1973/02/2073-11'2
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
COUNCILMEN: None
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis
CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph B. Geisler
DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Farrens
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson
ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts
ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST: William Butcher
ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE: William Armstrong
Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order.
INVOCATION: Reverend John K. Saville, of St. Michael's Episcopal Church gave
the Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ralph G. Sneegas led the Assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Dutton and unani-
mously approved by the City Council:
"Easter Seal Month" - March 1 through April 22, 1973.
RESOLUTION OF WELCOME: A Resolution of Welcome was issued to the Golden Gloves
California Championship, sponsored by the Orange County Veterans of
Foreign Wars, Post No. 3173, by Mayor Dutton and unanimously ratified
by the City council. Mr. Bill Rogers accepted the resolution on behalf
of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A Resolution of Congratulations was unanimously
adopted by the City Council in recognition of the recent accreditation
of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce by the Chamber of Commerce of the
United States.
MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meeting held January 23, 1973,
were approved on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton.
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 reading of the title,
specific request is made by a Councilman for the reading of such ordinance or
resolution. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
CouncilmAn Pebley left the Council Chambers at 1:35 p.m.
REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST TH~ CITY: Demands against~the City in the amount
of $1,384,037.79, in accordance with the 1972-73 Budget, were approved.
MOHLER DRIVE ANNEXATION - RECORD OF CANVASS OF RETURNS OF SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION
HELD FEBRUARY 132 1973: Comprising approximately 520 acres located briefly south
of Santa Ana Canyon Road, encompassing the Mohler Drive area.
Mayor Dutton appointed the following Canvassing Board to canvass the
returns of the Mohler Drive Annexation Election held February 13, 1973:
INS~CTOR:
Councilman Stephenson
Councilman Sneegas
Councilman Thom
The tally list of the election precinct and the absentee vote were
compared with the roster and Councilman Stephenson announced that the total
number of votes cast in said election, including the absentee ballots, was 11.6;
71 being in favor of annexation and 45 against annexation°
73-113
City HallI Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-61: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 73R-61
for adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-61
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
CAUSING A RECORD OF CANVASS OF RETURNS OF SPECIAL ELECTION
TO BE ENTERED UPON ITS MINUTES. (MOHLER DRIVE ANNEXATION)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim has canvassed
returns of a certain special annexation election held on the 13th day of
February, 1973, in certain unincorporated territory sought to be annexed
to said City of Anaheim; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has caused a record to be made of the
canvass of returns of said election, which record is entitled, "RECORDS OF
CANVASS OF RETURNS OF SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION HELD FEBRUARY 13, 1973."
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the total number of votes
cast in said election was 116 including 3 absentee ballots; that the total
number of votes cast in said election in favor of annexation was 71; that
the total number of votes cast in said election against annexation was 45.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Anaheim that said record of canvass of returns of said election be,
and the same is hereby ordered entered upon the minutes of said City
Council.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and signed by me this 20th
day of February, 1973.
/s/ Jack C. Dutton
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
/s/ Dene M. Daoust
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, DENE M. DAOUST, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 73R~61 was introduced and adopted
at a regular meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of
Anaheim, held on the 20th day of February, 1973, by the following vote of
the members thereof:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMF~N:
COUNCILMEN:
COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Stephenson, Thom and Dutton
None
Pebley
None
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim
approved and signed said Resolution No. 73R-61 on the 20th day of
February, 1973.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
the official seal of the City of Anaheim this 20th day of February, 1973.
(SEAL)
/s/ Dene M. Daoust
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
73-114
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 19730 1:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 3136: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3196 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO SAID CITY OF
ANAHEIM OF CERTAIN INHABITED TERRITORY KNOWN AS MOHLER DRIVE ANNEXATION.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO~ 2451 (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 73
AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8075~ REVISION NO. 3: Variance Application No. 2451, together
with Environmental Impact Report No. 73, were submitted by Anaheim Hills, Inc.,
and Texaco Ventures, Inc., requesting the establishment of a 184-1ot subdivision
(Tract No. 8075) on R-A zoned property located on both sides of Serrano Avenue,
northeast of Serrano Avenue and Nohl Ranch Road, with waivers of:
a. Requirement that residential lots rear on arterial highways.
b. Minimum lot width.
c. Minimum width of cul-de-sac lots.
do Minimum lot area.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 73: Enviror~nental Impact Report No. 73 was sub-
mitted, together with Environmental Impact Report Review Co~uittee Analysis, and
City Planning Commission Resolution No. PC72-331, recommending that said report
be adopted as the Environmental Impact Statement of the City Council.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas,
the City Council received Environmental Impact Report NOo 73, Committee Analysis
thereof, and City Planning Commission rec~mL,endations and adopted said report
as the Statement of the Council. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Planning Cormnission pursuant to Resolution No. PC72-332,
denied Variance No. 2451. Appeal from action taken by the City Planning Com-
mission was filed by Horst J. Schor, Vice President, Planning and Engineering,
Anaheim Hills, Inc., and the public hearing scheduled February 6, 1973, was
continued to this date at request of the Applicant.
Councilman Pebley returned to the Council Chambers. (1:45 P.M.)
Mr. Roberts briefed the location of subject property, noting it is
within the Anaheim Hills Lakeview No. 2 and Eastridge areas immediately east of
the reservioro The plan submitted to the City Planning Co~m~Lission indicated
that the developer proposed to build 184 single-family lots on 62 acres, however,
subsequent to denial by the City Planning C~,m~ission, a revised plan has been
submitted, and Mr. Roberts explained that the addendum to the staff report sub-
mitted this date is in reference to this revision.
Mr. Roberts summarized the reasons the Applicant had originally
requested certain Code waivers: i.e., there were five lots proposed to side on
Serrano Avenue, which is an arterial highway; in 80 of the 184 lots the widths
ranged from 55 feet to 68 feet, which is below the minimum 70-foot width requirement
for an R-1 zone; regarding the minimum 60-foot'width at the building Setback line
on cul-de-sac lots, 17 of these range from no frontage at all up to 59 feet;
regarding minimum lot area of 7,200 square feet, 24 lots or 137o of the total
range from 6,000 up to 7,200 square feet.
Further, the City Planning Commission considered the circulation ele-
ment a serious problem in the event of a natural disaster, as ingress and egress
for emergency equipment may be extremely difficult. Also~ there is concern
regarding the maintenance o~ the Metropolitan Water District easement on the
westerly boundary of this property, and it was the opinion of the City Attorney
that this should be included either in this development or in that to the west.
The engineer has not included this easement in Tract No. 8075, and it is assumed
it will be incorporated when the property to the west is developed.
The most recent revised tract map reduces the area by 2 acres, to a
total of 60 acres as some of the area originally included was within the Agricul-
tural Preserve, and the total number of lots has been reduced by four to a total
of 180.
Mr. Roberts summarized the findings of the City Planning C~m~ission in
the denial of Variance No° 2451 and Tentative Tract Map No. 8075, Revision No. 2,
73-115
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
and noted that the map submitted as Revision No. 3 (not previously reviewed by
the City Planning Commission) reveals that the number of side-on lots has been
reduced from five to four and that the pad elevations on these lots have been
lowered beyond that of the adjacent arterial highway. The four remaining side-
on lots show a grade differential to the arterial highway of 20 feet which
would preclude these parcels from being converted to commercial use. In the
revision, all lots have been brought up to 6,000 square feet or more, with the
exception of two, which are hillside lots. He noted also that the alignment of
Thrasher Lane, in the northwestern side of the tract, has been changed on Revi-
sion Noo 3, due to the fact that the slope on the west side has been changed
from 2:1 to 1~:1 and because of this steeper slope, the developer was able to
accomplish a larger pad area and shift Thrasher Lane further to the west,
thereby adding additional depth to the lots that rear on Serrano Avenue. The
forty-foot setback thus established no longer precludes the development of
the three lots north of Thrasher Lane.
