Loading...
1974/11/1974-1114 ~%heim~C2~!~ven%~oD. Center, Fullerton .Room, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 18~ 1974. 7:30 P.M. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Thom ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Pebley and Sneegas PRESENT: COM~ITY CENTER AUTHORITY: COMI~ITY CENTER AUTHORITY: William H. Currier Ben Shroeder Bob Hostetter Burr Williams l~n~ Laurence Henderson PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Aloha M. Hougard PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: Thornton E. Piersall ST~DrOH/CONVENTION CENTER DIRECTOR: Thomas F. Liegler ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: William Hopkins RESEARCH & BUDGET: Paul Robinson The adjourned regular meeting of the Anaheim City Council for the purpose of meeting jointly with the CoL,unity Center Authority was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by the City Clerk. AI~OUR~NT: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the meeting was adjourned for lack of a quorum to November 19, 1974, 12:00 noon in the VIP Room, Anaheim Convention Center. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 7:40 P.M. City Cle~k Anaheim Convention Center. vip Room. Anaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Nov-mher 19. 1974. 12:00 Noon. PRESENT: ABSENT: PllESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry O. McRae CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts FIRE CHIEF: James Riley Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and the Council recessed to Executive Session. AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Members of the Council present with the exception of Councilman Pebley. ADJO.UR~NT: Councilman Seymour moved to adjourn. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 1:25 P.M. City 'Clerk * See Minutes of December 3, 1974, 1:30 P.M., Page 74-1172, "Minutes". 74-1115 City Hal.l; Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRBSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts CITY CLERK: Alona M. Hougard CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts ASSISTANT PLANNER: Bob Kelley STADIUM-CONVENTION CENTER DIRECTOR: T.F..Liegler FINANCE DIRECTOR: M. R. Ringer UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon W. Hoyt Mayor Thom called the meeting to order. IN~OCATION: Reverend Holland Lewis of the Church of the Nazarene gave the Invocation. FL~G.. SALUTB: Councilman John Seymour led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. INTRODUCTION - DISNEYLAND AMBASSADOR: Mrs. Mary Jones, Manager of DisneylandAf~fairs~resented the new 1975 Disneyland Ambassador, Kathy Smith, to the City Council. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Thom welcomed Miss Smith and pre- sented her with roses, a replica of the Anaheim Stadium "Big A" score- board, and an attache case to be used in her additional capacity as a representative of the City of Anaheim. ORANGE COUNTY USE PERMIT NO. 3560 - BURRIS SAND PIT: Report from the Public Works and Development Services Departments was submitted relating the results of a meeting sponsored by the East Anaheim Homeowners Association on November 13, 1974, to discuss proposals for the Burris Sand Pit Reclamation (coPies furnished each Council Member). It was noted that the Orange County Planning Commission had continued to this date action on Orange County Use Permit No. 3560, being an application for a proposed dump site for inert materials for the Burris Sand Pit as a reclamation project. Further, that the City Council has been requested to reconsider the issue and take a new position or reaffirm their earlier position (October 29, 1974). Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts reported that pursuant to the direc- tion of the City Council on November 12, 1974, representatives from the Engineer- ing Division and the Development Services Department attended the meeting of November 13, 1974, and he briefed report submitted this date, concluding that concerned property owners appeared to be unhappy with the prospect of a 10 year dumping operation, and apprehensive about the type of use which might occur after completion of the fill; that they apparently prefer the pit be used as a percola- tion pond which would eliminate the annoyance of the dumping operation and avoid oth~r'undesirable uses. Mayor Thom remarked that he understood the Orange County Water District has not filed eminent domain proceedings against the property because of pending litigation filed by the County of Orange and the only way to resolve the situation would be for the County to approve the use permit with proper conditions which would then enable the County to drop their condemnation proceedings and allow the Water District to initiate similar action. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern that the residents were nOt fully aware that a percolation basin would not be an attractive lake, but rather a mud puddle which fills and empties continually, and must be emptied and scraped periodically. She further commented that if the Water District was in possession of an existing geological report on the Burris Pit, it should be released. 74-1116 City ~a!l.~ Ana~etm~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19,.1974~ 1:30 P.M. For the benefit of Councilman Seymour, who was absent from the November 12, 1974 meeting, the discussion at said meeting was briefly reviewed. He expressed 'the opinion that if the Orange County Use Permit is approved, the use requested thereunderwould be the end result. In response to question by Mayor Thom, Assistant Planner Bob Kelley stated that the Water District indicated they have not yet come to a decision on whether they will file condemnation proceedings on the property. Councilman Sneegas was of the opinion that a great deal of misinformation has been used to alarm the people in regard to this issue; with the result being that coumon sense had been neglected and cited as an example, the concern that there would be 400 trucks per day dumping material on the property and that Rio Vista Street would be widened to accommodate those trucks. He felt that an opportunity was being presented to improve the sand pit which has been dormant for six years. Regardless of the ultimate use of the property, the lower strata portion will have to be filled, even though there are bound to be some unpleasant side effects such as up to 300 trucks per day, which could use the freeway and .Would not have to travel on the residential streets. The real question is whether the Water District will acquire the property and turn it into a settling basin, or whether private enterprise will purchase the land, fill it and then turn to a recreational use which will pay for itself. Council discussion was held, and in answer to questions by Councilman Seymour, Councilman Sneegas noted that the environmental impact reports, submitted to the County in connection with subject application, suggested that the best ultimate use would be for recreational purposes. Also noted was the fact that the slopes of the pit are unsafe and some reinforcement and fill would be manda- tory no matter what the ultimate use may be. Councilwoman Kaywood called attention to the presentation made at the last meeting by Mr. Strong of the East Anaheim Homeowners Association, and their concern that strictly inert materials shouldbe used for any fill on the property due to the water contact with the percolating ponds. Mrs. Sherry Loop, 2851 East South Street, East Anaheim Homeowners Association Representative, advised that the report referred to by Councilwoman Kaywood is an engineering report which is available at the Office of the Water District. She cited the time limitations involved in securing a Water Quality Control Permit and a Grading Permit, being of the opinion that it would be impos- sible to complete the necessary work before the coming rainy season. Taking basic figures from the environmental impact reports, Mrs. Loop noted that it will take approximately 10,000,000 cubic yards of material to fill the pit and over a period of, ten years that would amount to 1,000,000 cubic yards per year; each truck capacity is approximately 10 cubic yards, and divided by 250 working days per year indicates a figure of 400 loads per day. The E.I.R.'s Projected approximately 280 loads per day and in her opinion, the project as presented is not feasible. In conclusion, Mrs. Loop advised of her intent to appear before the County Planning Commission on behalf of the Homeowners Association, to suggest that a Joint project be initiated by the Water District, the Harbors, Beaches and Parks Department, and the Orange County Flood Control District, and perhaps the 34 acre southern portion of the property could be used for a dump by private enterprise, since it is not so deep'nor so steep as the large pit. She requested that the City Council take a firmposition against the use permit. In answer to Council questioning, Mrs. Loop noted that one year ago'the County liarbors, Beaches and Parks Department initiated condemnation proceedings to acquire subject property, however the Board of Supervisors ordered a continu- ance until a decision on subject application was reached. It was susgested by Councilman Seymour that a representative of,'the City Council meet with members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors to see whether see2 alternative for the site can be worked out. 74-1117 City ~.!.1,~ A-~heim~ Calif0~nia - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19, 1974~ 1:30 P.M. :. Councilman Seymour thereupon moved that a member of the Development serVices Department staff appear at the hearing before the County Planning Com- mission this afternoon and convey that the Anaheim City Council has reconsidered their previous action and does not now support the use permit to use the Burris Pit as an inert materials dump, and that the City Council would prefer to work Jointly with the County Board of Supervisors, the Water District, the Flood Control District, and the Harbors, Beaches and Parks Department in an effort to formulate a satisfactory project. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Further discussion was held, and Councilman Sneegas. commented that he would urge acquisition of subject property by the County be based on the price that has bemm established, not on a minimal amount which has been mentioned in the past, the rights of the property owners thereby being retained. Councilman Seymour was of the opinion that by the same token, a pre- sent-~ay value of the property's future worth, based on its economic return from use as a dump site, should also not be used as a basis for the price. MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES: Minutes of the Regular Anaheim City Council Meeting held October 29, 1974, were approved, on motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman. Thom. MOTION C~IED. WAI%'~RO~ ,~D~G - OBD,LNANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive the reading in full of. all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such ordinamce or resolution. