1973/11/0673-893
Cit~z Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
COUNCILMEN: None
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust
CITY ENGINEER: James P. Maddox
FINANCE DIRECTOR: M. R. Ringer
PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR: John J. Collier
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES: Ronald Thompson
ZONING SUPERVISOR: Charles Roberts
Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order.
INVOCATION: Reverend Daniel Fernandez of the 7th Day Adventist Church gave
the Invocation.
FLA~ SALUTE: Councilman Mark A. Stephenson led the Assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Dutton and
unanimously approved by the City Council:
"United States Marine Corps Week in Anaheim" - The Week of
November 10, 1973.
"Youth Appreciation Week" - November 12 - 18, 1973.
SUGGESTION PROGRAM AWARDS: Mayor Dutton issued awards to City employees in
recognition of the best suggestions received as follows:
Steve Tokai, Engineering Division, received a $50 bond for two sug-
gestions - 1.) Placement of a clock in the car pool check out room
for a more accurate time reporting system; 2.) Lowering the block
wall in the employee parking lot which obstructs the view of on-com-
ing traffic.
Howard Weber, Engineering Division, received a $25 bond for his sug-
gestion that a telephone be placed in the Engineering Records vault
to enable employees to answer the phone when working in the vault.
Captain Norbert Mang, Police Department, received a plaque for his
suggestion of a system that more accurately points out changes in
personnel rules.
The Mayor congratulated all three employees and thanked them for
submitting their beneficial suggestions.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: Mr. Frank Campagnoni, of the City Personnel
Department, introduced 31 new employees attending the Council meeting
as part of the City's orientation program.
Mayor Dutton w~lcomed the new employees.
MINUTES: Minutes of the Anaheim City Council Regular Meetin~ held October 9, 1973
were approved, on motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Sneegas.
MOTION CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilman Sneeg~s moved to waive
the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions, and that consent to the
waiver of reading is hereby given by all Councilmen unless, after reading of
the title, specific request is made by a Councilman for the reading of such
ordinance or resolution. Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
REPORT - FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY: Demands against the City in the amount
of $1,208,773.70, in ac~'ordance with the 1973-74 Budget, were approved.
73-894
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-15; AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 112; RE-
CLASSIFICATION NOS. 73-74-1, 73-74-9, 73-74-10 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMP--
TION STATUS FOR SAID ACTIONS:
1. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-15: Initiated by the City Planning Commission for
a change in zoning from R-A (Urgency Ordinance) to R-A on property southerly of
Catalina Avenue (and its westerly extension) between Ranchito Drive (and its
northerly extension) and Brookhurst Street; and also between Bircher Street and
Brookhurst Street; and additionally on the west side of Brookhurst Street and on
the north side of Lincoln Avenue. (Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation)
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-186,
recommended said reclassification be approved unconditionally.
The City Council at the meeting of September 25, 1973 determined that
the environmental impact of Reclassification No. 73-74-15 would be trivial in
nature and that no environmental impact report or statement would therefore be
required. Consideration of Reclassification No. 73-74-15 was continued from
September 25, 1973 to this date to amend the description of the property incor-
porating those lots on Ranchito Drive and Bircher Street at the rear of the
Brookhurst Street frontage, and to be heard in conjunction with Reclassification
Nos. 73-74-1, 73-74-9 and 73-74-10 as well as Area Development Plan No. 112.
2. AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 112 ~READVERTIS~D)- To study appropriate zoning and
to explore the need for secondary access to those properties fronting on Brook-
hurst Street. Property is the area generally bounded by Lincoln Avenue on the
south; Catalina Avenue and its westerly extension on the north; those properties
fronting on Kathryn Drive on the west and by those properties fronting on Lindsay
Street to the east (Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation).
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-164,
recommended approval of Area Development Plan No. 112, Exhibit "~' and pursuant
to Resolution No. PC73-224, reaffirmed their recommendation, subsequent to the
continuation of the public hearing on Reclassification No. 73-74-15 by the City
Council in order to amend the description to include an additional tier of lots
adjacent to those lots fronting on both sides of Brookhurst Street.
3. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-1 (READVERTISED): Initiated by theCity Planning
Commission for a change in zone from R-A to R-1 on those residential properties
both west and east of Brookhurst Street, which front on Kathryn Drive, Ranchito
Avenue and Woodley Avenue; and also those which front on Bircher Street, Hilbers
Road and Lindsay Street. (Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation)
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-225,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and that said re-
classification be approved unconditionally.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Sneegas,
seconded by Councilman Stephenson, it was the finding of the City Council that
the impact of said reclassification would be trivial in nature and that no envir-
onmental impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
4. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-9 <READVERTISED~: Initiated by the City Planning~
Commission for change in zone from R-A to C-1 on those properties southerly of
Catalina Avenue (and its westerly extension) between Ranchito Drive (and its
northerly extension) and Brookhurst Street; and also between Bircher Street and
Brookhurst Street. (Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation)
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-226,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and that a portion
of said reclassification being only those lots fronting onto Brookhurst Street
and the two easterly lots fronting onto Woodley Avenue be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the sidewalks shall be installed along Brookhurst Street as
required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifi-
cations on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Brookhurst Street for street light-
ing purposes.
73-895
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Brookhurst Street for tree
planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department.
6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the east
or west property line(s).
7. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
8. That any parking area lighting proposed shall be down-lighting
of a maximum height of six feet, which lighting shall be directed away from
the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area.
9. That the final parking plan shall be approved by the Development
Services Department, and any landscaped areas in the parking area shall be pro-
tected with six-inch high concrete curbs, and concrete wheel stops shall be
provided for parking spaces.
10. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a man~
net that is satisfactory to the City Engineer.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro-
perty, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, above mentioned, shall
be completed. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall be-
come null and void by action of the City Council unless said conditions are
complied with within one year from the date hereof or such further time as the
City Council may grant.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Thom,
seconded by Councilman Pebley, it was the finding of the City Council that the
impact of said reclassification would be trivial in nature and that no envir-
onmental impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
5. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-10 (READVERTISED): Initiated by the City Plan-
ning Commission for a change in zone from R-A to C-3 (being on both sides of
a 250-foot length of Kathryn Drive) and the northwest corner of Lincoln Avenue
and Brookhurst Street. (Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation)
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 'PC73-227,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and that said
reclassification be approved for C-1 zoning subject to the following conditions:
1. That the sidewalks shall be installed along the west side of
Kathryn Drive as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard
plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Kathryn Drive, Brookhurst Street
and Lincoln Avenue for street lighting purposes.
3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Kathryn Drive, Brookhurst
Street and Lincoln Avenue for tree planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and
determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department.
6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the north
property lines except where abutting other C-1 property.
7. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
8. That any parking area lighting proposed shall be down-lighting
of a maximum height of six feet, which lighting shall be directed away from
the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area.
9. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a
manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer.
10. That Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9, above mentioned,
shall be complied with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized
under this resolution, or prior to the time that the building permit is issued,
or within a period of one year from the date hereof, whichever occurs first,
or such further time as the City Council may grant.
73-896
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Sneegas,
seconded by Councilman Dutton, it was the finding of the City Council that the
impact of said reclassification would be trivial in nature and that no environ-
mental impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
On recommendation of the Zoning Supervisor and with Council's concur-
rence, it was decided that Area Development Plan No. 112 and alt reclassifica-
tions pertaining to that area (Reclassification Nos. 73-74-15, 73-74-1, 73-74-9
and 73-74-10) would be considered together.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts related that the area referred to in Area
Development Plan No. 112 and related zoning actions is that portion of the pro-
perty within the Kathryn-Lindsay Annexation which lies north of Lincoln Avenue,
on both sides of Brookhurst Street, and extends two residential streets to the
east and west of Brookhurst Street.
For the purposes of discussion, this area was divided into Portion Nos.
iA, lB, 2 and 3 as follows:
Portion No. lA - consists of thoseresidental properties which front on.
Kathryn Drive, Ranchito Street and Woodley Avenue.
Portion No. lB - consists of those residental properties which front on
Bircher Street, Hilbers Road, Lindsay Street and Lindsay Road.
Portion No. 2 - consists of those properties south of Catalina Avenue,
being one tier of lots on both sides of Brookhurst Street and the two easterly
lots on Woodley Avenue.