In the easterly portion of the tract there are three lots served by
a private accessway, and under the original plan this accessway was located at
the base of the slope which divided these three lots in half; this has been
revised and the accessway relocated adjacent to the top of the other slope
facing wes~ and the lots are no longer divided.
Tentative Tract Map No. 8075, Revision No. 3, was reviewed at Council
table, and Councilman Thom asked whether the Planning Commission has seen this
latest revision.
Mr. Roberts advised that Revision No. 3 was received just after the
February 6, 1973, Council meeting and has not been reviewed by the City Plan-
ning C~ission, and read an excerpt from the City Planning Co~uission Minutes,
expressing their concern and recommending the redesign of the tract map be
submitted to the Commission for review, however, the Petitioner requested the
Planning Commission base their action on the tract map before them (Revision
No. 2).
Mr. Roberts recommended, should the Council approved this variance
and tentative tract map, Revision No. 3, an additional condition be imposed on
the tract map requiring recordation of an agreement to landscape, irrigate and
provide perpetual maintenance for all slopes ~utside of the tract boundaries
created by the grading operations of this tract, which would apply to a parcel
immediately to the west presently owned by Anaheim Hills, which they have indi-
cated may be sold to the City of Orange for a water treatment plant.
Councilman Dutton inquired as to why the developer should provide
maintenance in perpetuity to a slope which he will not own.
Mr. Roberts advised that the slope area should be landscaped now to
avoid erosion and when and if the property is sold, the responsibility for its
maintenance and irrigation will be transferred along with the title.
Mayor Dutton asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and
wished to address the Council.
Mr. Horst J. Schor, Vice President, Anaheim Hills, Inc., 380 Anaheim
Hills Road~ stated that the Development Services' report has accurately out-
lined the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission as well as the amend-
ments incorporated into Revision No. 3 of Tentative Tract~ Map No. 8075. He
agreed to stipulate to the conditions presented by Development Service Depart-
ment~ including the planting and maintenance of the slope outside of the tract
boundary. He advised that they have committed themselves to include the Metro-
politian Water District easement in development proposed for the westerly side
of this tract.
Mr. Schor observed that the original density has been decreased by
one unit per acre~ from four to three units per acre. He pointed out that this
project is proposed for a Planned Community Zone, and one of the intentions in
the creation of this zone was to allow some flexibility to the hillside develop-
er. He was of the opinion this project, which contains only 24 lots which are
less than 7,200 square feet, is a well-balanced tract, providing the variety
of lot sizes sought by their potential customers.
73-116
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
The Mayor asked is anyone else in favor or opposition to the proposed
project wished to address the City Council, and hearing no response, declared
the hearing closed.
With reference to the Planning Co~m~,ission Minutes and action, Council-
man Dutton felt that the problems noted have been alleviated by Revision Noo 3,
and further, in regard to the lot sizes, that allowance should be considered
because of the topography of the area.
Councilman Thom con~ented that hardship would be difficult to prove
in this situation, as the applicant was aware of the area topography prior to
designing the tract. Further, he could not agree with the methodology used to
circumvent submission of Revision No. 3 to the Planning C~m~ission and noted
that although Revision No. 3 is a step in the right direction, all of the con-
cerns expressed by the Planning C~Lission have not been reconciled.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-62: Councilman Dutton was of the opinion the developer has
reasonably complied with the Planning C~m,ission concerns and thereupon offered
a resolution to grant Variance No. 2451, subject to the conditions reco~nended
by the Interdepartmental C~mL~ittee, with amendments, as follows:
1. That this variance is granted subject to the completion of annex-
ation proceedings on affected portions of subject property, and the completion
of Reclassification No. 71-72-44, now pending, and Tract No. 8075, Revision No.
3.
2. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accor-
dance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit No. 1, Revision No. 1; provided, however, that final specific plans shall
be submitted and approved in accordance with the provisions of the PC, Planned
Community, Zone prior to the approval of the final tract map.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 2451.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley and Dutton
Thom
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-62 duly passed and adopted.
TENTATIVE MAP~ TRACT NO. 8075~ REVISION NO. 3: Developer, Anaheim Hills, Inc.,
and Texaco Ventures, Inc., property located on both sides of Serrano Avenue,
northeast of Serrano Avenue and Nohl Ranch Road; containing 180 proposed R-1
zoned lots.
The City Planning Commission at their meeting of December 27, 1972,
denied Tentative Map, Tract No. 8075, Revision No. 2 (184 lots). Mrl Roberts
reported Revision No. 3 (180 lots) has not been reviewed by the Co~unission.
On motion by Councilman Dutton~ seconded by Councilman Stephenson~
Tentativa Map, Tract No. 8075, Ravtsion No. 3 was approved, subject to the recom-
mendations of the Interdepartmental Co~nittee, with the addition of Condition No.
15, regarding landscaping and maintenance agreement as follows:
1. That approval of Tentative Map of Tract No. 8075, Revision No. 3
is granted subject to completion of Reclassification No. 71-72-44 and Variance
No. 2451.
2. That should this subdivision be developed as more than one subdivi-
sion, each subdivision thereof shall be submitted in tentative form for approval.
3. That in accordance with City Council policy, a six-footmasonry
wall (or an alternative approved by the Development Services Department) shall
be constructed on the property lines separating Lot Nos. 1, 2, 13 through 18,
73-117
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
44, 45, 51, 52, 59, 63, 64, 65, 73, 74, 82, 83, 84, 88 through 106, 170 through
180, from Serrano Avenue; and along the property lines separating Lot Nos. 10
through 13, 19, 84 through 87, from Glory Lane, such walls shall be measured
from the highest finished grade level of subject property or the adjacent road-
ways, whichever is highest. Reasonable landscaping including irrigation facil-
ities shall be installed within the slope areas of each lot adjacent to the
roadways and in the street parkways. Plans for said landscaping shall be sub-
mitted to and subject to the approval of the Parkway Maintenance Superintendent.
Following installation and acceptance, the property owner shall assume respon-
sibility for maintenance of said landscaping to the lot lines, regardless of
the location of the walls. The City of Anaheim shall assume responsibility
for maintenance of landscaping in the Serrano Avenue and Glory Lane rights-
of-way.
4. That all lots within this tract shall be served by underground
utilties.
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 any proposed covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall
be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to City Council
approval of the final tract map, and further that the approved covenants, con-
ditions, and restrictions shall be recorded concurrently with the final tract
map.
7. That street names shall be approved by the City of Anaheim prior
to approval of a final tract map.
8. That this Tentative Tract is approved subject to completion of
annexation of subject property to the City of Anaheim.
9. That the gutters shall be installed along Serrano Avenue, Glory
Lane, Lilac Lane and White Sage Lane as required by the City Engineer and in
accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in the office of the
City Engineer.
10. That drainage of said property shall be disposed of in a manner
satisfactory to the City Engineer and shall include construction of drainage
facilities of a size and type sufficient to carry runoff waters originating from
higher properties south of Santa Aha Canyon Road through said property to ulti-
mate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Reimbursement agreements may
be made available to the developers of said property upon their request.
11. That the property lines shall be a minimum of one (1) foot of
top of slopes as required in Section 17.06.110(b) of the City of Anaheim
Municipal Code.
12. That the maximum street grade on any street shall not exceed 12%.
13. That the developer shall provide full street improvements on
both sides of the centerline of Serrano Avenue from Hidden Canyon Road through
the tract.
14. That prior to the approval of the final tract map, final specific
plans shall be submitted and approved in accordance with the provisions of the
PC, Planning Community~ Zone.
