when a sufficient number of fees for that street have been collected; since all but two parcels probably will have paid their fees when the Applicant's are received, these improvements most likely will be made in the near future. Mayor Dutton asked if anyone else wished to address the Council; there being no response, declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-368: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-368 for adoption, authorizing preparation of necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested, subject to the conditions reconm~nded by the City Planning Com- mission, deleting Condition No. 2, as suggested by the City Manager. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE GITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMIN- ING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED. (71-72-3 - R-3) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-368 duly passed and adopted. 71-507 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. ..RESOLUTION NO. 71R-369: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-369 for adoption, granting Variance No. 2276 as requested, subject to the conditions recormnended by the City Planning Con~nission. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2276. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCIL~N: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-369 duly passed and adopted. CONTINUED REQUEST - TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO. 7370- Submitted by C.J. Queyrel, Ana- cal Engineering Company, requesting amendment of Condition No. 1 of Tentative Tract No. 7370, located between McKinnon Drive and the Santa Ana River, east of Lakeview Avenue. Said tract has been continued from the meetings of June 29, July 20 and August 3, 1971. The City Clerk advised a request has been received from the Applicant to again continue this tract to the meeting of August 24, 1971. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley, Tenta- tive Map, Tract No. 7370 was continued to August 24, 1971, as requested by the Applicant. MOTION CARRIED. RTD BUS STOPS - RELOCATION REQUESTS: Requests were submitted by Gilbert Haro, McCoy Drugs, that the existing bus stop on Anaheim Boulevard alongside his store, 100 West Lincoln Avenue, be relocated and the parking meters restored; and of Fran- ziska Oswald, that the parking area in front of her business at 721 South Anaheim Boulevard, recently designated as a bus stop, be restored. Also submitted were reports of the City Engineer, recommending both bus zones remain as installed. Councilman Stephenson stated he agreed with Mr. Haro's suggestion that the bus stop in front of his business could be moved to the front of the City Personnel Department at the northwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Broadway; also, he felt the bus stops took up much more room than is necessary. City Engineer James Maddox advised it was his understanding bus stops must not be more than 800 feet apart, and moving that stop to Broadway would exceed that limit from the Cypress Street stop; also, the law requires bus stops to be twice the length of the bus. Councilman Stephenson suggested that if a stop at Broadway would exceed the maximum distance, the stop could be moved to the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard, alongside Leo's Restaurant and the Antlers Hotel. Mayor Dutton invited representatives of the Southern California Rapid Transit District to address the Council. Frank Screech advised that the bus stop was located on the east side of McCoy Drug Store to allow passengers to transfer to their other line. Re- ferring to the length of the bus stop, he stated that since their busses are 40-feet long,the stops necessarily are 80 feet, and if that stop at Lincoln and Anaheim Boulevard was any shorter, a car parked in front of the zone would cause the bus to go out into head-on traffic to get away from the curb. He also stated stops in the center of a block are 120-feet long. Mr. Screech stated their company had no objection to moving their stop to the northwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue, although 71-508 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M it would necessitate painting out the loading zone and removing the first parking meter at that location. He recalled that the existing bus stops had been approved by the City Council in January, 1971, and work completed in July, and since that time traffic has been able to move swiftly and there have been no rear-end accidents. He added that there presently are three parking stalls, south of the bus zone, up to the alley at this location, and these are at the rear entrance to McCoy Drug Store. In reply to Council questioning, Traffic Engineer Edward Granzow advised that since Anaheim Boulevard is a State Highway, permission must be obtained from the Highway Department before a bus stop on that street can be either removed or installed. MOTION: Councilman Stephenson expressed the opinion it was unfair to down- town businesses to take away their parking spaces and offered a Motion to re- locate the bus stop to the northwest corner of Broadway and Anaheim Boulevard in front of the City Personnel Department. ' Mr. Murdoch commented that there is a parking lot within a half- block of every business in the downtown area. Councilman Dutton stated he felt the bus stop should remain as it is, as recommended by the City Engineer. Councilman Thom advised he had no objection to moving the bus stop as long as it was moved to a location where it would not interfere with a downtown business, and thereupon seconded the Motion. Councilman Pebley stated he could not take a stand either way, un- less he knew where the bus zone was to be located, and if it was an agreeable move. The foregoing M~tion failed to carry by the following tie vote; Roll Call requested by Councilman Stephenson: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson and Thom Roth and Dutton Pebley Councilman Pebley requested a further recommendation from the Traf- fic Engineer. Mr. Granzow advised that at the time the bus stops were under con- sideration a survey was made by Mr. Screech, the State Division of Highways Traffic Engineer and himself, to determine the most appropriate locations, and they realized two of the stops might be controversial. He stated that the northbound stop, south of the alley on the east side of Anaheim Boule- vard, in front of the old Bank of America parking lot, was located to com- pensate the southbound stop under consideration at-this time, and that one irmnediately south of Broadway and one north of Broadway were to accommodate opposing directions at that location. He added that these stops were con- sidered the best locations, particularly in view of the transfer point at Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard, since there is quite a bit of action between the two lines. Mr. Granzow also stated that HTD provides the only regular bus service in Anaheim, serving people going to and from the Disney- land area, Orange County Hospital, Santa Ana, etc., and is a step toward providing mass transit ~acilities. He confirmed his written report and recommendation that the present location is the most logical place for the bus to stop, adding that to move the stop to Broadway not only would be in- convenient for passengers, but would make a considerable distance for older transferring patrons to walk. Fred Busse, Assistant Chief Supervisor and Dispatcher for RTD, stated that his experience has been that in most instances where there is a drug store, a bus stop is welcome because it brings in business. He cited Thrifty Drug as an example of a chain of stores that welcomes a bus stop, and one liquor store operator who requested replacement of a bus stop that had been moved from in front of his place of business. 71-509 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17~ 1971, 1:30 P.M Mr. Busse advised that a survey made in Los Angeles showed that far-side bus stops were safer and faster than near-side stops. Councilman Pebley suggested delaying for one week a decision on these bus stop locations to allow the bus Company to approach the owner of Leo's Restaurant, on the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Bou- levard, about relocating the stop there. Mr. Busse stated they would be agreeable to contacting the restaurant owner. By general Council consent, decision on relocation of bus stops was delayed to August 24, 1971. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMM: Actions taken by the City Planning Corm~ission, at their meeting held July 26, 1971, pertaining to the following applications, were submitted for City Council information and consideration: VARIANCE NO. 2257: Submitted by Adolph W. Lemke, proposing subdivision of subject property into 36 R-1 lots, (Tract No. 7426). R-A zoned property lo- cated between the Riverside Freeway and Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of Lake- view Avenue, with requested waivers of: a. Minimum lot width. b. Minimum lot width on a cul-de-sac. c. Requirement that single-family homes rear on arterial highways. (Withdrawn). The City Planning Con~nission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-147, granted said variance in part, subject to conditions, granting Waivers "a" and "b", Waiver "c" having been withdrawn by the Petitioner. VARIANCE NO. 2161: Submitted by Lusk Corporation, requesting waiver of re- quirement that single-family structures must rear on arterial highways to permit four side-on lots on R-A zoned property located at the northwest cor- ner of Nohl Ranch and Royal Oak Roads, with waiver of: (Tract No.5674,Rev. 3) a. Orientation of residential structures adjacent to highways. The City Planning Cormnission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-150, granted said variance, subject to conditions. VARIANCE NO. 2275: Submitted by Violet Stevens Vosburg, requesting waiver of rear yard requirement to permit screened-in patio within 6 feet of rear property line on R-1 zoned property located on the east side of Concord Place, south of Charleston Drive, with waiver of: a. Minimum rear yard for room additions. The City Planning Conmtisston, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-143, granted said variance, subject to conditions. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1239: Submitted by Grace Elizabeth Dickerson, to establish a 54-unit motel, and to permit on-sale liquor in a proposed restaurant on C-1 zoned property located on the south side of Lincoln Ave- nue, west of Cliffrose Street. The City Planning Conmiission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-148, granted said conditional use permit, subject to conditions. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 1035: Submitted by Grace Elizabeth Dickerson, to establish a 99-bed convalescent hospital on C-1 zoned property located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue, west of Cliffrose Street. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-149, terminated all proceedings on Conditional Use Permit No. 1035 as use is super- seded by Conditional Use Permit No. 1239. VARIANCE NO. 2269: Submitted by Ralph L. Rickman, et al, to establish six il- legal parcels as conforming parcels as conforming parcels on R-A zoned property on the north side of Katella Avenue, west of Clementine Street, with waiver of: 71-510 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUI~S - August 17. 1971, 1:30 P.M. a. Code requirement that all lots have frontage on a public street. The City Planning Commission, by Motion, terminated all proceedings on said variance, at the request of the Agent for the Applicant. ..CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 888 (Revised): Submitted by Giacomo and Agostina Lugaro, requesting said conditional use permit (granted in 1966) be amended by allowing the transfer of the on-sale beer and wine permit from the "Plush Burrito," 524 North Magnolia Avenue, to another restaurant, "Caruso's Ital- ian Deli," in the same shopping center. C-1 zoned property located at the southeast corner of Crescent and Magnolia Avenues. The City Planning Commission, by Motion, terminated rehearing on amendment of Conditional Use Permit No. 888 on the basis that the proposed change in location warranted the filing of a new application; said Conditional Use Permit No. 888 as originally granted to remain in full force and effect. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1127: Request of Wrather Enterprises, Incorporated, and Wrather Hotels, Incorporated, for a one-year extension of time to permit outdoor banquet facilities on R-A zoned property located at the northwest corner of West Street and Cerritos Avenue. The City Planning Commission, by Motion granted a one-year extension of time to said conditional use permit, to expire July 27, 1972. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOw 1130: Submitted by Clifford W. Stokes, Frank L. Hope and Associates, requesting amendment of Condition No. 2 of Resolution No. PC69-173, requiring that all parking area lighting be no higher than 6 feet. Expansion of the existing Martin Luther Hospital complex on R-3 zoned property located on the south side of Romneya Drive, west of Euclid Street. An additional request was submitted by T. Eugene Dahlgren, Martin Luther Hospital, for a 6-month extension of time to said conditional use permit. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC71-151, amended Condition No. 12 of Resolution No. PC69-173 pertaining to parking area lighting, as requested. ' The City Planning Commission, by Motion, granted a six-month exten- sion of time to said conditional use permit, to expire January 21, 1972. VARIANCE NO, 1372: Submitted by R.E. Williams, Orange County Boiler and In- dustrial Repair, requesting an extension of time for the use of an existing residential structure as an office and outdoor storage and repair of equip- ment and vehicles, (for a period of three years) on R-A zoned property lo- cated at 1829 South Mountain View Avenue. The City Planning Co~mtission, by Motion, granted a one-year exten- sion of time to said variance, to expire June 26, 1972. The foregoing actions were reviewed by the City Council, and no further action taken. TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO, 7426, ~EVISION NO, 2: Developer - L.A. County Land Com- pany. Property located on the north side of Santa And Canyon Road, east of Lakeview Avenue, and contains 36 proposed R-1 lots. (Variance No. 2257). The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held July 26, 1971, approved said tentative map, subject to the following conditions: 1. That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7426, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the approval of Variance N°. 2257. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof sh~ll be submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 71-511 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971~ 1:30 P.M. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a ~final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 6. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the build- ing permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No.7426 shall be accomplished in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. That a decorative six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed on the north property line separating Lot Nos. 13 through 20 and the Riverside Freeway, and on the south property line separating Lot Nos. 1 through 5 and the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company Canal. 9. That A and C Streets shall be constructed as standard 64-foot collector streets. 10. That subject property shall be developed in accordance with the standards of the proposed Scenic Corridor Overlay (SC) Zone as follows: 1) Lots adjacent to the Riverside Freeway shall rear on to said freeway and shall have a minimum depth of 150 feet. 2) Lots adjacent to all other classifications of arterial highways or railroad rights-of-way shall have a minimum depth of 120 feet. 3) The lot depth requirements may be reduced or modified where a specific plan is approved by the City that indicates all building setbacks on lots adjacent to the Riverside Freeway have a minimum depth of 50 feet and lots adjacent to arterial highways have a minimum depth of 40 feet. 4) On all lots adjacent to the Riverside Freeway a 6-foot high landscaped, earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the right-of-way line. 5) Where special circumstances exist for a property such as limited size, unusual shape, extreme topography, dominating drainage problems or the impracticability of employing 4) above, a decorative masonry wall may be re- quired in lieu of the earthen berm. The decorative masonry wall shall include design variations. Variations in the required wall that are designed to include such decorative materials as wood, stone, or offsets for landscaping are encouraged. 6) On each building site or lot of a subdivision there shall be 10 trees per gross acre or 2 trees per lot, whichever is the greater, and shall be spaced at intervals of not more than 40 feet. 7) Those lots adjacent to the Riverside Freeway and arterial high- ways shall plant trees within 10 feet of the property line nearest the right- of-way line, except where existing trees are being preserved. On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, Tentative Map, Tract No. 7426, Revision No. 2 was approved, subject to the recommendations of the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. TENTATIVE MAP, TRACT NO. 5674, REVISION NO. 3: Developer - Lusk Corporation. Pro- perty located at the northwest corner of Nohl Ranch and Royal Oak Roads, and contains 52 proposed R-H-10,000 lots. (Variance No. 2161). The City Planning Commission, at their meeting held July 26, 1971, approved said tentative map, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 5674, Revision No. 3, is granted subject to the approval of Variance No. 2161. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, 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 street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That the vehicular access rights from Lot l~os. 1 and 22 to Royal Oak Road and from Lot Nos. 23, 43, 44, and 51 to Nohl Ranch Road, except at street and/or alley openings, shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 71-512 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. 6. That streets in the tract shall be constructed in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. 7. That in accordance with City Council policy, a 6-foot masonry wall (or an alternative approved by the Development Services Department) shall be constructed in the east portion of Lot Nos. 1 and 22 adjacent to Royal Oak Road, and in the south portion of Lot Nos. 23, 43, and 51 adjacent to Nohl Ranch Road. Subject walls shall be measured from the highest fin- ished grade level of subject property or adjacent roadway, whichever is highest. Reasonable landscaping, including irrigation facilities shall be installed easterly and southerly from said walls including the street park- ways and the Four Corners Pipeline Easement. Plans for said landscaping shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent. Following installation and acceptance, the property owner(s) shall assume responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping to the lot lines, regardless of the location of the masonry walls. The City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for such maintenance of landscaping in the Royal Oak Road and Nohl Ranch Road right-of-way. 8. Drainage of Tract No. 5674, Revision No. 3 shall be disposed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. 9. Public utility and sewer easements shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim as required by the Director of Public Utilities and the City Engineer. 