Portion No. 3 - consists of property at the northwest corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Brookhurst Street, being on both sides of a 250-foot length of Kathryn
Drive.
Mr. Roberts further reported that Portion Nos. lA and lB refer to that
property which was zoned R-1 in the County; Portion No. 2 to that property which
was designated residential-professional in the County; Portion No. 3 to that
property which was designated general-commercial or C-1 in the County. (Exhibits
were posted indicating the three portions and the alternate zoning proposals and
these were utilized by Mr. Roberts during his presentation.)
Mr. Roberts reported that the owner of the majority of the property
within Portion No. 3 did make application in 1958 for City of Anaheim C-3 zoning
and a resolution of intent approving C-3 was adopted. However one of the condi-
tions of approval was that completion of annexation proceedings pending at that
time be completed within a specified amount of time, which condition was not com-
pleted until just recently, some 15 years hence.
Mr. Roberts reported on the circulation pattern for the area, noting
that Portion No. 1 is served by single-family residential streets with exits on-
to Lincoln Avenue on the east side of Brookhurst Street and onto both Lincoln
Avenue and Brookhurst Street on the westerly side of Brookhurst. Brookhurst
Street bisects the study area and currently carries a very heavy volumnof traffic~
approximately 30,000 vehicles per day, which is projected to increase to 40,000
vehicles per day within ten years. Brookhurst Street presently has four travel
lanes, two in either direction with parking on both sides and continuous left-
turn pocket.
The Traffic Engineer has indicated that the Arterial Highway Financing
Program calls for Brookhurst Street to be increased to six traffic lanes with
left-turn lane. The State Division of Highways and the City are participating
in a proposal to widen the Brookhurst Street-Santa Aha Freeway bridges some time
in the future. The Traffic Engineer has recommended elimination of the on-street
parking along Brookhurst Street within the study area in order to gain additional
traffic lanes in each direction which would accommodate the projected increased
traffic load.
Mr. Roberts advised that generally, where residential lots have been
converted to commercial uses, it has been required that vehicular access rights
73-897
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
to arterial highways be dedicated to the City and pointed out that in the study
area all of the lots fronting on Brookhurst Street do have vehicular access
at the present time.
Mr. Roberts further reported that the average lot size within Portion
Nos. lA and lB is within the 7,200-square foot range; in Portion No. 2 due to
the recent widening of Brookhurst Street, the lots average 70-foot wide with
an 84-foot depth. All of these lots are developed with single-family residen-
tial structures
Mr. Roberts outlined the alternative zoning proposals which were con-
sidered by the City Planning Commission as follows:
Zoning Proposal No. 1: This alternative proposes that all of the
parcels which were zoned R-1 in the County would retain the R-1 Zone (Portion
Nos. iA and lB); that the same type of commercial zoning (C-1 or C-O) would
be applied to the one tier of lots fronting on Brookhurst Street (Portion No.
2); that all of Portion No. 3 be placed in the C-1 Zone.
Zoning Proposal No. 2: This was the result of correspondence sub-
mitted to Council the last time the matter was discussed and explores the pos-
sibility of establishing commercial zoning on more property than under Zoning
Proposal No. 1 by extending the C-1 designation from those lots fronting on
either side of Brookhurst Street to include the second tier of lots fronting
on both Ranchito and Bircher Streets; the other zoning designations remaining
the same as Proposal No. 1.
Mr. Roberts reported that the Land Use Element of the General Plan
indicates the areas both east and west of the Brookhurst frontage to be appro-
priate for low density residential developments; the west side of Brookhurst
appropriate for general commercial and the east side for C-O zoning. The area
at the northwest corner of the intersection of Lincoln and Brookhurst was des-
ignated appropriate for general commercial use.
A variety of alternatives for secondary access solutions were consid-
ered by the Development Services staff, and the recommendation of the Traffic
Engineer was the continued unrestricted access to Brookhurst Street with re-
moval of on-street parking which will improve left-turn egress and accommodate
the anticipated increase in traffic volumn.