15. That prior to approval of the final tract map~ the owner shall
provide the City with an agreement to landscape, irrigate and provide perpetual
maintenance for all slopes outside the tract boundaries which are created by
the grading operations for this tract. Said agreement shall be recorded con-
currently with the final tract map.
To this motion Councilman Thom voted "no". MOTION CAB/~IED.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2467 AND REgUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXEMPTION STATUS: Application of De Witt R. Lee, was submitted, together with request
for exemption status from filing of an Environmental Impact Report, to estab-
lish a 40-square foot directional billboard two to three feet from the 30-foot
easement on Lincoln Avenue, on C-1 zoned property, located at the southeast
corner of Lincoln Avenue and Magnolia Avenue~ with waivers of:
a. Minimum distance of a billboard from a single family residence.
b. Minimum front setback.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-6,
rec~ended that no environmental impact report be required and denied
Variance No. 2467.
73-118
~ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Appeal from action by the City Planning Commission was filed by
A. W. Hancock, Senior Vice President, Walker and Lee Real Estate, and public
hearing scheduled this date.
EXEMPTION DECLARATION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded
by Councilman Pebley, the City Council received the application for Exemption
Declaration Status and determined the impact of said project would be trivial
in nature, thereby requiring no environmental impact report or statement by
the Council. MOTION CARRIED.
The Deputy City Clerk advised that revised plans have been filed
reducing the size of the requested sign.
Mr. Roberts noted the location of subject property and related that
the site was formerly developed with a real estate office which subsequently
was demolished to allow construction of a service station on the corner parcel.
Walker and Lee Realtors have since developed a new real estate office on the
southerly portion and retained a 30-foot easement along the easterly side of
the service station property for additional access.
Mr. Roberts advised that the proposed location of the sign is irmnedi-
ately adjacent the arterial highway and within 75 feet of a residential struc-
tureo The billboard ordinance requires that the required setback in the under-
lying zone be maintained, which in this case would be 35 feet° He further
advised that the original proposal for a 40-square foot billboard has been
revised and reduced to a 3-foot by 6-foot sign located 8 feet above the ground
(18 square feet).
Mr. Roberts reported the Planning Commission felt that approval of
this proposal to locate the billboard on an access drive with frontage on an
arterial highway would establish a precedent, encouraging similar requests,
and read the findings from the Planning Commission's resolution of denial.
In answer to Councilman Dutton, Mr. Roberts reported the sign would
probably be classified as an off-site sign as it is for directional purposes
for the real estate office, however, will be located on the service station
property over which the real estate company has an easement.
Mr. Geisler advised that even though the real estate company has an
easement on the property, it is not a sufficient interest in said property on
which to build a Structure, and is not a part of the property on which their
office is located, therefore it would have to be considered off-site.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and wished
to address the Council.
Mr. A. W. Hancock, 1477 South Manchester, representing Walker and Lee,
utilized a map of subject area to indicate the traffic situation on Lincoln
and Magnolia Avenues which prompted the request for a directional sign to be
located on Lincoln Avenue which would indicate access to their parking lot
from this point. This would eliminate left turns across traffic to enter at
the Magnolia entrance. He further advised they do have a lease for the ease-
ment, and it includes the placement of subject sign upon approval by the City°
Mr. Hal Redman, Manager of the Walker and Lee office at 116 South
Magnolia, stated he can testify to the traffic problem which is compounded by
the construction of the service station and was of the opinion this directional
aid would help to alleviate the traf£ic congestion at this intersection. He
noted that the original sign proposed was revised as the Planning Commission
suggested it was more an advertising type of sign, rather than directional,
which was not their intent.
The Mayor asked if anyone else either in favor or opposition wished
to address the City Council, and, there being no response, declared the hearing
closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-63: Councilman Pebley concurred that'the traffic at the
intersection of Magnolia and Lincoln Avenues is very congested and, therefore,
73-119
City Halla Anaheima California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
to permit the construction of such a directional sign, in his opinion, would
not establish a precedent, and thereupon offered Resolution No. 73R-63 for
adoption, granting Variance Noo 2467 to permit the establishment of an 18-square
foot directional sign as requested, subject to the Interdepartmental Committee
recommendations, as follows:
1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of
Conditional Use Permit No. 1290, now pending.
2. That Condition No. 1, above mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or
prior to the time that the Sign Permit is issued or within a period of one year
from date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the City
Council may grant.
3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in con-
formance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim and
marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
Prior to voting on the resolution, Council Stephenson remarked, in
effect, this is an off-site sign, which does not conform with the sign ordin-
nance, and, further, if the proposed development at this location adds to the
traffic congestion, perhaps the original use application should be reconsidered.
Councilman Sneegas was of the opinion that the directional sign
would not alleviate the traffic situation, as the drivers looking for an
address on Magnolia would not notice a directional sign on Lincoln Avenue.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 2467.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNC II2MEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Pebley, Thom and Dutton
Sneegas and Stephenson
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-63 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1365 AND REQUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: Application of Rayco, Inc., together with request
for exemption status from filing of an Environmental Impact Report, was sub-
mitted to establish two billboards having areas of 700 and 300 square feet on
C-3 zoned property located at the northeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Euclid
Street, with waiver of:
a. Maximum display area.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-7, recom-
mended that no Environmental Impact Report be required and denied Conditional
Use Permit No. 1365.
A~peal from action taken by the City Planning Commission was filed
by Mr. Jay Kingry, Pacific Outdoor Advertising Company, and public hearing
scheduled this date.
EXEMPTION DECLARATION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by
Councilman Pebley, the City Council received the request for Exemption Declara-
tion Status and determined that the impact of said project would be trivial
in nature, thereby requiring no environment impact report or statement.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Roberts noted the location of subject property and existing uses
and zoning in the area and reported that the Applicant proposed to erect a
billboard with two faces, comprising display areas of 300 square feet and
700 square feet, which will cantilever from a single support column. The
proposed sign is to be located on the Euclid Street frontage adjacent to
73-120
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
State freeway property. Mr. Roberts advised that a 300-square foot billboard
would be permitted under the sign ordinance and that there is provision in the
ordinance to allow signs of greater area by conditional use permit procedure.
Mr. Roberts reported the City Planning Commission considered the
700-square foot billboard unreasonable for this location and read the findings
contained in their resolution of denial.
At the request of Councilman Dutton, Mr. Roberts explained the plans
submitted and these were reviewed at the Council table.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and wished
to address the Council.
Mr. Jay Kingry, representing Pacific Outdoor Advertising Company, des-
cribed the two basic types of signs utilized in outdoor advertising by his com-
pany and gave their respective dimensions. He presented graphic examples of both
types of signs for Council review.
The 700-square foot sign proposed, according to Mr. Kingry, would be
only three feet higher and three feet longer than the 300-square foot billboard,
and despite the increased display area, would not appear to be twice as large.
Mr. Kingry advised that pursuant to the sign ordinance enacted
by the City of Anaheim, his firm has removed five billboard type Signs
from various locations along the freeway, as well as 20 other signs on surface
streets, most recently from Lincoln and Dale. He observed that during the pre-
paration of this ordinance, in which his firm participated, it was suggested that
if these larger signs were removed from the freeways and other sites, more suit-
able surface street sites might be granted via the conditional use permit pro-
cedure.
Mr. Kingry further remarked that the observer will be able to see only
one of the panels on the proposed billboard at any one time, depending on this
approach. He referred to the comment which appeared in the staff report that
the proposed 700-square foot sign can be seen from the Euclid Street overpass
of the Santa Aha Freeway, stating this is a part of the audience it was meant
to attract, and submitted a photograph of the proposed billboard site taken from
the overpass location. He reported that his company at present has display
billboards at three other locations in the City and enumerated these. He further
noted that the proposed use at this site will not disturb any residential use,
nor require fire or police protection, and no written or verbal protests were
presented against the proposal at the Planning Co,=nission. The proposed sign
will be constructed on the Rayco property and sublet to Pacific Outdoor Adver-
tising by the franchisee.