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION UNANI- MOUSLY C~IED. REPORT - FINANCIAL D~S AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount of $678,805.77, in accordance with the 1974-75 Budget, were approved. PUBLIC fIEAR~NG - ABANDONMENT NO. 74-6A: Public hearing was held on proposed abandon- ment of a portion of an existing public utility easement to allow the expansion of an existing residence located north of Katella Avenue, west of Walnut Street, pursuant to Resolution No. 74R-535, duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. Report of the City Engineer dated October 3, 1974, was submitted recom- mending approval of said request. Mayor Thom asked if anyone wished to address the City Council, there being no response, he declared the hearing closed. RESOLUTION NO. 74R-566: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 74R-566 for adoption, approving Abandonment No. 74-6A, as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OFT HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF THAT PORTION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. (No. 74-6A) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABS~T: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL M~MBE~S: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-566 duly passed and adopted. AMUSe, DEVICES P,EF/~TS: The,following applications were submitted and granted sub- Ject to p~ovisions of Chapters 3.24 and 4.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Thom: a. Submitted by Robert W. Fellhauer for six flipper-type amusement machines and two arcade-type amusement machines for the Stop & Go #48 Market, 1716 West Glenoaks Street. b. Submitted by Mary E. Cyprien for .three pool tables, one cigarette machine and one Juke box for The 20's, 1827 Xatella Avenue. MOTION C~IgD. 74-1118 City Hallt Ana_~heim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. FIREWORKS DISP.L~Y. pERMIT: Application filed by The California Fireworks Display Com- pany for permit to allow public fireworks displays November 20, and 27, 1974 and December $, 1974 at Anaheim Stadium, was submitted and granted, as requested, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilmen Sneegas. To this motion, Councilwoman Kaywood voted "no", being of the opinion the residents of the immed- iate area have been subjected to enough noise pollution; however, she would favor visual fireworks without the noise, and suggested in the future this method of display be seriously considered. MOTION CARRIED. TEMPO_RAR__Y SIGN PERMITS - EXTENSIONS OF TIME: The following requests for extensions of time for sign permits in the Santa Ann Canyon area were submitted: a. Submitted by R. VanNostrand, Carter industries, Inc., for six-month extensions to Permit No. 1478, sign located on Imperial Highway, north of Old Santa Ana Canyon Road; Permit No. 1482, sign located on Imperial Highway, north of Santa Ann Canyon Road; Permit No. 1502, sign located on Imperial Highway, north of Old Santa Ana Canyon Road; and Permit No. 1534, sign located on Santa Ann Canyon Road, east of Solomon Drive. Because of a possible conflict of interest, Councilmen Seymour withdrew from the discussion and action on this issue as it pertains to Sign Permit No. 1534 only. b. Submitted by R. VanNostrand, A & E Melven Genser Outdoor, for a six-uonth extension to Sign Permit No. 1448, sign located at the southeast corner of I~perial Highway and Santa Ana Canyon Road. c. Submitted by Landon M. Exley, Vice President, Pacesetter Homes, Incorporated, for a six-month extension of time to Permit No. 1517, sign located between Woodsbor0 and La Palms Avenues. In response to question by Councilwomen Kaywood, with reference to cur- rent study of temporary tract signs in the Santa Ann Canyon area, Zoning Supervi- sor Charles Roberts advised that the signs included under Item Nos. a and b were among those to which the property owners in the canyon area had objected, and he thereupon displayed slide photographs illustrating some of the signs in the vici- nity of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Imperial Highway. Mrs. Mary Dinndorf, 131 La Paz Street, President of the Santa Ana Canyon Improvement Association, addressed the Council stating that if the signs in question advertised anything other than homes for sale they would be considered billboards. In reviewing the signs, she had observed that many were in violation of the sip ordinance as it pertains to limitations of size, height and distance from an R-1 Zone and inasmuch as the time limits for these signs have expired, she requested that the extensions be denied. Councilwomen Kaywood pointed out that recommendations soon will be forthcoming from the staff members studying these sips in the Santa Ama Canyon Scenic Corridor, and Chat developers of land in the vicinity had expressed their intent to collaborate on some type of signs that would be informative and attrac- tive, and report to the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force next week. She inquired whether it would be acceptable to the Association if the signs were allowed to remain in place pending the result of these studies. Mrs. Dinndorf was of the opinion that if the time extensions were denied, the signs would not be removed immediately, and by the time a new ordi- nance would be adopted the developers could be prepared to erect new signs in compliance with the new regulations. That if it was feasible, she WOuld prefer to see the signs removed immediately. Mr. R. VanNostrand representing the Applicant for Item '%", addressed the Council, noting there was also a representative of his former employer, Carter Industries Inc., present at this meeting, and advised that these temporary off-site sips do not come under the billboard ordinance, but under Section 18.62.070 of the AnaheimNunicipal Code. None of their sips are over 25..feet in height, end the 300 foot distance from an R-1 zone ~ould apply only to billboard wiSns. 74-1119 Ci~ Hall~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. VanNostrand was of the opinion that prospective home buyers must have direction to locate homes for sale, and the Builders International Associa- tion and many developers have concluded that approximately 80% of the sales are the direct or indirect result of directional advertising signs. To require immediate removal would slow down sales, leaving houses vacant for a longer period of time resulting in more vandalism, which would create a hardship to the developers and cause the prices of these homes to be increased. At the present time, the building industry has slowed, and signs are necessary to sell the housing developments in the area. As soon as a development is sold, the developers and sign companies will guarantee removal of their signs. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed the opinion that if the signs were smaller, they would stand out individually, but where there are several large signs at one location they seem to blur together. Mr. VanNostrand felt that smaller signs would create the same blurred image, and he pointed out that there are a limited number of appropriate locations available for these signs to direct traffic to the various developments. Councilman Seymour asked whether it would not be better at these key locations to have some type of integrated sign program. Mr. VanNostrand agreed, and was of the opinion that all developers and sign companies would cooperate and offer their recommendations and assistance. He stated it was his understanding that the policy of the City has been not to require extensions of time for tract signs, but to allow them to remain in place until the tracts are sold. In response to question by Mayor Thom with reference to staff report dated November 26, 1974, Mr. Roberts confirmed that the expiration dates listed for the signs in question were correct. He pointed out that the staff includes one zoning enforcement officer for 34 square miles of City, and it has been difficult to follow through on all sign permits. If strictly enforced, at the expiration of one year the applicant would be advised to remove his sign or to apply for an extension of time. He further noted that retroactive extensions would have to be granted from the appropriate dates to expire six months from this date. Councilmen Seymour expressed empathy with the points noted by Mrs. Dinndorf and commented that he also found it difficult to discern between these temporary signs and billboards, the only difference being the length of time they are allowed to remain in place. However, he would hesitate to ask the developers to remove their signs at this time and be without that type of advertis- ing until a new ordinance is adopted, or erect some other type of signs on an interim basis. In his opinion, the extensions should be granted for a reasonable period of time to allow preparation and adoption of an ordinance. Mr. Roberts reported that the first public hearing to consider the proposed amendment to the ordinance has been scheduled on December 10, 1974. Councilwoman Kaywood commented that at the last Task Force meeting, the staff presented five different styles of signs for consideration, and the devel- opers present were very cooperative and offered additional input. She felt that extensions of 30 to 60 days would be appropriate. Mrs. Jean Morris, 400 Torrey Pines Circle, member of the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force, addressed the Council stating that the last meeting concluded with good intentions that the developers would work together toward recon~endations for the proposed ordinance, however, she had not yet heard of any progress. Councilman Seymour pointed out that only one week had elapsed since that meeting and he had confidence that by December 10th there would be recom- mendations given by those concerned developers for a plan that they believe to be feasible. It was moved by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, that the extensions of time be granted to sign Permits NOs. 1478, 1482, 1502, 1448 and 1517, to expire January 7, 1975. MOTION CARRIED. 74-1120 City Hallm Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Pebley moved that extension of time be granted to sign Permit No. 1534 to expire January 7, 1975. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour abstained from voting. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood called attention to a notice she had received from the California Roadside Council containing a "special alert" regarding signs in the Santa Aha Canyon area, which stated on October 29, 1974, the City Council and staff had listened to presentation by representatives of the Santa Aha Canyon Improvement Association and COAL concerning these temporary off-site signs, but had taken no action. She asked that it be made clear that on October 15, 1974, the staff had been instructed to report and make recommendations for the proposed amendment to the Code, therefore, there was no need for further action on the later date. TE~O~RY SIGN PERMIT EXTENSION OF TIME: Request of David B. Travis, National Vice President Marketing, Dunn Properties Corporation, for a one-year extension of time to a sign at lZ01 East Ball Road was submitted. O~ motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour, one-year extension of time (November 19, 1975) was granted for said sign, subject to the followin$ conditions recommended by the Development Services Department and Building Division: 1. That a bond be posted to guarantee the removal of the sign at the expiration of one year. 2, That all existing illegal signs be removed from the premises. MOTION CARRIED. ~/~Lr~C~RN~IE BUILDING PRESERVATION: Communication dated November 8, 1974, from Earl E. Bahl, Chairman of the Cultural Arts Commission, requesting preservation of'the C&rnegie Building (former public library) at the northwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Broadway, was submitted. Mr. Dahl called attention to the history of the building attached to his letter as prepared by Mrs. Ruth Salaets, pointing out that of the five libraries constructed in Orange County under grants by Andrew Carnegie, the Anaheim building is the only one remaining, and he requested that the building be preserved as a historical monument. Mayor Thom expressed thanks to Mr. Dahl for his letter and to Mrs. Salaets for her research. He noted that the building is currently owned by the City and being used to house the Personnel Offices, and at present there are no future plans for the facility. He felt strongly that the building should be preserved for posterity. I~ response to question by Mayor Thom, the City Attorney advised that the Council may want to establish a policy that the building be preserved and not demolished, keeping in mind that this should be considered in connection with any future redevelopment plans for the area. Mr. Dahl advised that he also serves as Heritage Chairman for the Bicentennial celebration, and they feel the Carnegie Building and some other historical structures should be saved. Council--,- Pebley stated that he was definitely in favor of preserving the building in question, but expressed concern thatsafegnards should be imple- mented to assure that the building will not be sold or destroyed by a future City Council. Mr. Watts advised that the City Council might want to consider leasing the facility to an independent non-profit group, giving them authority and responsibility for the building so that there would be a contractual oblisation for preservation. ~ Hr. Dahl reported that the Cultural Arts Commissionhas considered forming & private historical society, however, at ~he present time they are not prepared to make any specific recommendations. 