Mr. Roberts reviewed the recommendations of the City Planning Commis-
sion relative to Area Development Plan No. 112 and related zoning actions, and
noted that the Planning Commission did receive a petition containing the signa-
tures of 138 single-family homeowners in opposition to the expansion of commer-
cial zoning to incorporate the second tier of lots which front on Ranchito and
Bircher Streets. He advised that the City Planning Commission recognizes there
are uses existing in Portion No. 3 which would be non-conforming uses in the
C-1 Zone they have recommended for said area but have determined that if con-
ditional use permits were initiated this would bring these uses into conformance.
Councilman Thom inquired as to what would happen if one of these non-
conforming businessess desired to enlarge their operation.
Mr. Roberts replied that the non-conforming use section of the Code
states that a non-conforming business cannot be expanded so that if the Council
did not initiate conditional use permits at the time of zoning then the peti-
tioner would have to initiate same at such time as he wanted to expand his
operation. He added that even if conditional use permits were intitated and
granted at this time, if any of the uses were to be expanded it would require
review at least by the Planning Commission and Council and depending upon the
extent of the proposed additions, it might involve additional conditional use
permits.
Mayor Dutton asked if anyone wished to address the Council relative
to Reclassification Nos. 73-74-15, 73-74-1, 73-74-9, 73-74-10 or Area Develop-
ment Plan No. 112.
Mr. Bill Cooper, property owner at 130 North Brookhurst, voiced his
agreement with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission with the
73-898
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973, 1:30 P.M.
exception that he would be opposed to removal of on-street parking along Brook-
hurst Street as recommended. He advised that while his property was still
County territory, he dedicated 20 feet of his frontage for the widening of
Brookhurst Street and in so doing gave up approximately five parking spaces.
He advised that the street in front of his property is currently three lanes
wide in either direction and has a left-turn pocket with on-street parking. If
now the street parking is taken away, he remarked that this will limit his park-
ing tremendously and place a burden on his business.
At Councilman Dutton's request, Mr. Cooper pointed out the approximate
location of his property on one of the posted exhibits.
City Engineer Maddox advised that Mr. Cooper's information is correct,
there are six lanes and left-turn lane at that location and that there is no
intent to remove on-street parking where the street has already been widened to
six lanes.
Mr. Roberts explained that the Traffic Engineer's recommendation for
removal of on-street parking applies if the individual parcels continue to have
unrestricted access, if there was land assembly and a resulting limited num-
ber of access points, then the number of conflict points would be reduced to the
extent that on-street parking could be permitted.
Mr. Oscar Lauderback, 12201 Burns Drive, Garden Grove, stated that he
and his partner own an "L" shaped parcel of land in Portion No. 3 of the area
under discussion. He advised that they do not own the portion on which the gas-
oline station is location nor do they any long own the bank property. He stated
that he feels they are justified in their request for C-3 zoning on the property
and presented the following reasons in support of this request: 1.) That they
have owned the property since 1954 and are therefore not land speculators seeking
to capitalize on a recent investment; 2.) That the property has been in the
County's General-Commercial Zone since 1954; 3.) That the Anaheim City Council
in 1958 adopted a resolution of intent to the C-3 use as requested subject to
annexation proceedings being completed within a specified time. He stated that
all of the other conditions with the exception of the annexation were completed.
4.) That portions of the property (the car wash and tire sale facility) have
had C-3 usage for 7½ years and 10½ years.
Further, Mr. Lauderback advised that he has purchased the City's Zoning
Code, and, on his own investigation, within one-half mile of his property dis-
covered 13 C-3 uses on Lincoln Avenue and six C-3 uses on Brookhurst Street. He
advised that due to an error, Portion No. 3 was advertised for £-3 zoning twice
prior to this hearing and not a single protest was received.
Mr. Lauderback concluded that for these reasons he and his partner feel
their request for C-3 zoning is justified. In addition, he stated that the pend-
ing zoning actions at this public hearing, if approved, would add nine and one-
tenth acres of C-1 property to the immediate vicinity of his property, which will
be competing for C-1 tenants.
In answer to Councilman Pebley's query regarding the uses allowed in
Portion No. 3 under County zoning, it was ascertained that conditional use per-
mit was obtained for the car wash but not for the tire facility or the Jack-in-
the-Box restaurant, and Mr. Roberts concluded that the County zone permitted
more intense commercial uses than the City of Anaheim C-1 Zone would permit.