Councilman Pebley stated that he could see no difference between the
proposed billboard and that which Pacific Outdoor Advertising had to remove
recently at Lincoln and Dale.
Mr. Kingry replied that the billboard at Lincoln and Dale was not with-
in 200 feet of the corner and on improved property. That they could have attempted
to maintain that site by conditional use permit procedure, but elected to apply
for conditional use permit on the proposed site at Euclid and Lincoln instead.
In further support of his petition, Mr. Kingry advised that this would
be an interim use for the property and that the billboard will remain only until
such time as the property is developed permanently. He also remarked that the
sign would give some additional illumination in a rather dark area.
The Mayor asked if anyone else either in favor or opposition to the
proposal wished to address the City Council, and hearing no response, declared the
hearing closed.
Councilman Stephenson expressed the opinion that this proposal is in
direct violation of the sign ordinance and offered a resolution to deny Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 1365.
Roll Call Vote:
73-121
City Hall~ Anaheimt California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson
Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
The Mayor declared said resolution failed to carry.
Councilman Dutton remarked that at the time the sign ordinance was
prepared, in order to facilitate the removal of advertising signs from the
freeways certain areas within the City were outlined for such possible use,
subject to conditional use permit.
Councilman Thom observed that the area for which the sign is proposed
is already developed to industrial and co~i~ercial uses, and therefore, could
see no reason for objection.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-64: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-64 for
adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1365, subject to the Interdepart-
mental Committee recommendations as follows:
1. That subject billboards be developed substantially in accordance
with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit
No. 1.
2. That Condition No. 1, above mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or
prior to the time the Sign Permit is issued or within a period of 360 days from
date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the City Council
may grant.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 1365.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
Stephenson
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-64 duly passed and adopted.
RE~ARING - CONDITIONAL USE I~ERMIT NO. 1360: Request of David Doering to estab-
lish a cocktail lounge in an existing commercial structure on C-2 zoned
property located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Carleton Ave-
nue, was submitted.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution NOo PC72-328,
denied said conditional use permit, which action was appealed by the Applicant,
and public hearing held January 16, 1973. Following said public hearing,
pursuant to Resolution No. 73-15, Conditional Use Permit No. 1360 was denied
by the City Council. Exemption Declaration Status from the filing of an
environmental impact report was granted by the City Council on January 16,
1973.
Rehearing on the basis of new evidence was requested by Mr. Doering
and granted on January 23, 1973, said hearing scheduled this date.
Mr. Roberts briefly s~rized the findings of the City Planning
Co~m~ission as presented at the January 16, 1973 hearing.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant was present and wished to present
further evidence in support of this petition.
Mr. David Doering, 1416 West Damon, presented a written statement
fromM rs. Margaret Sullivan, withdrawing her objections to the proposed
73-122
City Hallt Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
cocktail lounge, stating she is authorized to withdraw the objections of those
in that neighborhood as well, which opposition was expressed by her at the public
hearing, January 16, 1973. Mr. Doering further related a brief summary of his
past military and police experience which he feels will enable him to cope with
any potential problems presented in the operation of this cocktail lounge.
In reply to Councilman Stephenson, Mr. Doering advised that his proposed
cocktail lounge will not be operated conjointly with the adjacent mexican restau-
rant, although he did approach the proprietor with such a plan. Consequently,
he proposes to operate on a no-food basis for the 18 month duration of the restau-
rant's lease and then eventually add food service to the cocktail lounge.
The Mayor asked if anyone else in favor or in opposition to the proposed
project wished to address the City Council; and there being no response, declared
the hearing closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-65: Councilman Pebley stated that since the major objections
to the proposal have been withdrawn and the Applicant proposes to improve the
general appearance of the property in conjunction with this operation, he could
see no reason to deny such use. Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-65
for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 1360, subject to conditions
recommended by the Interdepartmental Committee as follows:
1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of
Anaheim a strip of land 10 feet in width from the alley for alley widening pur-
poses.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Carleton Avenue for street lighting
purposes.
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 all air-conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
5. That the existing structure shall be brought up to the minimum
standards of the City of Anaheim, including the Uniform Building, Plumbing,
Electrical, Housing, Mechanical and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Anaheim.
6. That the final parking plan shall be approved by the Development
Services Department and any landscaped areas in the parking area shall be pro-
tected with 6-inch high concrete curbs, and concrete wheel stops shall be pro-
vided for parking spaces as required by the Development Services Department.
7. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accor-
dance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit No. 1.
8. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution,
or prior to the time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of
one year from the date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as
the City Council may grant.
9. That Condition Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, above mentioned, shall be
complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 1360.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
Sneegas
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-65 duly passed and adopted.
CONTINUED REQUEST - EXTENSION OF TIME~ VARIANCE NO. 2144: (Continued from February 6,
1973 to allow the Applicant an opportunity to obtain the dedication for street
widening purposes and for further report on compliance with the conditions im-
posed in 1970 from Development Services Department.) The request of Herman
73-123
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Margulieux, Herman's Produce, for a two-year extension of time for continued
use of a commercial produce market on R-A zoned property located at the south-
west corner of Euclid Street and Cerritos Avenue was resubmitted, together with
an up-dated report from Development Services Department as requested by Council.
Prior to proceeding with the consideration of request for extension
of time, Mayor Dutton requested counsel from the City Attorney relative to the
petition for injunction against the City which was filed by the Applicant and
owners of subject property.
Mr. Geisler advised that the petition for restraint has no force and
effect until the court hearing scheduled March 16, 1973, and that it would
be perfectly permissable for Council to take action prior to that date.
The Deputy City Clerk advised that written communication had been
received this date from Mr. and Mrs. Jack Dales, 1727 West Cris Avenue, stating
their objection to extension of time for continued operation of "Herman's Pro-
duce" Market.
Mayor Dutton asked if the required dedication had been obtained.
Mr. Margulieux, 1525 South Euclid, replied that Mrs. Rannow had
agreed to the dedication since February 6, 1973, however on reading a newspaper
article subsequent to that meeting which stated that the City has the alternative
of condemning the property and taking the required frontage by eminent domain
proceedings, she decided instead to institute the petition for injunction
against the City.
Councilman Dutton referred to certain statements made in said petition
for injunction which were alleged to be his and stated categorically that he
had never made such remarks, and that he has never wished to put anyone out of
business. He noted that in this particular instance, he has voted several times
in the past few years to allow the produce market operation even though cooper-
ation from that enterprise by dedication for street widening and conformance
with City codes has not been forthcoming. He further commented that Mrs.
Rannow had originally agreed to make this dedication three years ago as one of
the conditions of the extension of time and to this date the required right-of-
way has still not been deeded to the City.
Mr. Margulieux stated that he had made an effort to comply with all
of the conditions imposed by the City except for the dedication, which is not
within his ability to do.
Councilman Sneegas observed that the problem at hand, i.e., the
tremendous accident rate at the corner of Cerritos and Euclid because of the
narrowing of the street and abutment of the propert~ will be solved by the
street widenin~ however once this is done, the 43 foot width from the centerline
will put the front of the produce stand into the right of way once again. He
commented that this should be dealt with realistically, so all the problems are
eliminated and not prolonged for another two years. He further submitted a
photograph presented to him by Mr. Lujan, a resident adjacent and to the rear
of subject produce stand, which is taken from his backyard looking into the
rear of said produce stand.
Mr. Margulieux stated that the area shown in the photograph is an
alley behimd his busimess which is owned by the two property o~ers on the
corner and since he is not the owner, he cannot assume responsibility for main-
tenance of this alley. He noted that he has requested the property owners
involved to cease depositing trash and other items into this alley without
success. He further stated that he was willing to build a wooden fence along
this property line, but this would have created a blind alley so a wire fence
was erected instead.