74-1121 ~it~ Hall~ ~_-_.aheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. City Manager Keith Murdoch pointed out that the Community Redevelopment Co~ssion, another appointive agency, has an interest in the issue and it might be well for the two Commissions to hold a joint meeting to discuss these histor- ical buildings. Mayor Thom and Councilman Pebley suggested that the matter be deferred to allow the City Attorney's staff an opportunity to research the issue and submit recommendations for possible methods to preserve the Carnegie Building and other historical structures. Mrs. Patricia Bailey, 2260 West Lincoln Avenue, Apartment Ud, was recognized and suggested that the Carnegie Building be restored to its original purpose and used as headquarters for the proposed historical society and perhaps as an extension of theM other Colony House and the Library Local History Room. She expressed an interest in participating as a member of the historical society. By general consent of the Council, the issue of the Carnegie Building preservation was deferred pending report and recommendation from the City Attorney. Councilwoman Kaywood called attention to the recent illustrated article in the local newspaper pertaining to a recent Redevelopment Commission meeting and raising the question of whether certain structures in the City would, be preserved, or demolished. She was of the opinion that an article of this nature ca~es people to become angry and fearful, and was not a positive approach. ~* This article appeared after she attended a Cultural Arts Commission meeting where she thought she had.made it clear there were no specific plans as yet, and that Council's intent was definitely to preserve the Carnegie Building. Mayor Thom stated that although he appreciated Councilwoman Kaywood's concern, the news media was one of the methods of communication. Councilman Seymour commented that it is normal for people to fear that which they do not understand, and in his opinion,.it is the responsibility of the Redevelopment Commission and the City Council to communicate these matters, which should prevent reports which may be unjust. PACIFIC TRL~PHONE COMPANY ADDITION - COMPLAINTS: Petitions of complaintagainst the construction of an addition to the Pacific Telephone Company facilities south of Cypress Street, between Lemon and Clementine Streets, were submitted by Mrs. P. D. Lewis, 221 North Clementine Street; said petitions containing approximately 44 signatures. Additional petition was submitted to the Council at open meeting, containing 10 signatures. Mrs. Esther Katz, owner, 211 North Clementine Street, addressed the Council, on behalf of Mrs. Lewis, advising that the residents in the vicinity of the construction are undergoing a great deal of distress. She read from the petition statement, noting that the street had been closed for three weeks making it difficult for any emergency vehicles to reach their neighborhood and advised that the 24 hour a day construction is scheduled to last approximately two years. Also noted was a meeting held between residents, Public Works Department staff members, representatives of the Police and Fire Departments and from Pacific Telephone Company, at which time no solution was agreed upon. In the opinion of Councilman Pebley, it would be impossible to construct a large facility without some inconvenience to nearby neighbors. Attention was called to memorandum report from the Director of Public Works, dated November 11, 1974, noting conditions imposed on the Company in connection with the excavation permit for construction. Mr. James B. Webb, District Manager for the Pacific Telephone Company, was invited to comment, and stated they were constructing an addition to the central office building which would contain the latest electronic equipment available to provide for growth of the City; further, the facility serves the entire County. When they found they would have to reroute some cables, it became necessary to close the street for three weeks, however, that work is completed and the street reopened. In order to reduce any danger to pedestrians, fences were erected along the sidewalks adjacent to the construction area. Mr. Webb-further noted that azea residents have been furnished with a telephone number which can be called at * See M~nutes of December 10, 1974, 1:30 P.M., Page 74-1187, '%linutes". 74-1122 City Hall~ A~.aheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. any time during a 24-hour day, and Mr. Richard Lodding, Neighborhood Relations Job Foreman for the Company, has been available to answer questions and explain the operation. The amount of dirt and noise generated by the project should be reduced considerably as construction progresses. Mayor Thom was of the opinion that assistance was being offered by the Pacific Telephone Company, and the activity will become less bothersome as time goes on. No further action was taken by the City Council. COIN-OP.~ATED,.LAIAtDRY EQUIPMENT - BUSINESS LICENSE PROCEDURES: Communication dated September 26, 1974, was submitted from Mr. Lee Gorelick, Executive Secretary of the California Route Operators Association, Inc., requesting time on the Council Agenda to discuss licensing fees for coin-operated laundry equipment. Mr. Gorelick was present and advised that the California Route Operators Association, Inc., is the trade association of businessmen who install and operate coin laundry equipment in apartment houses, trailer parks, projects, etc. That the method of computing business license fees for these coin-operated machines is on a $1.00 per machine per year basis, which they feel is inequitable in relation to other businesses. One laundry machine provides an average gross yearly income of approximately $150, which computes to a payment of nearly $7 per $1,000 yearly gross income, whereas other industries pay $.20 to $.30 for the same income. Many businesses pay $25 license fees for businesses which gross $25,000 per year. He noted the character of the business under discussion, where many of the opera- tore have machines placed in several other cities, and they would be in an unfavorable position with their competitors in other areas if they were required to pay exorbitant license fees. In 1970, Mr. Gorelick noted, the State Legislature adopted recommenda- tions of the California League of Cities, the thrust being that the coin-operated laundry machine industry would be placed on an equal footing with comparable industries, and be placed on a gross receipts basis. In 1972, the California Route Operators Association, Inc., appeared before the Anaheim City Council requesting that this City consider changing their requirement to conform with the State regulations; however, the City Council saw no need to make such a change, pointing out that Anaheim is a Charter City and not affected by legislation drafted for general law cities. Mr. Gorelick stated that at the present time, Anaheim is the only city collecting license fees on a per machine basis; Huntington Beach has a $3 per machine fee, however the Association has received a letter from their City Manager, Mr. David Rowlands, stating that that City is in the process of preparing a recommendation to their City Council that the industry be placed on a gross receipts basis; in the interim, they are not billing license fees on a per machine basis, pending results of said recommendation. Regarding the concern expressed in the report from Business License Division, dated October 14, 1974, that small operators having less than 25 machines would ba penalized by a change to licensing on a gross receipts basis, Mr. Gorelick advised that the Association will be glad to have an exception made in these cases, Using perhaps, the same $10 minimum fee that small operators now pay. In response to question by Mayor Thom, Mr. Gorelick stated that 150 laundry machines would gross $2,250 per year, with $1,500 being paid in license fees, while another merchant would pay $95 for his business license. If the City amends its ordinance as requested, there would be some small loss of revenue, but in his opinion the principle should take precedent. ~cauee of the possible conflict of interest, Councilman ineegas requested the record to show that he did not participate in the discussion, nor vote on this issue inasmuch as the same arguments could pertain to his business also, and he left the Council Chambers. (3:52 P.M.) The City Attorney pointed out that for the past ten years at least, these businessmen have had available to them the option of paying their license fees on a per mechine basis or a gross receipts basis, however, they have objected to the City's $25 minimum fee being applicable to each location where they have the equipm~mt installed. 74-1123 City Hal!~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~. 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Gorelick replied that due to the nature of the business, the oper- ators would be bankrupt if they paid $25 for each location. This business has made an effort to keep the fees for the use of machines down in spite of infla- tion, and a load of laundry which cost $.25 twenty years ago now costs $.30 to $.35 in the newest and largest machines. 90% of the industry consists of small businesses. Mr. Watts reported that "per machine" license fees for coin-operated machines are basically divided into two categories, those which provide service and those which supply merchandise. The fees on the latter are based on the denomination of coins used, $2 per machine for $.10 or less, and $3 per machine for coins over $.10. Mayor Thom commented that he has been sympathetic with operators of these coin-operated machines for some time and was of the opinion that the Code provision was discriminatory and should be amended to place all coin-operated vending and service machines on a gross receipts basis. Mr. Murdoch.no~ed that because of the multiplicity of locations and the nature of the type~ Of businesses involved in this type of industry, some of the gross receipt~schedules differ, as some of these various businesses have differ- ent profit relationships and require varying kinds of enforcement procedures. Complete equity in the licensing is extremely difficult to attain, and he asked whether the Council would consider a schedule of fees which might be different from those governing retail sales, for example. Mayor Thom and Councilman Seymour indicated that they would be willing to consider a different schedule, and Councilman Seymour asked how it could be determined if the gross receipts reported were accurate. Mr. Murdoch added that licensed businesses are required to file an annual report on the range of the gross receipts, and although most of the time these are accepted, the City does have the right to audit. One of the largest laundry machine companies, Web Service Company, has consistently furnished the City with a list of the average number of machines, recognizing that said number fluctuates. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she would like to see the Code amended, and noted the importance of the service provided-by these companies and their efforts to retain moderate prices for their use. She called attention to the differences between laundry and other vending machines, and expressed concern that licensing methods for the others should be .investigated prior to action thereon. It was noted that action would not be taken until a written amendment proposal was before the City Council. Councilman Pebley stated he too would be in favor of directing the preparation of an amendment to the Code, but only if all coin-operated vending machines were included. On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Attorney was instructed to prepare an amendment to the Code which would place all coin-operated laundry and vending machines on a gross receipts basis. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Sneegas returned to the Council Chambers. (4:07 P.M.) RECESS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved for a five-minute recess. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (4:07 P.M.) AFfER ~ECE$$: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Members of the City Council being present. (4:12 P.M.) .A~tNDONMENT REQUEST: Request of Carter L. and Virginia Horney was submitted for aban- donment of a portion of an existing public utilities easement located within Lot No. 5, Tract No. 1353, west of Sunkist Way, north of Romneya Drive (1212 Earl Circle) to install a swi-~ing pool. 74-1124 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Also submitted was report of the City Engineer recommending that. the abandonment be denied, inasmuch as the easement provides the only access for utilities, and further recommending that an encroachment permit be issued. In answer to question by Councilwoman Kaywood, City Engineer James P. Maddox reported that if the easement were retained, it would allow utility workers to come onto the property for necessary repairs and maintenance. Councilman Seymour recalled a past instance where a party had an encroachment permit for a portion of his building and when he attempted to sell the property the lender would not accept an encroachment permit, and the City then enacted an abandonment. He expressed concern that a similar situation could occur in this instance. Councilman Pebley suggested that the City grant th~ Applicant an ease- ment on the City's easement. Mr. Watts counseled that generally, a party cannot have an easement on property which he owns in fee, since the titles would merge. Discussion was held and Mr. Murdoch explained the procedure for abandon- ment public hearings. Mr. Watts was of the opinion that if there was no structure nor under- ground utilities within the affected portion of the easement, an abandonment of that portion of the easement only would be proper. Mr. Homey was in the audience and advised that there were no under- ground utilities in the easement, and the pool would encroach five feet into a ten-foot easement. He also noted that a professional survey would be costly. Mr. Maddox stated he could obtain additional reports from the Electrical Division and the Pacific Telephone Company within a week, however at present the only report is the recommendation of the Electrical Division that the abandonment be denied. Mayor Thom advised Mr. Homey to provide a plot plan, drawn to scale, showing the measure of distances from the property lines to the pool, which would be sufficient to allow staff to compute a legal description for that portion to be abandoned. RESOLUTION NO. 74R-567: On the recommendations of the City Attorney,' Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 74R-567 for adoption, denying the abandonment request at this time and granting the encroachment permit as recommended by the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. A I~SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING REQUEST FOR ABAI~DONMENT 74-7A AND APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACflMENT PERMIT WITH CARTER L. AND VIRGINIA HORNEY. (74-7AE) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-567 duly passed and adopted. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 70-71-25 AND TRACT NO. 7422 - EXTENSION OF TIME AND APPROVAL OF PLANS: Request was submitted for approval of final floor plans and elevations for Tract No. 7422, together with report dated November 19, 1974 from the Zoning Division recommending an extension of time to Reclassification No. 70-71-25, retroactive to February 9, 1974, and that submitted plans be approved. Zoning Supervisor Charles Roberts briefed said report, advising that the 16.8 acre property is a portion of a larger parcel of land originally requested for R2-5000 zoning. Said property is located east of Imperial Highway 74-1125 City Hal~ A~aheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. between the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way to the north and La Palma Avenue to the south. He called attention to the various sizes and numbers of units as noted on the report, advising that the homes on 12 out of the 87 total RS-5000 lots would have straight-in garages with 6- to 10-foot setbacks. Floor plans and elevations were reviewed at the Council Table. In response to question by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Dudley Frank, owner of subject property, advised that the number of units was increased from 85 to 87 as result of the acquisition of an adjoining parcel of property. Councilwoman Kaywood inquired whether any of the 6- to 10-foot garage setbacks would be located on cul-de-sac lots, and how large the homes on the cul- de-sacs would be. Mr. Roberts stated the plans indicate three homes would be located on the cul-de-sac bulb, one with four bedrooms, one having three bedrooms, and the third having two bedrooms plus den. The on-street parking at the bulb would accommodate two or three cars. Councilwoman Kaywood referred to previous Council discussions .concern- ing the possible prohibition of 6- to 10-foot setbacks on cul-de-sac lots where there is little room for on-street parking. Mr. Roberts reported that there was a recommendation from the City Planning Commission pending, and he recalled that discussions had pertained to the possible requirement of three-car garages and that houses on cul-de-sacs have a 25-foot minimum setback. In response to question by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Roberts advised that all RS-5000 zoning standards were being met in the tentative tract as proposed, with no variances. Councilwoman Kaywood stated she could not approve plans which indicate 6- to 10-foot setbacks on cul-de-sac lots. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, exten- sion of time was granted for all property described in Reclassification No. 70-71-25, retroactive to February 9, 1974 and to expire February 9, 1976; and floor plans and elevations for Tract No. 7422 were approved as presented. To this motion, .Councilwoman Kaywood voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commission at their meeting held October 30, 1974, pertaining to the following applications were submitted for City Council information and consideration: 1. F~NVIP~.NMgNTAL IMPACT - NEGATIVE. DECLARATIONS: Om motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council finds that the following actions will have no significant effect on the environment and are, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report: Variance No. 2643 Conditional Use Permit No. 1496 MOTION CARRIED. 2,. g~ZI~ONM~TAL IMPACT - CATEGORICAL EXgMPTIONS: On motion by Councilman Pebley, secomded by Co~cil~n Sneegas, the City Co~cil ratified the dete~ina- t$~ of the Director of Development Semites that the activities proposed in the followin~ ac=ions fall within the definitiOn of Section 3.01, Class 1, 2 or 3, of t~ City of ~aheim Guidelines to the requir~nC for an environmental impact report and are, therefore, categorically ex~pC from the requirement to file said ce~rt: Conditional Use Pe~it No. 1494 Conditional Use Pe~it No. 1497 VarianceNo. 2646 74-1126 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974, 1:30 P.M. 3. VARIANCE NO. 2643: Submitted by Timothy W. Wallace to establish the outdoor storage of used automobile supplies and parts (Import Auto Supply) on C-2 zoned property located at the northeast corner of Center Street and Manchester Avenue, with Code waivers of: a. Permitted uses. b. Minimum off-street parking. The City Planning. Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-214, granted said variance for a period of two years, subject to conditions. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1496: Submitted by.James and Angela M. Plou to per,it e~ansion of an existing mobilehome park (La Belle Fontaine Mobile Estates) on C-3 and R-A zoned property located northeast of the intersection of Lincoln and Grand Avenues, with Code waivers of: a. Maximum wall height. b. Minimum front yard setback. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-207, granted said conditional use permit subject to conditions. 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1494: Submitted by Robert W. and Donna Hostetter, to permit a cocktail lounge in an existing shopping center on R-A zoned property located on the west side of Brookhurst Street, south of Broadway, with Code waivers of: a. Minimum setback area landscaping. (Withdrawn) b. Minimum setback adjacent to R-A zoning. c. Minimum parking area landscaping. (WithdFawn) d. Maximum building height. e. Required block wall adjacent to R-A zoning. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-211, granted said conditional use permit waivers "b", "d" and "e" (waivers "a't and "c" having been withdrawm) subject to conditions. 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1497: Submitted by Masao and Hiroshi Fujishige, to permit three mobilehomes for the purpose of housing agricultural workers in the R-A Zone; property located on the east side of Harbor'Boulevard, south of the centerline of Katella Avenue. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-212, granted said conditional use permit subject to conditions. 7. VARIANCE NO. 2646: Submitted by Dr. and Mrs. John S. English, to construct a house addition on R-1 zoned property located on ,the north side of Chanticleer Road, west of Nutwood Street, with Code waivers of: a. Maximum eave projection. b. Minimum rear yard. The City Planning Commision, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-215, granted said variance subject to.conditions. 8. VARIANCE NO. 2609 - AMENDMENT: Submitted by Derek H. White, Derek H. White and Associates, Consulting Engineers, requesting deletion of Condition No. 1, Resolution No. PC74-137, approving Variance No. 2609. Said variance permits the construction of a two-story office building on C-1 zoned property located at the northwest corner of Magnolia Avenue and Ball Road, Condition No. 1 requiring dedication to the City of a strip of land 53 feet in width from the centerline of the street along Magnolia Avenue for street widening purposes. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-218, amended their Resolution No. PC74-137, by deleting Condition No. 1. ' II 74-1127 F City Hall~ ~aheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~. 1974~ 1:30 P.M. 9. VARIANCE NO. 2535 - EXTENSION OF TIM~: Submitted by George Collins requesting an extension of time to permit motorcycle service and repair in conjunction with an existing motorcycle sales and accessories facility on C-1 zoned property located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue, east of East Street. Extension of time was granted by the City Planning Commission to expire February 28, 1975. 10. VARIANCE NO. 2546 - EXTENSION OF TIHE: Submitted by D. A. Doug Hard<ins, McCoy Ford, requesting an extension of time to permit the establishment of an automobile and recreational vehicle storage facility in the M-1 Zone; property located at the northeast corner of Broadway and Loara Streets. Extension of time was granted by the City Planning Commission to expire September 5, 1976. 11. VARIANCE NO. 2317 - TERMINATION: The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-217 terminated Variance No. 2317 on the basis that the owners no longer intend to operate said facility (Brunswick warehouse); variance orig- inally approved to permit retail sales of pool tables and related equipment in conjunction with the existing warehousing facility on M-1 zoned property, located at the northeast corner of Lewis and Howell Streets. COUNCIL ACTION: The foregoing applications (Item Nos. 3 through ll)~were reviewed by the City Council and no further action was taken. 12, CO_.ND_ITIONAL USE MERMIT NO. 1499 - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT CATEGORICAL EX~ION: Submitted by Amherst Consolidated Enterprises to permit the continued use and expansion of a private school on County of Orange R-1 District property located on the north side of Orange Avenue, west of Brookhurst Street (Amherst Oakmont Private School), with Code waivers of: a. Minimum side yard setback. (Withdrawn) b. Permitted uses in required setbacks. (Withdrawn) c. Maximumbuilding height. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-213, granted said conditional use permit waiver "c" (waivers "a" and "b" having been withdrawn) subject to conditions. Review of action taken by the City Planning Commission was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood, and the City Clerk was instructed to schedule the matter for public hearing before the City Council. 13. ORANGECOUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT - PROPOSED SALE OF LAND TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTNENT OF TRANSPORTATION: Proposing to purchase a parcel of land and obtain a drainage easemen~ fr°m the Orange County Flood Control District in connection with the construction of the Orange Freeway. Property is located south of Katella Avenue on the west side of the Santa Ana River. The City PlanningCommission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC74-216, finds and determines that the proposed conveyance of real property interests for freeway and drainage purposes to the State of California Department of Transporta- tion by the Orange County Flood Control District is in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council sustained the action taken by the City Planning Commission.' MOTION CARRIED. CO.NDITIONA~.' USE PERMIT.NO.. 1377 - TERMINATION: Submitted by Masao FuJishige requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1377, originally approved to permit the construction of a recreational vehicle and camper park at the northeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Convention Way (Conditional Use Permit No. 1497). RESOL~rflON NO. 74R-568: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution NO. 74R-568 for adoption. 74-1128 City Hall~ Anaheim,, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEED- INGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1377. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-568 duly passed and adopted. WORK ORIIER NO. 1008 - FIRE STATION NO. 9: On the recommendations of the Fire Chief, the awar4 of contract for Work Order No. 1008 was continued two weeks (December 3, 1974) to further analyze the bids and explore other alternatives, on motion by Councilman Sneesas, seconded by Councilman Pebley. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NO. 74R-569 - WORK ORDER NO. 839 - ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER RE-CARPETING OF ARENA STAIRWAYS AND LOGE AREA: Award of contract for Work Order No. 839 to the only bidder, CuStom Floors, was continued from the meeting of November 12, 1974, to ascertain whether or not two of the three firms which obtained specifications had intended to submit bids for the work, and why they decided against same. Stadium-Convention Center Director T. F. Liegler submitted report from the Convention Center Maintenance Supervisor John Roche (copies furnished each Council Member), noting that the two firms which picked up specifications for the work but did not bid were contacted, and they both advised they did not have sufficient time to submit a bid. Also reported was contact made with two carpet mills for direct sales. The third firm which obtained specifications was Custom Floors, who submitted the only bid received in the amount of $49,647, which was within the City's estimate of $50,000. Mr. Liegler indicated concern for the integrity of the formal bid pro- cess, noting that the one bidder had complied with all requirements established by the City and followed all necessary procedures and their bid amount has been public. It was his recommendation that the one bid received be accepted, as being in the best interests of the City. Mayor Thom noted that the report indicated all potential bidders were given the same opportunity to submit a quotation, however for one reason or another, two of the three who obtained .specifications did not bid. RESOLUTION NO. 74R-569: Councilman Sneegas stated his questions had been answered, and thereupon offered Resolution No. 74R-569 for adoption, in accordance with recommendations of the City Engineer and the Stadium-Convention Center Manager. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A SEALED PRO- POSAL AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER FOR THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND PERFORMING ALL WORK NECES- SARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: RE-CARPETING OF ARENA STAIRWAYS AND LOGE AREA IN THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 839. (Custom Floors - $49,647.00) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL HEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-569 duly passed and adopted. 74-1129 City Hall; A~mheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ i974~ 1'30 P.M. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Nos. 74R-570 through 74R-572, both inclusive for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RE~OLUTION NO. 74R-570 - WORK ORDER NOS. 736-B AND 1253: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVE- NIENCE AIqD NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVE- MENT, TO WIT: THE LA PALMA AVENUE STREET AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NOS. 736-B AND 1253, A.H.F.P. NO. 658; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLA~S, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHO- RIZING TI~ 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. (From 6475 feet east of Fairmont Boulevard to 2926 feet east of Imperial Highway--Bids to be Opened - December 12, 1974, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 74R-571 - WORK ORDER NO. 735-B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECES- SITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE HOWELL AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, 150 FEET W/O TO 230 FEET W/O KATELLA, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 735-B; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CON- STRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICA- TIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be Opened - December 12, 1974, 2:00 P.M.) RESOLUTION NO. 74R-572 - WORK ORDER NO. 845: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE SCHWEITZER PARK GRADING IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 845; 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 - December 12, 1974, 2:00 P.M.) Roll Call Vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-570 through 74R-572 both inclu- sive duly passed and adopted. RR$OLUTION NO. 74R-573 - WORK O~ER NOS. 2280 AND 726-A: Upon'receipt of certifica- tion from the Director of Public Works, Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 74R-573 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF ~IE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COHPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIP- MENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE.OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: THE LA PAI~ AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT, W/O CITRON STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM WORK ORDER NOS. 2280 and 726-A. (D. W. Contrac- tins Company) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSg~T: COUNCIL HEMBERS: COUNCIL HEMBERS: COUNCIL 14EI~I~ERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 74R-573 duly passed and adopted. 74-1130 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. CONSTRUCt!ON DRAWINGS SPECIFICATIONS AND COST ESTIMATE - PARK BUILDINGS (Boysen,. Twila Reid andManzanita Parks): Inasmuch as there was no staff member present for verbal report end actual specifications and plans only were submitted, on motion by Councilman T~om, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the plans, specifications and cost estimates for park buildings at Boysen, Twila Reid and Manzanita Parks were referred back to the Parks, Recreation and Arts Department for a summ-ry report and recomendation. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION NOS, 74R-574 through 74R-576 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 74R-574 'through 74R-576 both inclusive for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. KESOLUTION NO. 74R-574: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Walnut Canyon Mutual Water Company; Robert L. Ramacciotti, et ux; Vonde E. Pierson; Thomas 3. Lithgoe, Jr.; Vera W. Myers & Raymond G. Simpson) RES~LUTION NO. 74R-575: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCZPTING A MODIFICATION OF A DEED OF EASEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLF~ TO EXECUTE SAID MODIFICATION. (Service Distributors, Inc. - R/W 1640) RESOLUTION NO. 74R-576: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING A DEED FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC HIGHWAY PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE ACCEPTANCE THEREOF, AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF A PROCESSING FEE THEREFOR. (Southern California Edison - R/W 1736) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: KaYW°od, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 74R-574 through 74R-576 both inclu- sive duly passed and adopted. 