10. That the covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be sub- mitted to and approved by the City Attorney's office prior to City Council approval of the final tract map, and further, that the approved covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract map. Said covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall include pro- vision for the perpetual maintenance of all slope areas in Tract No. 5674 and the Four Corners Pipeline Easement. On motion by Councilman D~tton, seconded by Councilman Roth, Ten- tative Map, Tract No. 5674, Revision No. 3 was approved, subject to the re- commendations of the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7417~ REVISION NO. 2 - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7151, REVISION NO. ~ - Y~NTATIVE TRACT NO. 7458, REVISION NO. 2 - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7459, REVISION NO. 2 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7460, REVISION NO. 2: Developer, Harvey A. Berger. Property located south of Esperanza Road and north of the Santa Ana River, east of Imperial Highway, and encompasses a total of 280 proposed R-2-5,000-zoned lots. Maps of said Tracts were posted on the Council Cham- ber wall and explained by Mr. Roberts. Mr. Roberts advised that the developer has revised the tentative maps to substantially conform with the current plans of the County of Orange for the Yorba Regional Park, and has provided an alignment for La Palma Ave- nue that essentially conforms to the County's exhibit that accompanied their application to the State for matching funds for the development of the Park. Both the County Park Department and County Road Department have reviewed these maps and a letter is on file from Kenneth Sampson, Director of the Harbor, Beaches and Parks, advising that the proposed alignment of La Palma Avenue appears to be in accordance with the County's present proposal. Mr. Roberts noted a 50-foot wide strip between the lots and La Palma Avenue which is to be used as an equestrian, bicycle or hiking trail, and reported that it is recommended that an irrevocable offer of dedication of this 50-foot strip be submitted to the City and the City to accept the offer within 30-days time limit or the 50-foot strip would revert back to the developer and incorporated into the abutting lots. He stated that this provision is recommended in the event the County would want the 50-foot strip as a part of the Park development. Mr. Roberts thereupon read the City Planning Commission's findings and recommended conditions, the conditions being as follows: Tract No. 7417 - Revision No. 2 - 66 proposed R-2-5,000 lots: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7417, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 71-513 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17. 1971, 1:30 P.M. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval. utilities.3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 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 appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the build- ing permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No. 7417, Revision No. 2, shall be dis- posed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City E~gineer. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at street and/or alley openings to La Palma Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 9. a. That the developer shall submit to the City of Anaheim an irrevocable offer of dedication for Lots la through 9a abutting La Palma Avenue, said irrevocable offer shall be accepted by the City of Anaheim within 30 days after re- cordation of the final tract map. In the event Lots la through 9a are not accepted by the City, said lots shall revert, to the developer to be included into the abutting Lots 1 through 9. b. That if Lots la through 9a are accepted by the City of Ana- heim, the developer shall install a 6-foot masonry wall on south property line separating Lots 1 through 9 from Lots la through 9a. c. That if Lots la through 9a are not accepted by the City of Anaheim, they shall become a part of Lots 1 through 9 re- spectively and the developer shall, in accordance with City Council policy, construct a 6-foot masonry wall on the south property line, separating Lots 1 through 9 and La Palma Avenue. Reasonable landscaping, including irri- gation facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial highway parkway the full distance of said wall; plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway Maintenance. Following installation and acceptance, the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. d. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 10. That Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2, shall be developed prior to Tract Nos. 7151, 7417, 7459, and 7460, Revision Nos. 2, and that Tract No. 7151, Revision No. 2, shall be developed prior to Tract No. 7417, Revi- sion No. 2. 11. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District, prior to approval of a final tract map. Tract No. 7151 - Revision No. 2 - 49 proposed R-2-5,000 lots: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7151, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- div~sion, each subdivision thereo£ shall ~e submitted in tentative form for approval. 3. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground utilities. 4. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 71-514 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. 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 appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the build- ing permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No. 7151, Revision No. 2 shall be dis- posed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at streets and/or alley openings, to La Palma Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 9. a. That the developer shall submit to the City of Anaheim an irrevocable offer of dedication for lots la through 13a abutting La Palma Avenue, said irrevocable offer shall be accepted by the City of Anaheim within 30 days after re- cordation of the final tract map. In the event Lots la through 13a are not accepted by the City, said lots shall revert back to the developer to be included into the abut- ting Lots 1 through 13. b. That if Lots la through 13a are accepted by the City of Anaheim, the developer shall install a 6-foot masonry wall on the south property line separating Lots 1 through 13 from Lots la through 13a. c. That if Lots la through 13a are not accepted by the City of Anaheim, they shall become part of Lots 1 through 13 respectively and the developer shall, in accordance with City Council policy, construct a 6-foot masonry wall on the south property line separating Lots 1 through 13 and La Palma Avenue. Reasonable landscaping, including irriga- tion facilities, shall be installed in the uncemented por- tion of the arterial highway parkway the full distance of said wall; plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Park- way Maintenance. Following installation and acceptance the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. d. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amen~ the assumption of maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 10. That Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2 shall be developed prior to Tract Nos. 7417, 7151, 7459, and 7460, Revision Nos. 2. 11. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard let- ter from the Orange County Flood Control District, prior to approval of a final tract map. Tract No. 7458 - Revision No. 2 - 75 proposed R-2-5,000 lots: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, 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 street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 6. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim tha appropriate parr and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2 shall be dis- posed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. This shall include provisions for accepting and transporting runoff from any upstream tributary area. 8. That the vehicular access rights, except at street and/or al- ley openings to La Palma Avenue, shall be dedicated to the City of Anaheim. 71-515 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M 9. a. That the developer shall submit to the City of Anaheim an irrevocable offer of dedication for Lots 7a through 26A abutting on La Palma Avenue, said irrevocable offer shall be accepted by the City of Anaheim within 30 days after re- cordation of the final tract map. In the event Lots 7& through 26a are not accepted by the City, said lots shall revert back to the developer to be included into the abut- ting Lots 7 through 26. b. That if Lots 7a through 26a are accepted by the City of Ana- heim, the developer shall install a 6-foot masonry wall on the south property line separating Lots 7 through 26 from Lots 7a through 26a. c. That if Lots 7a through 26a are not accepted by the City of Anaheim, they shall become part of Lots 7 through 26 re- spectively and the developer shall, in accordance with City Council policy, construct a 6-foot masonry wall on the south property line, separating Lots 7 through 26 and La Palma Avenue. Reasonable landscaping, including irrigation fa- cilities, shall be installed in the uncemented portion of the arterial highway parkway the full distance of said wall; plans for said landscaping to be submitted to and subject to the approval of the Superintendent of Parkway Mainten- ance. Following installation and acceptance the City of Anaheim shall assume the responsibility for maintenance of said landscaping. d. That the City Council reserves the right to delete or amend the assumption of maintenance in the event Council policy changes. 10. That Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2 shall be developed prior to the development of Tract Nos. 7151, 7417, 7459, or 7460, Revision Nos. 2, and that Tract No. 7151, Revision No. 2, shall be developed prior to Tract No. 7417, Revision No. 2, and that the entire storm drain facilities required to accept and transport the runoff from the tributary area north of Esperanza Road shall be constructed as part of the improvements for this tract. 11. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control Dist- rict, prior to approval of a final tract map. 12. That a permit shall be obtained from the Orange County Flood Control District for any work within the Santa Ana River Channel right-of-way. Tract No. 7459 - Revision No. 2 - 72 proposed R-2-5~000 lots: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7459, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, 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 street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 6. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No. 7459, Revision No. 2, shall be dis- posed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. This shall include provisions for accepting and transporting runoff from any upstream tributary area. 8. That Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2, shall be developed prior to Tract No. 7459, Revision No. 2. 9. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control Dist- rict prior to approval of a final tract map. 71-516 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M Tract No. 7460 - Revision No. 2 - 18 proposed R-2-5,000 lots: 1. That the approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 7460, Revision No. 2, is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification No. 70-71-25. 2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one sub- division, 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 street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior to approval of a final tract map. 5. That a final tract map of subject property shall be submitted to and approved by the City Council and then be recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder. 6. That the owners of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the build- ing permit is issued. 7. That drainage of Tract No.7460, Revision No. 2, shall be disposed of in a manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer. This shall include provisions for accepting and transporting runoff from any upstream tributary area. 8. That Tract No. 7458, Revision No. 2, shall be developed prior to Tract No. 7460, Revision No. 2. 9. That the developer shall obtain a favorable flood hazard letter acceptable to the City of Anaheim from the Orange County Flood Control District prior to approval of a final tract map. Council discussion followed, it being noted that approval of said maps set the precise alignment of La Palma Avenue in this area. Mr. Maddox advised that the property owners in between the area where tentative maps have been approved by the City can design their maps to join the La Palma Avenue alignment that has been established by the approved tenta-' rive tract maps. At the conclusion of the discussion, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Roth, Revision No. 2 of Tract Nos. 7417, 7151, 7458, 7459 and 7460 were approved, subject to the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7419, REVISION NO. 1, AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7470: Developer - R. Spehar, J. Liberio and H. Budlong. Property located on the north side of Santa Aha Canyon Road, east of Imperial Highway, containing as follows: Tract No. 7419 - 143 proposed R-2-5,000 zoned lots. Tract No. 7470 - 96 proposed R-2-5,000 zoned lots. On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Thom, Council action on Tentative Tracts No. 7419, Revision No. 1, and No. 7470 was contin- ued to be considered in conjunction with Reclassification No. 70-71-53. MOTION CARRIED. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 7488: Developer - Alan G. Chapin. Property located on the east side of Sunkist Way, north of La Palma Avenue, and contains 5 proposed R-1 zoned lots. On motion by Councilman R0th, seconded by Councilman Dutton, Council action on Tentative Tract No. 7488 was continued to be considered in conjunc- tion with Reclassification No. 71-72-10 and Variance No. 2285. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-370 - AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO, 1501: In accordance with recom- mendations of the City Engineer, Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 71R- 370 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 71-517 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971~ 1:30 P.M. 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 PERFORM- ING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IM- PROVEMENT: ANAHEIM HILLS GOLF COURSE GRADING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 1501. (Hudson Contracting Corporation - $277,750.00) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley and Dutton Thom None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-370 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-371 - AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 628-A. In accordance with the recommendations of the City Engineer, Councilman Stephenson offered Resolu- tion No. 71R-371 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 PERFORM- ING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IM- PROVEMENT: THE KATELLA AVENUE AT WEST STREET NE CORNER STREET IMPROVEMENT IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 628-A. (L.P. Leavitt - $4,785.40) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-371 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-372 - WORK ORDER NO. 603-B: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-372 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER- MINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT. TO WIT: THE LA PALMAAVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT FROM APPROXIMATELY 11~ OF TO APPROXIMATELY 2,965 FEET EAST OF IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 603-B. APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - Sep- tember 10, 1971, 2:00 P.M.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-372 duly passed and adopted. CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - WORK ORDER NO. 616-B: Upon report and reconm~ndation of the City Engineer, Councilman Pebley moved that Change Order. No. 1 to Work Order No. 616-B, representing additional work in connection with the Blue Gum Street- Coronado Street street improvement, increasing the contract amount by $6,995.18, be approved. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 71-518 City Rail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M _RESOLUTION NO. 71R-373 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No.71R-373 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Shapell Industries, Inc.; Herbert F. and Betty Jean Berger; Anaheim Eucalyptus Water Company and Mitchell and Louise Boureston; Earl and Helen Wahl Callan.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-373 duly passed and adopted. METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT - EAST ORANGE COUNTY FEEDER NO, 2 On the recon~nen- dation of the City Manager, payment of $2,641.65, representing the City's proportionate share of costs for the operation and maintenance of the East Orange County Feeder No. 2 was authorized in accordance with agreement be- tween the City of Anaheim and Metropolitan Water District, on motion by Coun- cilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Thom. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-374 - T.RASE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY - JOH~ YAMAGUCHI: Council- man Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-374 for adoption, amending lease on pro- perty known as the Wagner and Montague property, leased formerly to Louie Kodama and John Yamaguchi, by eliminating Louie Kodama, lessee, and leasing the property to John Yamaguchi as sole lessee. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO LEASE (FORMER WAGNER AND MONTAGUE PROPERTY.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-374 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-375: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 71R-375 for adoption, concluding a transaction authorized November, 1964, deeding a small, triangular parcel of City-owned property on La Palma Avenue, east of West Street, to Dan Rowland, et ux. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A GRANT DEED (LA PALMA AVENUE) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILM~N: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephens0n, Pebley, Thom and Dutt0n None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-375 duly passed and adopted. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Council- man Roth, the following claims were denied, as recommended by the City Attor- ney, and ordered referred to the insurance carrier: 71-519 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES- August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. (a) Lynn H. Hawkins, purported personal property damage in the amount of $486.53, as result of shutting off power July 10, 1971, at 236 West Lincoln Avenue. (b) Mrs. Beverly Carlson, on behalf of son, Brent Beckett, for personal injuries May 20, 1971, as result of bicycle becoming lodged in a grate at the northeast corner of Santa Ana Street and Manchester Avenue; amount to date, $25.00, prospective damage amount,S200.00. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING - SANTA ANA FREEWAY - ROAD 07-ORA-5: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley, public hearing was scheduled to be held August 31, 1971, 1:30 P.M., to consider agreement between the City of Anaheim and State of California, Department of Public Works, concerning the Santa Ana Freeway, in the vicinity of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street, involving the widening of the Brookhurst overcrossing of the Freeway and construction of an additional overcrossing on La Palma Avenue, and modification to ramps to and from said Freeway. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 71R-376 - AGREEMENT - TALLMANTZ AVIATION, INC, - POLICE HELICOPTER MAINTENANCE: Discussion was held relative to the renewal of the agreement with Tallmantz Aviation, Inc. Councilman Stephenson noted this matter was deferred for a full Council, during which time he had researched the issue and found the follow- ing facts: The program from the time the helicopters were received, June 18, 1970, to date, has cost $173,175.43 (not considering depreciation). Hourly cost is $59.00 per hour flight time, or $107,675.00 per year, for a five-hour-per-day flight. Noting the fact that the City owns two such air- craft, that the Chief recommends flight time be increased to ten hours per day, cost of $215,530.00 can be projected for one year's operation. To him, this large expenditure warrants further evaluation in the light of what the program has accomplished. Councilman Stephenson further noted from the Police Monthly Report (July) that there has been no decrease in crime since the helicopter program has been in operation. He questioned justifying the cost of one police unit, which still requires a ground unit to apprehend and effectuate an arrest. According to his understanding, Police ground units were decreased by five with the implementation of the air patrol which, in his opinion, would have been far less costly and considerably more effective as a deter- rent to crime. Councilman Stephenson reported that the Los Angeles Sheriff's De- partment started a patrol called the "Argus Program" three years ago, com- prising eight cities, five of which have since dropped out of the program because of the expense compared to value received. Councilman Dutton advised that at the time the helicopter program was considered, there were reported robberies in the City of $2,000,000.00 which, it was felt, the helicopter patrol would reduce by 2% with the two helicopters flying. Because of budgetary requirements, only one aircraft has been flying five hours a day, and this schedule only the past four months, and as of now, the benefits are not known. Portion of a report prepared by Chief Michel, dated August 11, 1971 (page 5), was read by Councilman Dutton, wherein it was noted that cer- tain preventable crimes proved the helicopter program e~ective, and during the months of April through July, by comparison figures, night commercial burglaries were reduced 16%, and schools reduced 34%, and there had been an overall reduction of 23% compared to a 66% increase for the same period of time one year ago. Councilman Dutton felt, under these circumstances, a qualified judgment could not be rendered until there had been at least one year's ex- perience. 71-520 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - AuKust 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Stephenson questioned the differences in the monthly re- port and the report just referred to. Chief Michel reported that the difference in the latter report cov- ered only the four-month period from April to July when the helicopter program was considered fully operational, with permanent observers, and only those cate- gories considered preventable by the helicopter program were selected, such as parks, schools, and industrial areas, and these incidents were hand-tabulated and, therefore, not reflected in the total monthly report. Statistics relating to burglaries and robberies were then reported on the basis of the number of cases and percentage of increase or decrease. Chief Michel further advised that prior to this period, beginning in February, they were not fully effective as they were going through an orien- tation program, flying 132 members of the department two hours each. Regarding requiring a ground unit for police action, Chief Michel advised that this is why sworn personnel man the helicopters as they can land and take whatever police action is necessary. Councilman Roth, recognizing everyone's concern regarding costs, asked if any of the surrounding conm~nities have evidenced interest in pooling these flights and sharing the costs? Chief Michel replied in the affirmative, advising of present nego- tiations with the City of Buena Park. Regarding costs, the Chief further reported that the $173,000.00 figure includes personnel, which is the greatest part of the cost, in that the personnel for this program are not new employees but transfers from ex- isting police divisions; that cost of operating the helicopters is $52,288.00, and manpower is $61,756.00. In answer to questions of Councilman Stephenson, the Chief stated more ground units would be advantageous as, in his opinion, they were "spread pretty thin." He further advised that sometimes there is a backlog of calls, at which time priorities are put into effect. As to the program, Chief Michel advised that at the time the City went into the program, had it been known it would not be a full program, he probably would not have recommended it. He stated they knew the program was expensive and the equipment was expensive, and it did no one good when it was not in the air. Discussion was held pertaining to how much additional time should be considered to develop meaningful statistics on which to base a further de- cision to retain or abandon the program, and Councilman Thom felt one full year of operation would be necessary, meaning ten-hour day flights for twelve months. Chief Michel reported an additional $52,288.00 would be necessary for an additional five-hour-a-day flight. No additional personnel would be required as present personnel would be assigned from Special Enforcement. Further, after a thorough evaluation if it is determined the program is not effective, he also would want it eliminated. However~ to determine this, they request one year fully operational. The Chief reported that there are now 52 cities in the United States utilizing this type of program, 17 in California, and none of these cities have discontinued the program because of ineffectiveness or disenchantment. Some of the cities in the Sheriff's "Argus Program" that dropped out did so because of an increase in cost in the contract with the Sheriff's Department and to establish their own program under L.E.A.A. Funding. Terms of the contract were explained by Mr. Murdoch, noting the cost is based on the amount of time flown as shown on the instrument of the aircraft. 71-521 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. Regarding the discussions with the City of Buena Park, Mr. Murdoch advised that the Chief is of the opinion that an adequate test would require the ten-hour-per-day scheduled flights,/and in order to keep costs down as much as possible, discussions have be~ held with the Chief and City Manager of Buena Park to provide that city a Portion of the ten-hour-day schedule by providing a pattern that might provide them as much as two hours a day. An amount has been budgeted by Buena Park for this possible service. It was felt Buena Park should be paying approximately the difference between the five-hour and ten-hour flying time, and although they would not be receiving five-hour surveillance, the plane would be in the air and available ten hours a day. Councilman Stephenson disapproved leasing any portion of the flight time to another city, stating if it is good, Anaheim should keep it, and if it is not good, the program should be eliminated. Councilman Pebley concurred with the statement of Councilman Stephenson. Councilman Roth was interested in reducing costs and felt a cooperative agreement with another city could be beneficial. Councilman