Mrs. Bleanor Lujan, 1709 West Cris Avenue addressed the Council
stating she wished to clarify that the responsibtlty for the unsightly con-
dition of the alley behind the produce market has been wrongly attributed to
her family and noted that the unsightly section of said .alley is not behind
her property.
73-124
City Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 PoM.
Councilman Dutton remarked that Mr. Margulieux has complied with re-
quests made by the City over the years but has failed repeatedly to maintain
these standards when attention is not focused on his establishment.
Councilman Sneegas reiterated that ultimately this problem must be
resolved, and noted that the street widening will not improve the traffic hazard
caused by the ingress and egress of traffic from the produce market. He moved
that the request for a two-year extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No.
2144 be denied. Councilman Dutton seconded the motion. To this motion
Councilman Thom voted "no". MOTION CARRIED.
At the request of Mr. Roberts for clarification as to what period of
time is to be allowed the Applicant to discontinue operation from his present
site, Councilman Sneegas answered that he does not wish to put anyone out of
business but hopes that the Applicant will be able to come forward with a pro-
posal which will alleviate the problems experienced in the past, by moving the
commercial operation further away from the residences, and by erecting a structure
and parking lot which will conform to site development standards, and by making
application for the proper zoning. If he wishes to negotiate with the owners of
subject property for this purpose, Councilman Sneegas suggested that Council allow
him some additional time to initiate such action.
Mr. Margulieux stipulated that he would be willing to relocate and re-
build his business operation, subject to approval and dedication by the Rannow
sisters.
By general Council consent, a period of two weeks was allowed Mr.
Margulieux in which to notify the City regarding whether or not he has obtained
dedication and authorization for proper zoning application for moving and re-
building the produce market. That if such application is not filed within this
period, the Council will then establish a reasonable period of time for discon-
uance of said produce stand operation.
MARCH OF DIMES WALKATHON: Request of Arthur R. McKenzie, Chairman, The National
Foundation of the March of Dimes, to conduct a walkathon on March 24, 1973, 8:00
a.m., starting from the Anaheim Stadium parking lot was submitted together with
report from the Stadium and Convention Center Director and Chief of Police, and
approved on motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas.
MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST - REPEAL OF SECTION 6.28.010~ "BEEKEEPING PROHIBITED": Request of Mr. George
Kaminski, regarding repeal of Sect'i'~n 6.28.010 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
which prohibits the keeping of bees within the City limits was submltted~ together
with report from the Zoning Enforcement Officer as well as report from the City
Attorney recommending against repeal of said section of the Anaheim Municipal
Code.
Councilman Pebley requested the record to show that he did not partici-
pate in the following discussion since the complainant is one of his tenants, and
his own office is in close proximity to subject apiary and left the Council table.
(3:20 P.M.)
Mr. Robert Broxon, 18552 McArthur Boulevard, Irvine, Attorney represent-
ing Mr. Kaminski, addressed the Council and requested that consideration of this
item be deferred to allow him time for research into the constitutionality of the
ordinance and to investigate applicable legal precedents. He further noted
that Mr. Kaminski has a large amount of factual information, selected from
various sources~ w4~ich demonstrates the harmless nature of bees and their impor-
tant role in the ecological balance, which he would like to present to Council
in support of this petition.
Mr. Broxon further noted that Mr. Kaminski became a beekeeper entirely
accidentially, by providing a place for bees which swarmed to his property and
that profit has never been his motive. During the process of providing an apiary
for this swarm, Mr. Kaminski became engrossed in the study and care of bees and
therefore now makes the request that the Code be amended or some variance granted
him which would legally permit him to maintain the hives so that his bees can
continue their essential function.
In addition Mr. Broxon informed the Council that following the publicity
73-125
.~ity Hall; Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Kaminski has received in connection with his request, he has been contacted
by several people also interested in beekeeping who would like an opportunity
to be heard. In conclusion, Mr. Broxon requested that in because of the impor-
tance of the case and the fact that he was called into it just this morning,
that any definitive action be deferred.
Councilman Thom inquired as to where the complaint against these bees
originated.
Mr. Pebley advised, from the audience~ that one of his tenants oper-
ates a machine shop, and has had the situation occur where an employee while
working on an expensive piece of equipment on a lathe has been buzzed by a bee
and since this might result in a costly error, the complaint was issued by this
tenant against the keeping of bees at this location.
Councilman Thom correctly observed that the bees are being kept in
the southeast industrial area, on M-1 zoned property.
Mr. Geisler reported that the present ordinance is perfectly valid
and constitutional and advised that should the Council elect to permit the
keeping of bees within the City limits~ this should be accomplished by amending
the ordinance and not by granting a variance to any particular person. In other
words, the Council may designate that beekeeping be permitted perhaps in the
R-A zone and set up specific qualification for those who wish to engage in bee-
keeping. However, when such amendment is made, all persons who meet said qual-
ifications will legally be permitted to maintain an apiary providing it is
located in the proper zone.
Mr. George Kaminski, 865 South East Street, reiterated that the bees
are harmless and further expounded on their useful ecological function. He
stated that the bees have never bothered his employees and that they are eco-
nomical in their movements to and from the hives, and would never intentionally
digress from their route or enter a structure. He suggested if the City intro-
duces an amendment to permit beekeeping that all persons who engage in such be
required to register with the City, and perhaps pay a small fee, which would
permit the regulation and inspection of these activities.
By general Council consent, decision on this matter was deferred for
two weeks, as requested by the Applicant, to allow further investigation into
the possibility of amending the ordinance to permit the keeping of bees in the
R-A zone.
Councilman Pebley returned to the Council table. (3:45 P.M.)
REQUEST - MODIFICATION OF THE R-E ZONE: Request of Roland F. Krueger, Secretary,
Peralta Hills Improvement Association, that the City Council consider directing
the Development Services Department to investigate the feasibility of modifying
the R-E zone with regard to animal density and house movings, was submitted to-
gether with report from the Development Services Department.
Councilman Dutton remarked that he had been involved in working to
achieve the present animal density regulation in the R-E zone and cormnented that
the request submitted has some merit, if the animal density provision is being
abused as stated, as it was not the intent to permit quantities of animals suf-
ficient to sustain commercial breeding or boarding operations in the R-E zone.
Council discussion ensued in which it was apparent that the major
area of concern was the number of horses to be permitted per acre.
Mr. Geisler advised that the simplest measure to prevent abuse of the
animal density privilege in the R-E zone would be to place a lower limit on the
number of permitted animals, especially horses, per acre. He referred to the
recommendation presented in the Peralta Hills Improvement Association letter
that the number of horses on parcels larger than one acre be restricted to one
horse per family member, stating that the relationship must be to the use of
the land and not to the number of people who live on it; i.e., the use of the
land must be the same for whoever lives on it so that if a man has 20 children
or lives there himself, he is still entitled to the same number of horses per
acre. He noted further that you can place a maximum number restriction so that
the Code will permit four horses per acre, but on no lot shall they exceed six.
73-126
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Geisler stated that if the fact is that horses in great numbers
cause problems in an area, the method to solve such should be to increase the
acreage per horses, but the relationship should be between the horses and the
acreage and not people.
Mr. A1 Hyatt, 251 Orange Acres Drive, immediate past President,
Peralta Hills Improvement Association, stated that this group is satisfied with
the four horses per acre animal density restriction for their own use, however
they have reason to believe that there are parties interested in the Peralta
Hills area, who wish to purchase eight to ten acres of land, and in compliance
with the Code, put in as many as forty horses. As this seems an unreasonable
number of horses for recreational or instructional use, he felt that such a
situation easily lends itself to commercialization in such forms as the
breeding or boarding of horses which can be conducted by word-of-mouth adver-
tising only. This is one of the reasons which has prompted the present
request.