Mr. Lauderback further pointed out that his property is so situated~.
as to be completely dependent upon automobile traffic for any successful commer-
cial use. He contended that if he is able to offer his property as C-3 he will
be more likely to obtain appropriate commercial tenants. He stated that he has
no fear of losing either of the tenants now on his property but that the C-3
Zone would aid him in leasing the vacant property to the north on Brookhurst.
Councilman Pebley expressed the opinion that if this property owner
was told he would retain his County C-3 zoning upon annexation, then this Council
should honor that prior commitment.
Councilman Dutton further noted that it has always been the policy of
the Council that when an area is annexed, it is given the City zoning nearest to
its County zoning designation.
73-899
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Lauderback stated that he does not plan' to abuse C-3 zoning,
that he is particular in selecting his tenants and that he would be willing
to accept certain modifications to the Zone, such as a landscape provision.
At Council's request, Mr. Roberts advised that the C-3 Site Develop-
ment Standards are limited and not up to the same quality as those of the C-1
Zone. Further Mr. Roberts summarized the various uses existing in Portion No.
3--gasoline service station, tire facility, Jack-in-the-Box restaurant, bank,
car wash, Orange Julius restaurant--and advised that whether they are in the
C-1 or C-3 Zones, the two walk-up restaurants and the car wash would still
require conditional use permits.
Mr. Bob Burglin, 517 South Archer, stated that he operates the car
wash locatiOn within Portion No. 3 and he would prefer to have the property
zoned C-3 rather than C-1 since he wishes to remodel this facility. Because
the tire operation is under lease to him, he stated he is therefore as concerned
as Mr. Lauderback regarding the zoning of the property and related that it is
sometimes difficult to obtaina tenant whena conditional use permit is required
for certain activities.
Mr. Lewis Dexter~ 305 North Ranchito, spoke in favor of zoning Pro-
posal No. 1. He indicated that there was apparently some misunderstanding in
the neighborhood about the City's intent, however once that was cleared up,
a significant number of the property owners, particularly on the westerly side
of Brookhurst, signed a petition indicating that they were in favor of retain-
ing the second tier of lots in the R-1 Zone. Further Mr. Dexter indicated that
he personally would not be opposed to C-3 zoning of the property in Portion No.
3, as requested by Mr. Lauderback, since he feels a good tax base is important,
and therefore the property owners should be allowed the best economic use of
his land.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council relative
to Area Development Plan No. 112 or Reclassification Nos. 73-74-15, 73-74-1,
73-74-9, 73-74-10, hearing no response, declared the hearing on all of these
items closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-520 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-15: Councilman Sneegas
offered Resolution No. 73R-520 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of the
necessary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Com-
mission from R-A (Urgency Ordinance) to R-A (Portion Nos. 2 and 3).
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
(73-74-15 - R-A (Portion Nos. 2 and 3)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-520 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3228: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 3228 for first
reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-15 - R-A)
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-521 - AREA DEVELOPMENT~PLAN NO. 112: Councilman Thom offered
Resolution No. 73R-521 adopting Area Development Plan No. 112 in accordance with
Exhibit No. A as recommended by the City Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
73=900
CitY Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AREA
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 112, EXHIBIT "A".
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-521 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-522 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-1: Councilman Thom offered
Resolution No. 73R-522 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of the neces-
sary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission
to R-1 (Portion No. iA and lB) in accordance with Zoning Proposal No. 1.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
(73-74-1 - R-l)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenso~, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-522 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-523 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-9: Councilman Pebley offered
Resolution No. 73R-523 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of the neces-
sary ordinance, changing the zone as recommended by the City Planning Commission
to C-1 (Portion No. 2) in accordance with Zoning Proposal No. 1, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the sidewalks shall be installed along Brookhurst Street as
required by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifi-
cations on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Brookhurst Street for street light-
ing purposes.
3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Brookhurst Street for tree
planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department.
6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along all
boundaries separating C-1 and R-1 properties.
7. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
8. That any parking area lighting proposed shall be down-lighting
of a maximum height of six feet, which lighting shall be directed away from
the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area.