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 Coucilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom: a. Claim submitted by Richard E. Crane for personal injuries purpor- tedly sustained as a result of hole in asphalt path on No. 16 hole of Anaheim Golf Course, on or about August 2, 1974. b. Claim submitted by William Burrola for injuries purportedly sustained as a result of action of Police Officers of the City of Anaheim, on or about August 13, 1974. c. Claim submitted by Mrs. Angeline Jackson on behalf of her mother, Mrs. Rose Markovich for personal injuries purportedly sustained in a fall at Pearson Park, on or about August 30, 1974. d. Claim submitted by Colleen Susan Moran for personal injuries pur- portedly sustained as a result of acts of agents and employees of the City of Anaheim, on or about September 16, 1974. e. Claim submitted by Mr. Franklin L. Brown for damages to sewer lines purportedly resulting from City parkway tree roots clogging City sewer lines, on or about September 21, 1974. f. Claim submitted by Jeffrey D. Stearman for injuries sustained to head purportedly as a result of being struck by police baton, on or about November 1, 1974. g. Claim submitted by A. J. Smith for damages sustained to windshield purportedly as a result of actions of Police Officers of the City of Anaheim, on or about November 1, 1974. h. Claim submitted by Marcos G. Morales for personal injuries purpor- tedly sustained as a result of condition of sidewalk at 529 Sunkist, on or about November 4, 1974. i, Claim submitted by Gozetta Johnson for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of upkeep of flooring at the Anaheim Room, Convention Center, as well as too many tables set up at hobby show, on or about November 11, 1974. MOTION CARRIED. 74-1131 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. CANCELLATION OF COUNTY TAXES: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the Orange'County Board of Supervisors was requested to cancel County tax~s on property acquired by the City of Anaheim for municipal purposes, pursuant to Resolution No. 74R-536, formerly assessed to Merchants National Realty Corpor- ation recorded November 1, 1974 as Document No. 315 in Book No. 11278 at Page No. 1754, Official Records of Orange County, California. MOTION CARRIED. TRANSFER OF REVENUE SHARING FUNDS: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council authorized the transfer of $61,300 in Federal Revenue Sharing Funds from the Riverdale Park Site Account to the Ball and Harbor Park Site Account (said property acquired pursuant to Resolution No. 74R-560, adopted November 12, 1974). MOTION CARRIED. VENDOR NAME CHANGE - UNIVERSAL REFUSE: On report from the City Manager that the pur- chase authorized by Council on November 5, 1974 from Universal Refuse Removal should actually have been from their parent company, Universal By-Products, Inc., for Wesco Repairs, Councilman Sneegas moved that the previous motion be amended to authorize purchase of two 1974 50,000 G.V.W. cab and chassis from Universal By-Products, Inc., for Wesco Repairs at the total cost of $42,389.40, including tax. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - FIRE HOSE: The City Manager reported on informal bids received for the purchase of various sizes of fire hose for the Fire Department as follows, and recommended that the bid be split in order to take advantage of lowest bids on all items: VENDOR American Rubber Co. Western Fire Equipment Wardlaw Fire Co. Goodall Rubber Co. TOTAL AHOUNT~ INCLUDING TAX $4,229.40 (Item 2 - 3000' 1½" x 50') 5,968.86 (Item 1 - 2500' 3" x 50') (Item 3 - 400' 3/4" x 100') NO QUOTE NO QUOTE On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the low bid of Western Fire Equipment was accepted for Item Nos. 1 and 3 in the amount of $5,968.86, including tax; and the low bid for Item No. 2, American Rubber Company was accepted in the amount of $4,229.40, including tax and the purchase of Item Nos. 1, 2, and 3, herewith authorized. MOTION CARRIED. PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - TEST SIMULATOR FOR WATER CENTRAL CONTROL AND TELEMETRY SYSTEM PHASES I AND II: The CityManager reported on the recommended purchase of a test simulator for Water Central Control and Telemetry System, Phases I and II and advised that the sole vendor, American Chain and Cable Company, Inc., Datamaster Division has submitted a quotation for said equipment, Model No. 425, for a total purchase price of $3,132.30, including tax and thereupon recommended the purchase be authorized. On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, purchase was authorized in the amount of $3,132.30, including tax. MOTION CARRIED. PURCNARE OF EQUIPMENT - USED AUSTIN WESTERN 220 CRANE: The City Manager presented recommendations from the Utilities Director, Water Superintendent and Mechanical Maintenance Superintendent that the City purchase a used Austin Western 220 Crane from Morgan Equipment Company in the amount of $44,950, together with feasibility report for use of an eight ton crane. Mr. Murdoch stated that the report and recommendation indicate that this purchase would be less expensive for the City as such equipment new would cost approximately $60,000. Further, this item has been budgeted at $44,500 and there is the availability to transfer the additional $450 from another account. On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the purchase of one used Austin Western 220 Crane from the Morgan Equipment Company in the amount of $44,950' including tax, was authorized. MOTION CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed, on motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood: 74-1132 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. a. Orange County Mosquito Abatement District - Minutes - October 17, 1974. b. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Application of The Gray Line Tours Company, a corporation, for authority under Section 454 of the Public Utilities Code to increase its fares. c. Community Center Authority - Minutes - October 21, 1974. d. Co~unity Redevelopment Commission - Minutes - November 6, 1974. e. Cultural Arts Commission - Minutes - October 9, 1974. f. Financial and Operating Reports for the month of September for the Electrical Division and the month of October for the Building and Customer Ser- vice Divisions. MOTION CARRIED. ORDINANCE NO. 3374: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3374 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE l, SECTION 1.04.110 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 1.04.560 CREATING A REDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3374 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3375: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3375 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (63-64-62 (16) - R-3) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Pebley, Sneegas and Thom Kaywood None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3375 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3376: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3376 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING PARAGRAPH 19 OF SECTION 14.32.190 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ENACTING A NEW PARAGRAPH 19 IN ITS PLACE PERTAIN- ING TO PARKING. (No parking at any time - La Palma Avenue, north side from Acacia Street to Liberty Lane; south side from Anna Drive to Hawthorne Street) ORDINANCE NO. 3377: Councilman Pebley offered Ordinance No. 3377 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 6.56, SECTION 6.56.010 BY ADDING THERETO A NEW SUBSECTION 6.56.010(4) RELATING TO POOLS AND PONDS. (Exception. provisions of this Chapter shallnot apply to swimming pools, fish ponds and other bodies of water larger than one-quarter (¼) acre.). OP, DINANCE NO. 3378: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3378 for first reading. AN OP. DI/~ANCE OF THE C~TY OF ANAHEIM APP~OVINO AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAI~IM AND THE BOAItD OF ADM1NISTIt4T~ON OF TH~ CALiFO~N~A EMFLOYEE~' ~T~M~NT SYSTEM AND AUTHORIZING THE MAY01~ AND T~E CITY CL~RK TO EX~CUTE SAZD AMENDMENT. (amendmen~ excludes police cede=s) ORDI~kN~E~O.~?Pt Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No, 3379 for first reading. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY OF ANAHEIM AMENDINC TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATINO TO ZONING. (71-73-51 (13) - R-E-22,000) 74-1133 City Hall~ Amaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. FTN_~.__MA~L~RACT NO. 7787: (Continued from the meetings of October 29, and November 5, 1974) Developer, Wittenberg National Company; property located north of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of Anaheim Hills Road and contains 50 RS-5000 zoned lots. The City Clerk submitted request dated November 15, 1974 from Eric A. Wittenberg of the Wittenberg National Corporation that consideration of Final Map, Tract No. 7787 be continued to the meeting of December 3, 1974. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, consideration of Final Map, Tract No. 7787 was continued to the meeting of December 3, 1974. MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION - CHANGE OF MUNICIPAL ELECTION DATE TO 'MARCH: Mr. Murdoch advised Council of a memorandum submitted from the City Clerk advising of recent provisions of the Elections Code requiring general law cities and districts to hold elections in March instead of April. Anaheim is required by Charter to hold their municipal election in April of even-numbered years and if it is desired to change to the March date, it would require the submission of such a Charter Amendment to the voters. Mr. Murdoch stated that he felt there is some advantage occasionally to having a separate election and for this reason does not recommend that Council make the change. In answer to Council questions, City Clerk Aloha Hougard replied that the cost for an election would basically be the same whether the date were in March or April, unless there were other County and school issues for decision at the March date and those jurisdictions wished to consolidate with Anaheim. In this event the costs would be pro-rated. Councilwoman Kaywood observed that there seems to be such a conglomera- tion of issues and so much material to absorb at election time that she tends to have mixed emotions about such a change. Mayor Thom stated that he would be in favor of it if the City could be assured of saving some money. Mr. Murdoch advised that there is no need for a decision at this time, but that if Council does wish to place this matter on the March 1975 ballot, the County must be notified by December 4, 1974. Following brief discussion, Council was of the general opinion that it would not be worthwhile monetarily for the City to place this Charter Amendment before the voters at a special election in March and no further action was taken. REQUEST - ANAHEIM RAND BOOSTERS - CO-SPONSORSHIP OF PACIFIC STATES BAND REVIEW~ NOVEMBER 30~ 1974: Mr. Julius Dallman, 550 South Lemon Street, President of the Anaheim Band Boosters Club and Chairman of the Pacific States Band Review, addressed the Council and advised that their organization is sponsoring a band review to be held at the Anaheim Stadium parking lot on Saturday, November 30, 1974, at 10:00 a.m. He advised that the intent of his request to appear before the Council today was to ask the City of Anaheim to act as co-sponsor of this event together with the Anaheim Band Boosters, which would then allow them the use of the City's name, as they would prefer to call this the "First Annual Anaheim Pacific States Band Review". The review will be a public service event conducted for the benefit of youth and community residents with public acclaim and recognition of high school bands. He advised that in excess of 2,500 band members and their families and friends are expected to attend this year. Mr. Dallman reported that the Anaheim High School Band Boosters have agreed to the routine contract terms for a public service event at the Stadium and hope, with Council's endorsement, to host the Pacific States Band Review on an annual basis. Mrs. Karen Breusing, 308 North Citron Street, gave her support to Mr. Dallman's statements. She encouraged the City Council to support the event since it will bring forth benefits for the City of Anaheim as well as for band members in general. She extended a special invitation to Council Members to attend the review, which is open to the public without charge. 