Mr. Hyatt further related that the preservation of the purely residen-
tial atmosphere of the Peralta Hills neighborhood is the objective of the Peralta
Hills Improvement Association, and the motive behind this request. He pledged
this Association's cooperation in working out some proper wording together with
City staff, for the R-E zone which would preclude such commercialization.
Mr. Hyatt further requested that the two requests, i.e., restrictions
on animal density and prohibition of house move-ins be considered as two sep-
arate autonomous items.
Mayor Dutton requested, with the concurrance of the Council, that both
requests submitted by the Peralta Hills Improvement Association be referred to
the Development Services Department and the Planning Commission for review and
recommendation regarding the need or desirability of an amendment to Title 18
of the Zoning Code as it pertains to the R-E zone, as recommended by Development
Services Department.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 61-62-49 RELEASE OF BONDS: Request of John L. Waite, D. C. and
Elizabeth J. Waite, for waiver of bonds posted pursuant to conditions imposed on
approval of Reclassification No. 61-62-49 by Resolution No. 62R-33, for construc-
tion of masonry walls and alley improvements, was submitted together with reports
from Development Services Department and the City Engineer, recommenQing said
bonds be released.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
City Council authorized waiver of wall bonds B108 139 and alley improvement bond
B108 161, submitted pursuant to conditions imposed on approval of Reclassification
No. 61-72-49. MOTION CARRIED.
TRACT NO. 7587 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Request of Horst J. Schor, Vice President, Anaheim
Hills, Inc., dated November 17, 1972, for an extension of time for recordation
of Tentative Map, Tract No. 7587 was submitted, together with reports of the Devel-
opment Services Department and City Engineer, recommending said extension be granted.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, a
one-year extension of time for Tentative Map, Tract No. 7587, was granted, retro-
active to November 9, 1972 and expiring November 9, 1973. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-35 AND VARIANCE NO. 2237 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Requests of
Charles B. Frank. and E. J. Moore, Vice President~ Prime Contractors, Inc.~ for
an extension o£ time to Parcel No. A of Reclassification No. 70-71-35 and Vari-
ance No. 2237, was submitted together with reports from the City Engineer.
The Development Services Department presented a verbal report, recom-
mending one-year extension of time be granted.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, a
one-year extension of time for Reclassification No. 70-71-35, Parcel No. A only,
and Variance No. 2237 was granted as recommended. MOTION. CARRIED.
73-127
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
REQUEST - SIGN PERMITS - CLUB CONTINENTAL APARTMENTS: On request of Mr. Roberts,
Zoning Supervisor, this item was continued for one week for submission of re-
port from Development Services Department.
NORTH ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL OCCUPATIONAL PROGRAM - STREET SIGNS: Request of Mr.
Stan Ross, Superintendent, was submitted for installation of two directional
street signs, to be located at the intersection of La Palma Avenue and Sequoia
Street and the intersection of Brookhurst and Sequoia Streets, together with
report from the City Engineer.
The City Engineer recommended that the request be granted,providing
that the City signs are furnished and installed by the Applicant, subject to
the approval of the Traffic Engineer, and that said signs be a maximum size
of 24 inches by 36 inches.
The City Manager recommended that the signs be permitted for a period
of two years.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Thom, the
City Council approved for a term of two years, the installation of two direc-
tional signs, said signs to be furnished and installed by the North Orange
County Regional Occupational Program, subject to approval of the City Traffic
Engineer, and the recommendations of the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED.
COUNTY OF ORANGE USE PERMIT NO. 3377 (ZA): Continued from meeting of February 13,
1973, for receipt of comments from the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, Industrial
Committee, regarding proposal to establish a commercial stable for a maximum
of 200 horses on County property located east of State College Boulevard, south
of Winston Road.
On receipt of letter dated February 15, 1973, from the ~maheim Chamber
of Commerce, Board of Directors, indicating their opposition to said stable,
and on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, the City
Council ratified their previous position of objection to the granting of Use
Permit No. 3377 (ZA) for this purpose and authorized notification of said pos-
ition to the Orange County Zoning Administrator. MOTION CARRIED°
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-66 - AWARD OF WORK ORDER NO. 672A: In accordance with recommen-
dations of the City Engineer, Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No.
73R-66 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
ARESOLUTION 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 TRANSPORATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER~ AND PERFORM-
ING ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT: THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT
THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH STREET AND STATE COLLEGE BLVD., IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 672-A. (Baxter-Griffin Company - $12,528.00)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-66 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-67 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution
No. 73R-67 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN
DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Maurice M. & Carol N. Lebanoff;
Henry H. & Alice J. Lathrum; Anna Allen; Bill J. & Diane Soteropoulos;
Melvin D. & Alma Ruth Hilgenfeld)
73-128
City Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
NOES: COUNCILMEN: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-67 duly passed and adopted.
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT - ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES - ANAHEIM UTILITIES SERVICE CENTER AND
UTILITIES BUILDING: Mr. Robert Davis reported on two letter proposals presented by
Donald J. Fears, Architect, for architectural services for Phase IV of the Anaheim
Utilities Service Center and for remodeling a portion of the Utilities Building
at 518 South Anaheim Boulevard. That based on the schedule of fees outlined in
these proposals the total amount for both projects would be a fee not to exceed
$11,400.00. He reported recommendation had been withheld until it was apparent
both projects required the services of an architect, and it now appears the mod-
ifications will involve electrical work and air conditioning. Mr. Davis noted
that Donald J. Fears is the architect who had the original contract on this pro-
ject, and recommended that said contract be extended by acceptance of the two
letter proposals.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
City Council authorized acceptance of the two letter proposals'~from Donald J.
Fears for architectural services for Phase IV of the Anaheim Utilities Service
Center and for modifications to the Utilities Building at 518 South Anaheim Boule-
vard, extending the original contract in an amount not to exceed $11,400.00 total
for both projects, as recommended by the Assistant City Manager. MOTION CARRIED.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied, as recommended by the City
Attorney, and ordered referred to the insurance carrier on motion by Councilman
Thom, seconded by Councilman Pebley:
a. Claim submitted by H. Lee Watkins, for purported personal property
damages to automobile windshield, sustained.on or about January 11, 1973.
b. Claim submitted by Richard C. White, Jr., for purported personal
property damage sustained as a result of collision with City vehicle, on or about
November 28, 1972.
c. Claim submitted by Alan and Joseph A. Prete for purported personal
injuries and property damage sustained as a result of purported failure of City
to provide reasonable maintenance or warning devices of termination of Frontera
Street, on or about January 2, 1973.
d. Claim submitted by Mr. Les Buckholder, for purported personal pro-
perty damages sustained as a result of City employee hiting parked pickup truck,
on or about January 30, 1973.
MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-68 - JOINT AGREEMENT - ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT: Councilman
Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-68 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTH-
ORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A "JOINT" AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ORANGE COUNTY TRAN-
SIT DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RELATIVE TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
Roll Call Vote:
AY~g: COUNCILM~N:
NOES: COUNCILI~gN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
gneegas, gtephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-68 duly passed and adopted.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on
motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Stephenson:
a. Financial and Operating Reports for the Month of January, 1972
and 1973:
73-129
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Building Division - 1972 & 1973
Fire Department - 1973
b. Orange County Mosquito Abatement District - Minutes - January 24,
1973.
c. City of Buena Park - Resolution No. 4857 - Objecting to the pro-
posed interim guidelines for the preparation and evaluation of environmental
impact reports under the State of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970
as developed by the office of Planning and Research and requesting modification
of the proposed interim guidelines to provide relief from the time-consuming,
costly and unwieldy administrative procedures proposed in said guidelines.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 3133: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3133 as an urgency
ordinance for adoption. Said ordinance was read in full by the Deputy City
Clerk.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 15, CHAPTER 15.04,
SECTION 15.04.070 RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODE AND DECLARING THE
URGENCY THEREOF.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3133 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-69: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 73R-69 for
adoption, amendinR Resolution Nos. 65R-29 and 71R-396 to allow parcels in
Reclassification Nos. 64-65-64 and 71-72-7 to proceed separately.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 65R-29 IN RECLASSIFICATION PROCEEDING NO. 64-65-64 AND RESOLUTION NO.