9. That the final parking plan shall be approved by the Development
Services Department, and any landscaped areas in the parking area shall be pro-
tected with six-inch high concrete curbs, and concrete wheel stops shall be
provided for parking spaces.
73-901
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
10. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a
manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro-
perty, Condition Nos. 2 and 3, above mentioned, shall be completed. The pro-
visions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by
action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one
year from the date hereof or such further time as the City Council may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, above mentioned,
shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit where exist-
ing structures are being modified; or prior to final building and zoning in-
spection where new construction is proposed or where existing structures are
removed to make way for new construction.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
(73-74-9 - C-1)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-523 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-524 - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-10: Councilman Pebley
offered Resolution No. 73R-524 for adoption, authorizing the preparation of
the necessary ordinance, changing the zone from R-A to C-3, subject to the
following conditions: (Portion No. 3)
1. That the sidewalks shall be installed along the west side of
Kathryn Drive as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with stan-
dard plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City
of Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Kathryn Drive, Brookhurst
Street and Lincoln Avenue for street lighting purposes.
3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City
of Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot alongKathrynDrive, Brookhurst
Street and Lincoln Avenue for tree planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance
with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public
Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department.
6. That a six-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the
north property lines except where abutting other C-1 property.
7. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
8. That any parking area lighting proposed shall be down-lighting
of a maximum height of six feet, which lighting shall be directed away
from the property lines to protect the residential integrity of the area.
9. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a
manner that is satisfactory to the City Engineer.
10. Subject property shall be developed in conformance with the
site development standards of the C-1 Zone.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezonlng subject
property, Condition Nos. 2 and 3, above mentioned, shall be completed. The
provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by
action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one
year from the date hereof or such further time as the City Council may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, above mentioned,
shall be complied 'with prior to the issuance of a building permit where exist-
ing structures are being modified; or prior to final building and zoning in-
spection where new construction is proposed or where existing structures are
removed to make way for new construction.
73-902
City Hall, Anaheim, California COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE cHANGED.
(73-74-10 - C-3)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: coUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-524 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 73-74-23: Application by Hulen E. and Hester
Y. Slayton for change in zone from R-1 to C-1 to utilize property located east
of Anaheim Boulevard, south of Lorraine Drive, as a parking area for a pro-
posed three-story medical office structure, was submitted together with appli-
cation for Exemption Declaration Status.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-223,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and that said re-
classification be approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of $2.00 per front foot along Charlotte Avenue and Claudina
Street for street lighting purposes.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of
Anaheim the sum of 60¢ per front foot along Charlotte Avenue and Claudina
Street for tree planting purposes.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with
approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public Works, and
shall be relocated away from the single family residence to the east.
4. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
6. That a 6-foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the east
property line and south property line adjacent to Claudina Street.
7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a man-
ner satisfactory to the City Engineer.
8. That the final parking plan shall be approved by the Development
Services Department, and any landscaped areas in the parking areas shall be
protected with 6-inch high, concrete curbs, and concrete wheel stops shall be
provided for parking spaces.
9. That a 5-foot landscape buffer strip shall be provided along
the east property line separating and protecting the single family residence
from odors and noise emanating from the parking area.
10. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accor-
dance with plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked
Exhibit No. 1, provided however, that a 6-foot wall or crash gate shall be con-
structed at the exit to Claudina Street.
11. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject pro-
party, Conditions Nos. 1 and 2, abov~ m~ntion~d, shall be completed. The pro-
visions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by
action of the City Council unless said conditions are complied with within one
year from the date hereof, or such further time as the City Council may grant.
12. That Condition Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 above mentioned,
shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
73-903
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman
Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson, it was the finding of the City
Council that the impact of said reclassification would be trivial in nature
and that no environmental impact report or statement is required. MOTION
CARRIED.