74-1134 City Hal!~ Anaheim; California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Murdoch noted that this event would not be sponsored by the Anaheim Union High School District and inquired whether there would be any conflict with the Band Festival which they hold annually. Both Mr. Dallman and Mayor Thom advised that they had spoken with Superintendent Ken Wines who indicated there would be no conflict, since this review would include bands outside of the District. .Mr. Tom Liegler also stated that the Anaheim High School Band Boosters have met all obligations of the normal Stadium rental contract for events of this type. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Pebley, the City Council approved co-sponsorship of the "First Annual Anaheim Pacific States Band Review" to be held Saturday, November 30, 1974, 10:00 a.m., thereby allowing the use of the name "Anaheim" for the event. MOTION CARRIED. REPORT - FI~IAL STATUS OF CITY: Mr. M. R. Ringer, Finance Director, presented his su~ry of the City's financial status at the end of the first four months of Fiscal Yaar 1974-75. He noted that this report was prompted by Council's request for a up-date on the Civic Center Project financing following the election. Mr. Ringer advised that after reviewing these first four months, there is no quastion but that electric and water revenues will fall deficient, consis- tent with the request for rate increases which has been held over by Council. At this point it appears that City revenues are lagging two to three million dollars short of the revenue estimate. Mr. Ringer advised that other City revenues (sales, property and room tax, etc.) are not showing strength either due to the current economic climate. In addition, Mr. Ringer reported that all purchases of aquipment and materials coming before the Council are over the amounts budgeted due to the inflationary spiral. The Council also recently approved employee salary increases which are in excess of the budgeted 6%. Mr. Ringer stated that due to these factors, the City Council has to either datermine a method of obtaining additional revenue or reducing apPropria- tions and suigested that the deadline for this decision should be January 1, 1975. Mr. Ringer then reviewed the submitted financial report (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) with Council as follows: CIVIC C~TER PROJECT APPROPRIATIONS (PAGE NO. 1): Mr. Ringer explained the out- st~din$ itas and balances as listed on Page No. 1, which would require an addi- tio~al appropriation of $804,764 to complete the financing of the First Phase, Civic Center Project. He noted that the second page of the financial report deals with the budget for First Phase construction of the Civic Center and shows expenditures to date. ~NAp, PROPRIATED BALANCE: Mr. Ringer indicated that Page No. 4 of this report shows the status of the 1974-75 Unappropriated Balance, indicating that $1,859,028 was available in the Unappropriated Balance on July 1, 1974 and from this amount, $302,130 have already been allocated to other uses. In addition, appropriations have been requested to cover the 10.6% salary increases and seven firemen for Station No. 5 which cannot be funded from P.E.P. Funds. If the $804,764 neces- sary to complete Phase I construction of the Civic Center Project were added to these requested appropriations and taken from the Unappropriated Balance, this would leave $210,549 in this account. However Mr. Ringer pointed out that the City is close to receiving the Possessory Interest Tax Refund which would bring the account back to the million dollar level. APPROPRIATIONS IN THE ADOPTED 1974-75 BUDGET: Mr. Ringer noted that should Council decide not to attempt to increase revenues but rather to look at a reduc- tion of appropriations, he would refer them to Page No. 3 of his report. He noted that the fixed costs portion of the Budget totals $88,186,045 and covers bond service and purchase of power and water for resale. The variables portion of the Budget is comprised of 67.7% in salaries and frinse benefits and 32,2% in capital outlay, material and supplies, services and other charges. 74-1135 City Hall~ Anahe£m~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Ringer noted that in the $36,000,000 figure shown for purchase of power particularly, it is increasingly difficult for the City to determine what the total power cost will be because of the fuel cost adjustment. It is possible that the Budget figure will not be sufficient. Councilman Pebley voiced the opinion that this report indicates the Council should have approved the electric and water rate increases as recommended to be effective in September. Councilman Seymour disagreed with Councilman PebleY, pointing out that at the time these recommended increases were presented, in excess of $1,000,000 of the 1.6 million ($1,650,460) which it was estimated these increases would generate, was pinpointed from other sources. He stated that what Council is now considering is the allocation of these funds to build Phase I of the Civic Center rather than leaving them as unappropriated so as to off-set the utility increases. Mr. Murdoch clarified that this is true only if that is what the Council elects to do; that this information is presented now so Council will be apprised of the City's financial status at this point, recognizing that particularly in the purchase of power the City is relying on the best information they can get from Southern California Edison. He noted that up to this time, the City's estimates on power costs have been on the pessimistic side, but he did not think the City could take the chance of being over optimistic as regard to future rates. He stated that the City Council is facing some difficult decisions on the Civic Center Project and funding for same. Mr. Murdoch cautioned however, that he would not recommend that Council wait until January 1, 1975 on all of these decisions. He felt that if Council wishes to proceed with Phase I Civic Center construction, the sooner that deter- · mination is made the better. Similarly, if utility rate increases are to be adopted, if that rate is adopted sooner rather than waiting, a lower rate can be implemented to generate the same amount of money. Conversely, if Council does not wish to implement rate increases, the alternative is to trim the Budget in some substantial areas and this too he would recommend be determined as early as possible. In answer to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Ringer reported that expenditures made by the City on the Civic Center Project at present total $404,845.20. Councilwoman Kaywood inquired as to how the City of Anaheim electric rates presently compare with Southern California Edison rates and Mr. Hoyt responded that as of Wednesday, November 13, 1974, the City of Anaheim residen- tial rates were 9% less than Edison; Anaheim commercial rates were 7 to 11% lower; and Anaheim industrial rates were 13 to 15% lower. Mr. Hoyt submitted a schedule, for Council's information only, which indicates the possibilities for generating monies to be transferred to the General Fund, i.e., the dates which certain rates must be effective to produce the desired level of return to the General Fund. He indicated that presently the Utilities Department is forecasting a transfer of $3,000,000 which is approximately $3,300,000 less than the amount budgeted for transfer. Mr. Hoyt noted that Table No. 3 of the information submitted shows the various estimates of fuel cost adjustments as compared with the City's actual experiences with them. This indicates that to date the City has paid less than what has been estimated. He related that these estimates are based on the best information which Southern California Edison can produce. In reply to Councilman Pebley, Mr. Hoyt advised that the increases recommended to be effective September 1, 1974, if implemented at that time, would have produced $4,690,000 in electrical revenues and $1,275,000 in water revenues. He also advised in answer to Councilman Pebley that the Anaheim rate would have been equal to Edison until last Wednesday, at which time they were granted an increase, and would currently be lower. Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that during the bond election in 1970 the citizens were advised that the Anaheim rates would be less than and not equal to Edison rates. 74-1136 City Hal!.~.~gahetm, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. Mr. Hoyt pointed out that the increases requested for September 1, 1974, were for the purpose of balancing the Budget and not for running the Utilities Department. Councilman Seymour noted that at the time the subject rate increases were recommended (see Council Minutes of August 27, 1974, Page Nos. 74-868 through 74-871) the stated sum which would be lost due to delaying this increase was $1,650,460, and that was the only recommended increase which Council did not approve. He inquired then as to why there appears to be a deficiency of $3,300,000 instead of the $1,650,460. Mr. Hoyt advised that this is due to the fact that fuel cost adjust- ments passed on by Southern California Edison were much higher than were projected. In addition, the Utility is selling fewer kilowatt hours of power. Again he stressed the point that as the situation stands today, the Utilities Department is projecting a transfer of $3,000,000 and that this is $3,261,000 less than what was budgeted for transfer to the General Fund for this Fiscal Year. The maximum revenues which could be generated while remaining within the criteria of not exceeding the Edison rates, and the dates by which these rates must be implemented are shown on the information supplied to Council. Councilman Sneegas observed that if the same increases and unknown fac- tors continue to endure, the result may be that the utility will not have even this $3,000,000 to transfer in another six months. He stated that in view of the current economy this is not the time to avoid passing on the increased costs necessary to stay in business. Mayor Thom stated that if the City cannot operate a utility and provide services for less than Edison, then why should it operate at all. Councilman Pebley contended that if Anaheim's rates were equal to Edison, the utility would be returning $6,000,000 per year to the General Fund, and that is $6,000,000 which the citizens would not have to pay in property taxes, etc. Councilwoman Kaywood remarked that she hoped the Anaheim Utilities Department, because they are in the electrical business,'does not adopt the atti- tude of encouraging people to use more energy, since it is essential that conser- vation be stressed. MX. Hoyt further reported that since the only adjustment which can be · a~e in races is the fuel cost adjustment, it is a relatively simple matter to effect an increase in terms of the mechanical procedures. He reported that there will be a race increase effective approximately January 1, 1975 over which the City has no control, that which is the result of enactment of the Warren Bill. At the conclusion of discussion, Councilman Seymour requested that more detailed recapitulation of the budgeted items and current status of same be pre- pared for Council information. He also requested that some alternatives be offered, should Council decide to look at the variables portion of the Budget and attempt to trim some areas. pared. Mr. Hurdoch advised that he would have this additional information pre- No further action was taken by the City Council. Pg~J~_ISSION TO LEAVE THE STATE - COUNCILWOMAN KAYWOOD: On motion by Councilman Thom, 'Seconded' by Councilman Seymour, Councilwoman Kaywood was granted permission t° leave the State for 90 days. MOTION CARRIED. A~aheinrl a~nual dues in the gattonal Leasue of Cities to the a~wunt o£ du~ ~tch ~. Mu~doch advised chat theae duea are a budSeCad item amd chac semites provided, especially fesardins ~n~oFifls of Federal ~tSi~la~ion, would be difficult for ~he City ~o duplicate. At the conclusion of discussion, by saneral consent, the Council autho- rtsad payment of the National Leasue of Cities annual dues. 74-1137 Qity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ RECESS: Councilman Pebley moved to reces's until 7:30 p.m. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:05 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: PRBSENT ABSENT PRESENCE Mayor Thom called the meeting to order. (7:30 P.M.) COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Sneegas (arrived at 7:40 P.M.), and Thom COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: Robert M. Davis CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER: William G. Devitt ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - FAIRMONT BOULEVARD GENERAL ALIGNMENT: To consider the establishment of a general alignment of Fairmont Boulevard from Santa Ana Canyon Road to Canyon Rim Road. Continued from the meeting of October 29, 1974 to this date to study further proposed alternate alignments. CONTINUED PUBLIC ~F~RING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1490 AND VARIANCE NO. 2630~ TENTATIVE HAPm TRACT NO. 8560~ REVISION NO. 3 (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 120): Submitted by Henry F. and Ethel C. Del Giorgio to establish a 5-unit planned residential development to be used as a model home complex with sales office for one tentative tract with a total of 85-dwelling units, with Code waiver of: a. Maximum number of signs. And to construct an 83-1ot R-H-22,000 subdivision (Tentative Map, Tract No. 8560, Revision No. 3) with Code waiver of: a. Minimum lot size. Said petitions were submitted together with a supplement dated August 29, 1974 to E.I.R. No. 120 which the City Planning Commission recommended be certified as in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and incorporated into E.I.R. No. 120. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC74-192 and PC74-193 granted Conditional Use Permit No. 1490 and Variance No. 2630 respec- tively, subject to conditions and by motion, approved Tentative Map, Tract No. 8560, Revision No. 3, also subject to conditions. Review of action taken by the City Planning Commission was requested by Mayor Thom at the October 8, 1974 City Council meeting, and public hearing scheduled for October 29, 1974. Said public hearing was continued from October 29, 1974 to this date to be considered in conjunction with alternate proposals for the general alignment of Fairmont Boulevard. Mayor Thom advised that the Applicant's Attorney has requested an opportunity to make a statement and he recognized Mr. Thomas H. Baldikoski. Mr. Baldikoski, General Counsel for the McCarthy Company of Southern California, reported that during the two-week interval following the October 29, 1974 continuance to this date, the McCarthy Company had an opportunity to do more definitive cost analysis which has disclosed that the project, as presented, has become economically unfeasible. He reported, therefore, that he has been instruc- ted to respectfully request that the City Council permit the McCarthy Company at this time to withdraw Conditional Use Permit No. 1490, Variance No. 2630 and Tentative Map, Tract No. 8560, Revision No. 3, and any other related matters pending. Mr. Baldikoski indicated that he felt this situation to be a classic case which bears some explanation. He related that because of the nature of the terrain and the unique position taken by the landowners, i.e., that development 74-1138 City Hall., Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19~ 1974~ 1:30 P.M. not maximize the land value, the McCarthy Company intended to develop a "show place" project of which it could be proud. They attempted to do something other than mass grading since the McCarthy Company felt that maximum density with mass grading and gridiron street patterns was not really what people desired. He described their first attempt in this direction, which was a cluster housing type of project with open areas and trees left in between. The yield for this project was 131 single-family dwelling units, and this was denied by the Anaheim City Planning Commission in May of 1973. After acquiring the remainder of the prop- erty from Mr. Del Giorgio, they put together a potential subdivision plan for 99 lots which was denied in April of 1974 by the Anaheim .City Council. The density was subsequently reduced to 96 lots and the proposed project was still denied. The McCarthy Company then came up with the concept of an 85-1ot subdivision on 22,000-square foot minimum residential lots, in compliance with the zone for which the property was designated, and this was approved by the City Planning Commission and was scheduled for public hearing by Council on October 29, 1974. Mr. Baldikoski related that during the time these concepts were con- sidered, the problem of alignment of Fairmont Boulevard always remained in the background. In order to accommodate the alignment proposed on October 29, 1974, the lots in this subdivision were further reduced to 83. At this point, however, he reported that whatever general alignment is set for Fairmont Boulevard, it. makes the McCarthy Company project unfeasible. Mr. Baldikoski cited some of the increased costs, indicating that basic development costs have increased by 50%; fees and bonds increased from $127,000 to $234,000, and if various City ordinances were rigidly applied, the McCarthy Company would be responsible for construction of a block wall and installation of landscaping, including sprinklers, on a massive slope adjacent to Fairmont Boulevard. Consequently, the costs of these eventual homes increased to a point where the McCarthy Company was forced to withdraw from the project even though their costs to date have exceeded $100,000. Mr. Baldikoski indicated that both Developer and adjacent homeowners' groups who were in opposition to the project have to share the fault for this project not coming to fruition. Mr. Baldikoski indicated that his prior comments were made on behalf of the McCarthy Company only, but that the following is a joint statement authorized by the McCarthy Company and the property owners, Henry and Ethel Del Giorgio. He advised that with a project such as the one the McCarthy Company proposed on natural terrain, all of the alternate alignments proposed for Fairmont Boulevard make it economically unfeasible. He recommended to the homeowners present that if they do have another opportunity to review or comment upon a proposed creative ~.project that regardless of their position on that project, they retain the memory that time delays add a terrific cost impact to a project and in all likeli- hood can destroy the developer's efforts. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council terminated, without prejudice, all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1490, Variance No. 2630 and Tentative Map, Tract No. 8560, Revision No. 3, as requested. MOTION CARRIED. The Mayor recognized a spokesman from the audience who requested the opportunity to present a short statement in rebuttal to Mr. Baldikoski's remarks, to which the Council acceded. Mr. Farrell Weber, 1024 Via Vista, Anaheim, took exception to the implications in Mr. Baldikoski's remarks that it is the homeowners who have caused the problem and who now have made it economically unfeasible for the McCarthy Company to develop the Del Giorgio property. He stated that the McCarthy Company n~ver sought to propose anything for this property which was consistent with existing homes in that area, i.e., a 22,000-square foot lot size. He advised that there is a developer (Criterion Homes) building in that area Just across the street from the Del Giorgio property, in accordance with all existing Code require- ments, who did not seek variances from the City Council for lot size. Mr. Weber stated if it is possible for Criterion Homes to develop such a tract, he could not understand why it would be impossible for the McCarthy Company to develop the Del Giorgio property according to Code also. He reiterated that it is inaccurate to state that the homeowners are stopping development and that he did not want the City Council to think that £his is indeed the case. 74-1139 City Hall. Amaheim. California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 19. 1974. 1:30 P.M. GEN~.~ ALIGNMENT - FAIRMONT BOULEVARD: Mayor Thom called for comments from staff re~ardinm the advisability of proceedinm with the establishment of an ali~mment for Fairmont Boulevard in light of the Petitioners' withdrawal of the development proposal for the Del Giorgio property. City Engineer James Maddox advised that it is still necessary to estab- lish the ali~nment to provide access from Canyon Rim Road to Santa Aha Canyon Road, although the decision no longer carries the urgency it did. He also noted that establishment of the ali~%ment would permit the City to conduct the neces- sary title searches so as to establish the precise ali~nment. Councilman Seymour voiced his opinion that if staff is proposin~ the ali~ment shown as Alternate "C-2" this would constitute a harsh requirement as it affects the Del Giorgio property, and since, it appears this property will not now be im~inently developed, further consideration should be given in this regard. He related that as result of the last discussion of this alignment on October 29, 1974, Council became concerned with the two other property owners who had not, to that point, given any indication of developing their property, and he contended that Mr. Del Giorgio, who is no longer developing his property either, deserves equal consideration with the other property owners. Councilman Seymour further pointed out that Mr. Del Giorgio's holdings, consisting of 61½ acres, constitute a large piece of ground under one ownership, and if a developer is going to attempt something imaginative, the larger the piece of ground, the better are his chances for success. Me indicated that he would be in favor of continuing the matter for 30 to 60 days, to ascertain whether or not any developer is interested in this property prior to establishing this alignment, so that the effect of that alignment on the proposed development may be weighed. If, within that time frame, no movement towards development has been made, then the Council can take a stern look at establishing the alignment. City Engineer Maddox advised that Council has until June 30, 1975 to establish the alignment, and if necessary can request an extension of time beyond that date. Councilman Seymour moved to continue the public hearing on the general alignment of Fairmont Boulevard to March 4, 1975. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Watts advised that since the public hearing has been continued so far in advance, he would expect that staff would undertake to notify the adjacent property owners shortly prior to that date. Mr. Maddox also advised that he would intend to have several meetings with affected property owners prior to this meeting in the hopes of establishing an alignment which is agreeable to 90% of them. ADJOURNMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn to Wednesday, November 20, 1974, at 10:00 a.m. in the Management Control Center, 114 South Claudina Street. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 8:10 P.M.