71R-396 IN RECLASSIFICATION PROCEEDING NO. 71-72-7.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Sneegas, Stephenson, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-69 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3137: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 3137 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (64-65-64 (1) - C-i)
ORDINANCE NOo 3138: Councilman Stephenson offered Ordinance No. 3138 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (71-72-7 (1) - C-I)
ORDINANCE NO. 3139: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3139 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (72-73-8 - C-l)
RECESS: Councilman Dutton moved for a five minute recess. Councilman Thom seconded
the motion. (4:20 P.M.)
73-130
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being present.
(4:25 P.M.)
CABLE T.V. FRANCHISE (CATV~: Mr. Robert Davis advised that because of certain F.C.C.
regulations the City's proposed specifications regarding Cable T.V. Franchise
had to be modified somewhat and the ordinance revised accordingly. As a result,
additional proposals were solicited from the four firms which originally had sub-
mitted and negotiations have since been authorized with one of these firms, for
which purpose a cormmittee comprised of representatives from the following areas
was formed: Public Works; Utilities Department; City Attorney; Anaheim Elementary
and High School District; and City Manager, as well as Mr. William Armstrong,
Science and Technology Advisor.
Mr. William Armstrong presented a report, using transparencies, on the
status of the negotiations with Theta Cable of California, using a similar fore-
mat as last presented in April 1972. Mr. Armstrong advised that the second re-
quest for bids yielded only one proposal, that of Theta Cable, and negotia-
tions with Theta were authorized, which have been in progress in the interim,
and he feels will culminate in final recommendation on approximately March 20,
1973.
Mr. Armstrong summarized the system proposed to be provided by Theta
as not changed materially since the last report. There will be a studio within
the City, and a van, the "head end" will still be located in Anaheim. He explain-
ed that the two major changes in the concept which are of note are the A.M.L.
(Amplitude Modulator Link) which is a microwave length which will allow the oper-
ator to tie together the regional network of all Orange and Los Angeles Counties,
to provide all of the programs available. A substitution for closed-circuit T.V.
has been made in the form of a two-way (school and city) video capability immed-
iately within the system for a total capacity of five channels, both up and down
stream.
The principal change which has evolved in the intervening months since
the last presentation is in the number of cables. Originally the City's specifi-
cations had called for three cables to be installed immediately whether or not
there was any use for this capacity. Theta Cable has proposed to install two
such cables and the F.C.C. has notified the City it will not sanction a franchise
if we specify more than two cables. In addition, he noted, that there is no evi-
dence of any system in the Country with any more than two cables. Along with the
reduction in capacity immediately from three to two cables, there will be associa-~
ted reduction in capacity of t.v. channels, etc.
Mr. Armstrong pointed out that ultimate capacity has been requested for
62 channels and the wording in the proposed ordinance complies with F.C.C. legis-
lation which states that at any time there is use for channels over and above those
supplied, the operator shall provide for it within six months or have certifica-
tion and franchise deleted. Along with the reduction by one cable, Mr. Armstrong
reported, we are accommodating two-way capability now by amplifiers rather than
by special cable, which is an advance, and offering more F.M. stations than orig-
inally provided. Regarding capacity, he stated adequate provision has been appro-
priated for all potential uses.
Regarding technical and design standards, the operator now agrees to
the City's specifications,which in all respects,exceed F.C.C. standards as far as
signal quality and interference. In all but two minor cases they meet our re-
quirements, and in these two instances, according to our technical consultants,
are offering the best technology available within the industry. It has been
assured that they are providing thorough and maximum interference and "ghost"
protection.
The terminal hardware which the individual subscriber would use in his
home immediately and later was illustrated, and Mr. Armstrong explained that by
a slide rule type of manipulation this device will permit tuning to 30 channels
on any cable. Theta Cable and Hughes Electronics are currently conducting
a very advanced experiment in the City of E1 Segundo to determine the
economic practicability and the demand for two-way service by subscribers. This
study will be complete in two years, and if successful, plans are included in
the Theta proposal for S.R.S. systems (Subscriber Response System) and tying in
alarm systems and other such extraneous services from that time on.
73-131
City Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
The City's installations have not changed consequentially. Free
hook-up to all City, school and hospital buildings within the boundaries of
Anaheim will be provided. Two-way television capability will be provided im-
mediately for key City installation and for two school facilities. Additionally
the City will have free access to five upstream and five downstream channels
(two-way capability) for the first five years. This is,in effect,all that the
F.C.C. allows under current legislation. There are provisions in the ordinance
that the City will regulate the cost of at least two of these channels forever.
Fundamental characteristics of the ordinance have not changed sub-
stantially; duration is 15 years in an ensuing period, which is the maximum time
permitted by the F.C.C. The franchise fee requested is 5% of the operators
gross revenues, and this is in violation of the F.C.C. ordinance and therefore
will be subject to some discussion with that body. Frequency of payment by the
franchise operator, originally reported to be monthly, prior to issuance of the
ordinance has been modified to a quarterly basis which is standard practice in
the industry. The ten year takeover option still exists and the cost of such
takeover is probably the main area of disagreement between the City and the
potential franchise operator. The City wishes to include provision to buy out
the system at a depreciated value and they contend that they cannot acquire
financing unless this condition stipulates Fair Market Value.
In the area of performance bonding, originally the City had suggested
$100,000.00 for the construction period as well as the duration of the ord-
inance, and this has been amended as an incentive to insure construction with-
in the prescribed time to $250,000.00 for the construction period and then
dropped to $100,000.00 for the duration of the ordinance.
Mr. Armstrong advised that Theta Cable has categorically agreed to a
provision that any technological advancements which should occur, either by
their own experimentation, or through the industry, such advances will be in-
stalled in Anaheim prior to, or concurrently with, any other of their systems.
Additionally they have agreed to support City experimentation proposals on a
level of one man throughout the period of experimentation and proposed prepara-
tion. Free access to the studio and van has been reduced to four hours each
for the City and eight hours for the collective school system per week, from
the originally requested 20 hours. The emergency disaster override still pre-
vails on all channels.
The schedule for implementation of this concept is aligned so that
following a trip to the F.C.C. in March to insure that the ordinance drafted
is viable, the final recormmendations will be placed before the Council on
approximately March 20, 1973; and following the possible adoption of Resolution
of Intent, public hearing would be held in April of this year, leading to start
of construction in mid-1974, with completion scheduled two years later.
In answer to Councilman Dutton's query regarding the fact that there
is only one bidder, Mr. Armstrong answered that Theta was the only bidder who
followed the instructions and met the extremely high specifications given.
Councilman Dutton remarked that he recalled a proposal, all things
being equal, that the potential franchisee would purchase parts from the Anaheim
firm of Anaconda Electronics.
Mr. Armstrong stated that Theta proposes to purchase all of their
amplifiers from Anaconda Electronics as that firm produces the best amplifiers
available in the Country.
Mr. Davis outlined the various precautions which have been built in-
to this ordinance and associated documents to insure that the subscribers will
receive strong and clear signals. He explained that Theta will outline a speci-
fic program of very rigid test procedures which they will perform to eliminate
the situation encountered in other cities whereby the franchise operator can
attribute problems to the individuals' receiver. The operator will have to ad-
here to strict parameters to maintain a quality signal.
Regarding the marketing capability, Theta Cable has agreed to put
one man on full time in this area, as they agree it needs intensive effort.