Zoning Supervisor Roberts reported that subject property does not
front on Anaheim Boulevard, but the Applicant proposes to combine subject
parcel with lots fronting on the east side of Anaheim Boulevard, just south
of Lorraine Drive. He advised that presently there is a small one-story
commercial building on the property which will be moved to the northeast
corner of Lorraine and Anaheim Boulevard (the permit to move said structure
was approved by the City Council following public hearing on October 30,
1973). The property under consideration today is proposed to be utilized
as part of the parking lot for a proposed three-story medical office
building.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and
satisfied with the recommendations of the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Zylstra, 7110 North Euclid, representing the property owners
replied that the Applicant approves all conditions.
The Mayor asked if anyone in opposition to the proposed reclass-
ification wished to address the Council; and hearing no response, declared
the hearing closed.
Mr. Roberts recommended that, should Council wish to approve this
reclassification, Condition No. 6 as set forth by the Planning Commission be
amended to provide that a six-foot masonry block wall be constructed on the
north property line. He advised that there is an existing wall on the north
boundary, however because of grade differential the wall will only be four
feet high on the R-1 side. This amendment is recommended to simply clarify
what the Code would require.
Councilman Pebley noted that the use adjacent to subject property
on the north boundary line, is indicated on the map as an "office machine
shop"
Mr. Roberts advised that this property is currently zoned R-l,
there is a residence on it and a variance has been granted for the office
machine shop portion.
Councilman Pebley voiced the opinion that if the property owner
to the north is using his property for C-l, that the owner of subject parcel
should not be required to erect a six-foot masonry wall to protect that pro-
perty from his proposed C-1 use.
Following brief discussion, on motion by Councilman Pebley,
seconded by Councilman Sneegas, it was the findin~ of the City Council that
the existing wall on the north property line of subjectparcel would be
an adequate buffer between the use on the property to the north. MOTION
CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-525: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-525
for adoption, authorizing the preparation of the necessary ordinance, changing
the zone as requested, subject to the conditions recommended by the City
Planning Commission.
73-904
9ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHE%M FINDING AND DETER-
MINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING SHOULD
BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE CHANGED.
(73-74-23 C-l)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-525 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2553 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 101 (RECLASS-
IFICATION NO. 71-72-44): Application by Anaheim Hills Inc., and Texaco Ventures,
Inc., for the following Code waivers to construct a 108-unit apartment complex
on R-A zoned property, located on the north and south sides of Canyon Rim
Road, east of Nohl Ranch Road, was submitted together with Environmental Impact
Report No. 101:
a. Maximum building height.
b. Requirement that carports be enclosed on three sides.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. ?C73-221,
recommended that E.I.R. No. 101 be adopted as Council's statement and granted
Variance No. 2553 subject to the following conditions:
1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City
of Anaheim the sum of 60 cents per front foot along Canyon Rim Road for tree
planting purposes.
2. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance
with approved plans on file with the office of the Director of Public
Works.
3. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required
and determined to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to
commencement of structural framing.
4. That all air conditioning facilities shall be properly shielded
from view, and the sound buffered from adjacent properties.
5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
6. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City
of Anaheim the appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees as determined to
be appropriate by the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the
building permit is issued.
7. That the final parking plan shall be approved by the Develop-
ment Services Department, and any landscaped areas in the parking area shall
be protected with six-inch high concrete curbs, and concrete wheel stops shall
be provided for parking spaces.
8. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of
reclassification No. 71-72-44, now pending.
9. That drainge of said property shall be disposed of in a
manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. If, in the preparation of the
site, sufficient grading is required to necessitate a grading permit, no work
on grading will be permitted between October 15th and April 15th unless all
required off-site drainage facilities have been installed and are operative.
Positive assurance shall be provided the City that such drainage facilities
will be completed prior to October 15th. Necessary right-of-way for off-site
drainage facilities shall be dedicated to the City, or the City Council shall
have initiated condemnation proceedings therefor (the costs of which shall
be borne by the developer) prior to the commencement of grading operations.
73-905
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973, 1:30 P.M.
The required drainage facilities shall be of a size and type sufficient
to carry runoff waters originating from higher properties through said
property to ultimate disposal as approved by the City Engineer. Said
drainage facilities shall be the first item of construction and shall
be completed and be functional throughout the tract and.from the down-
stream boundary of the property to the ultimate point of disposal prior
to the issuance of any final building inspections or occupancy permits.
Drainage district reimbursement agreements may be made available to
the developers of said property upon their request.