Thom was of the opinion that the statistics to be de- veloped to determine retention of the program would not be as factual if the program was shared with another city and that the program should at least go alone to next July. After statistics are obtained, a contract relationship with another city might then be in order. Chief Michel called attention to the problem of refueling at the Orange County Airport, advising that approximately one hour of the five is spent in going to and from refueling, which occurs twice a day. Discussion was held on the possibility of constructing a fueling facility on a temporary basis. Chief Michel stated costs for such a facil- ity have been determined and such a facility would be economically advanta- geous and paid for by the difference in cost of fuel purchased in 10,000- gallon lots, not considering the cost of time lost in flying the aircraft to Orange County Airport. At the conclusion of the discussion, Councilman Dutton offered Resolution No. 71R-376 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAt{EIMAPPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND TALLMANTZ AVIATION, INC. DATED JULY 27, 1971, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Pebley, ~hom and Dutton NOES: COUNCILMEN: Stephenson ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-376 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Thom moved that the Chief be instructed to put the heli- copter program on a fully-operational basis of ten hours a day to a period ending June 30, 1972. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. To this motion, Councilman §tephenson voted 'lNo." MOTION CARRIED. It was agreed that additional funds required to implement a fully- operational helicopter program be a supplement to the current budget, and the amount necessary be calculated and reported at the meeting to be held August 24, 1971. Also requested were cost figures for a temporary fueling facility. RESOLUTION NO, 71R-377: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 71R-377 for adop- tion. 71-522 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M, Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO DIRECT ITS STAFF TO COMMENCE STUDIES FOR CERTAIN ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS. (Weir Canyon Road) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-377 duly passed and adopted. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton: a. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of July, 1971. b. City of Monterey Park - Resolution No. 7549 - Urging passage of State Senate Bill 51 relating to auto repair dealers. c. City of Fountain Valley - Resolution No. 6092 - Requesting the State of California, Department of Public Works, to subvene directly to Cities and Counties TOPICS and Urban Funds. d. Community Center Authority - Minutes - August 2, 1971. e. Before the Public Utilities Cormmission - Investigation on the Cormnission's own motion into the adoption of a general order prohibiting pollution of railroad right-of-ways by railroad corporations. f. Before the Civil Aeronautics Board - Joint Application of Golden West Airlines, Inc and Los Angeles Airways, Inc., for exemption un- der Section 416(b) of the Federal Aviation Act. g. Before the Civil Aeronautics Board - Joint Application of Golden West Airlines, Inc., and Los Angeles Airways, Inc., for approval of acquisition agreement, transfer of certificates, issuance of exemption and other relief. h. Before the Public Utilities Co~mnission - Application of the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, a corporation, for authority to increase certain intrastate rates and charges applicable to telephone ser- vices furnished within the State of California in an amount necessary to offset increases in wage and salary rates. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 2956: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 2956 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2930, NUNC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO SUBDIVISIONS. (Chapters 17.06 and 17.08) Roll Call Vote: AYE S: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 2956 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 2957: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 2957 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (70-71-58 - C-I) RESOLUTION NO. 71R-378: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 71R-378 for adop- tion. Refer to Resolution Book. 71-523 .City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - August 17, 1971, 1:30 P.M. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RELATING TO THE EMERGENCY EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1971. Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NO~S: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Roth, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 71R-378 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Dutton requested the record to show his reasons for ap- proving the foregoing Resolution, and stated them to be as follows: 1. That under the Emergency Employment Act, if the City does not accept the responsibility it passes on to the County. 2. It makes possible employment for some people. 3. In his opinion, people would rather work for their money than receive it from Welfare. Mr. Murdoch reported that the Grant would be for all of the public agencies within the City of Anaheim, and that programs from other agencies should be appraised in their relative priority with the activities of the City. PROJECT AND PROGRAM PRIORITIES; Mr. Murdoch asked if there were any suggested chan- ges in the Project and Program Priorities discussed and considered at this morning's meeting. Councilman Thom advised that he would like to see Item 32 "Restora- tion of Audio-Visual Program at the Library" m~ved forward and combined with Priority No. 9 "The Book Purchasing and Book Binding Program." At the conclusion of the discussion, it being recognized that the dollar value of projects would be subject to change as affected by the Emer- gency Employment Act, the order of project priorities as recommended by Mr. Murdoch was agreed upon by the City Council, the only change being Item 22, "10-Hour Per Day Helicopter Service," which is to be given first priority. Relocating Item 32 was disapproved and its position on the list of priorities stands. .SAND, GRAVEL AND MINERAL EXTRACTIO~ STUDY COMMITTEE: In accordance with Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 71-886, Mr. James Maddox, City Engineer, was ap- pointed to said Study Corm~ittee, representing the City of Anaheim, on motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Dutton. MOTION CARRIED. ADJO~NT: Councilman Thom moved to adjourn. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 4:45 P.M. City Clerk