They will also review all of their marketing aspects with the City.
73-132
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20t 1973t 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Davis noted that the City is requesting 5% of the operators gross
revenues, despite the fact that the F.C.C. contends that a franchise fee of 5%
can only be obtained on demonstration that this is required, and furthermore
F.C.C. opinion is that this should be on subscriber revenues only. Mr. Davis
commented it appears that the trend is towards 5% and indications are that the
City will succeed in obtaining this. He further noted that in the future the
bulk of revenue earned by such cable t.v. system will be in extraneous services,
(shopping, pay t.v., etc.) and the City should receive some of that revenue.
The "most favored nation" clause makes this proposal especially favor-
able for the City in that this will assure that the Anaheim cable t.v. system
will not become technologically outdated as Theta has quaranteed that they will
not install a more sophisticated system in any of their franchise locations
before they have installed such in Anaheim or at least concurrently.
The only section remaining to be worked out is the provision to estab-
lish a value for takeover of the system in the event of default or after the
termination of the franchise period. This is in accord with F.C.C. recommendations
that some method of determining the value be established. Mr. Davis indicated
that there is some disagreement as to whether this should be done on the basis of
Fair Market Value or on a depreciation method, but added that he feels confident
a solution agreeable to both parties will be found.
An additional point emphasized by Mr. Davis was that the City's position
is that unless the franchise can be obtained through the F.C.C., the City would
not accept the conditions imposed. This means that under Theta Cable's original
proposal, which provided that as soon as the franchise was granted by the City
and during the interim period of process through the F.C.C.~ they would begin
immediately to make application for pole line permits~ etc~ and most likely make
a substantial investment in start of the system; then, if the F.C.C. should find
the franchise unsatisfactory~ the City would be faced with awarding the franchise
to another firm. In order to advoid being placed in such a position~ the City has
requested that Theta defer initiation of any construction activities until the
F.C.C. certification has been obtained. This will result in a delay of approx-
imately six months after the franchise is awarded to start of construction~ but
it is felt that this is justifiable in order to protect the City's best interests.
Mr. Davis then stated that the staff committee involved feel they have
negotiated the best possible terms with Theta Cable and have concluded that this
is one of the largest and best companies in that business and therefore they make
the recommendation that the City proceed, subject to agreement on the buy-out
provision, to introduce the necessary legal documents and begin the necessary
legal requirements to award the franchise to Theta Cable of California.
The reasons for going forward at this time, Mr. Davis stated are that
there are imminent developments in cable in which the City should participate;
that there will be a two and one-half year lead time before the system will be
operational; and pressures have already been exerted from developing canyon areas
for such service.
Mayor Dutton commended those involved in the ground work and negotiations
for awarding of this franchise, stating that it appears to him that all important
areas have been covered and precautions taken to assure the reliability of the
firm for the protection of the subscribers.
Councilman Stephenson moved that the City Council authorize the prepara-
tion and introduction of the necessary legal documents, subject to agreement on
the buy-out provision, to award the cable t.v. franchise to Theta Cable of Calif-
ornia. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
COST/FEE STUDY: Mr. Robert Davis requested direction from Council on recommendations
to be presented regarding the cost/fee study, stating that the preparation of said
recommendations is proceeding on the following assumptions:
1. That the City Council does wish to increase fees to recover costs
as closely as possible;
2. That the City Council wishes to recover costs in those areas which
require greater staff time and effort.
73-133
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
He noted that if this is in line with Council's intent, then recom-
mendations will be completed and presented on February 27, 1973.
The Council concurred that the objectives of the cost/fee study as
stated by Mr. Davis were in accord with their own thinking.
Mayor Dutton further commented that request has been received from
the Anaheim Board of Realtors for an opportunity to make some input into the
cost/fee study of zoning applications, and directed that a copy of the staff
report together with statistics on fees charged in other cities be made avail-
able to them.
SOLICITATION PERMIT - ST. JOSEPH'S HILL OF HOPE: Request for solicitation permit
for the sale of food and beverages, April 7, 1973, at the East Anaheim Shopping
Center, submitted by Mrs. Ethel Bernstein, St. Joseph's Hill of Hope, Brea,
California, was referred to the Police Department for further investigation
prior to Council action.
SANITATION DISTRICT NO. II - CONNECTION FEES: Councilman Stephenson reported that
the outcome of the most recent meeting of Sanitation District No. II was that
action to increase connection fees was continued until after District No. III
votes on such increase, and that public hearing on District No. III fees will
be held March 15, 1973.
RESIGNATION - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Councilman Thom requested that
the following letter of resignation be spread in full upon these Minutes:
"February 16, 1973
Councilman William J. Thom
P. O. Box 3222
Anaheim, California 92807
Dear Bill:
It is with real regret that I must tender my resignation as a member
of the Redevelopment Commission of the City of Anaheim. I firmly
believe that this Commission's efforts have already produced actual
physical progress. This of course is a welcome evolution in over
fifteen years of effort put forth by hundreds of residents in this
community. I strongly support the policies of this Commission and am
convinced that its techniques and ability to listen to the desires of
the community (both as individuals and as a collective voice) will
lead to more pleasant and effective land use for Anaheim's residents.
After all that is the underlying responsibility with which both the
Council (as Local Agency) and the Commission are charged.
My resignation is prompted by the following:
1. My wife and I have recently moved to Laguna Beach and plan to
establish our legal residency there.
I am a commercial property owner within Project Area Alpha and
as such believe a real potential for conflict of interest exists.
This conflict could be remedied by placing these properties in
a blind trust, a device used by all senior Federal government
employees. (One which I willingly used when employed by the
Federal Home Loan Bank Board). However, since most of the
properties are involved in various estates, I find it difficult
to accomplish this presently.
I find myself less and less able to understand or support the
overall approach to land use planning in Anaheim as evidenced by
recent Council actions.
I guess philosophically I'm an advocate of more controlled growth,
even if this means limiting the property.rights of some individuals.
If the collective will of the residents of a community is to estab-
lish certain parameters and constraints on development, I believe
a Council has a responsibility to reflect that thinking.
73-134
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 20~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
It's interesting, isn't it, how deeply Anaheim's roots go back to a real
citizens town planning effort. During its formative years (as one of
California's first planned communities) residents of this city felt it
highly appropriate that local government predominately reflect the wishes
of existing residents in determining the future lay of the land. (Just
take a look at the records of disputes which arose over Vineyard Lot vs
Town Lot land use planning.) I believe we have strayed too far from
this philosophy.
Bill, I would appreciate your communicating this to the Council and with
it my thanks for the opportunity to serve in this effort.
Respectfully,
/S/ Larry Ulvestad
Larry Ulvestad
LU/st
cc:
James Morris
Chairman
Redevelopment Commiss ion"
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, re-
signation of Mr. Larry Ulvestad from the Community Redevelopment Co~nission was
accepted with regret and the City Clerk was directed to forward a letter of
appreciation to Mr. Ulvestad for his service to the City of Anaheim to date.
MOTION CARRIED.
CLUBHOUSE - ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE: Because of the amount of correspondence
he has received regarding the condition of the present clubhouse, Councilman
Dutton requested that investigation be made into the possibility of providing an
improved clubhouse facility at the Anaheim Municipal Golf Course.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: At the request of Mr. Davis, Councilman Dutton moved to
recess to Executive Session. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED. (5:05 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being present.
(5:14 P.M.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Pebley moved to adjourn to Thursday, February 22, 1973, 1:30
P.M., in the Zion Lutheran Church Sanctuary located at the southeast corner of
Emily and Chartres Streets, for the purpose of receiving report from the City
Attorney relative to the Grand Jury Investigation in the matter of the Murdoch/
Piersall land transactions. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 5:15 P.M.
Signed
Deputy City Clerk