10. That grading, excavation, and all other construction
activities shall be conducted in such a manner so as to minimize the
possibility of any silt originating from this project being carried into
the Santa Ama River by storm water originating from or flowing through
this project.
11. That the property owner shall obtain approval of the City
Council of an exception to Sections 17.06.110 and 17.06.120 of the
Anaheim Municipal Code in order to allow slopes to be located at other
than required locations.
12. 'That subject property shall be developed substantially
in accordance with plans and specifications on file with the City of
Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4.
13. That Condition Nos. 1, 8, and 11, above mentioned, shall
be complied with prior to the commencement of the activity authorized
under this resolution, or prior to the time that the building permit
is issued, or within period of one year from date hereof, whichever
occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission may
grant.
14. That Condition Nos. 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 and 12, above
mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final building and zoning
inspections.
Review of action taken by the City Planning Commission was re-
quested by Councilman Thom at the October 16, 1973 City Council meeting
and public hearing scheduled this date.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT: On motion by Councilman Stephenson,
seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the City Council accepted E.I.R. No.
101 (supplementary to E.I.R. No. 80) and Committee Analysis thereof
together with the City Planning Commission recommendations and adopted
same as the Statement of the City Council. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Clerk submitted and read a letter dated October 15,
1973 from Mr. James Barisic, Vice President, Anaheim Hills, Inc., re-
garding an exception to Sections 17.06.110 and 17.06120 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code to allow slopes to be located at other than required
locations.
Mr. Roberts reported that this project is proposed to be
located east of the commercial shopping center proposed for the northeast
corner of Anaheim Hills Road and Nohl Ranch Road in an area which was a
part of the 675 arces Planned Community Zone, and was proposed and
approved for an R-3 designation. The Applicants now proposed to develop
an apartment project which would conform to the density provisions and
in this connection have requested two waivers from Site Development
Standards for th~ R-3 Zone.
The waiver from maximum building height adjacent to a single-
family zone is requested because the property immediately to the north
is in the R-A Zone, under resolution of intent to R-H-22,000, however
there is a significant grade differential between the R-A property and
the pad on which this project would be built. The Applicants have
submitted evidence to the Planning Commission which indicates the
effect these apartment would have on the northerly property.
73-906
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973t 1:30 P.Mo
The second waiver regarding carports is requested because the
Applicants are proposing some carports to be constructed with roofs only
in order to capitalize on the view potential to the green landscaped
areas at the opposite side of the carport rather than boxing all of these
in.
Mr. Roberts reported that the City Planning Commission granted
the waivers requested on the basis that because of the terrain, the single-
family homes would have a sight line over the tops of the apartment com-
plex, and the apartment units in no way would be able to view the single-
family homes. The second waiver was granted since similar carports with-
out enclosure on three sides have been approved in order to take advantage
of the view.
In answer to Councilman Dutton, Mr. Roberts advised that the
original proposal for this development called for 233 units and the
current plans propose 108 units.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or his Agent were present and'
wished to address the Council.
Mr. James Barisic, Vice President, Anaheim Hills, Inc./Texaco
Ventures, Inc., stated that they are very pleased with the recommendation
of the Planning Commission. He pointed out that the R-3 zoning for this
property was approved one and one-half years ago. Additionally he'noted
that the market concept for this apartment complex is that it will be an
adult oriented luxury apartment project. He reiterated that they have
reduced densities overall, and where originally 863 units were projected
in the PC Zone, this is now down to 538 units, which is a 37% reduction
in overall density.
Mr. James Rogers, ~epresenting Westfield Development, 17802
Skypark Circle, Irvine, the potential builders and owners of the project
advised that their main market orientation will be luxury adult living,
since according to their information this is the market which will be
well received in this location. The project comprises 15.8 acres with
a density of 6.8 units to the acre, which he contended is quite low.
They propose to provide a circular type traffic pattern, bisected by
Canyon Rim Road. Each street will have a complete circulation system,
with return to Canyon Rim Road. He advised that all of the slopes both
below and above the project will be landscaped and maintained by the
apartment owners. The majority of the apartment units will be view
oriented with balconies and patios and other amenities, so that the
units will command the high type of rents proposed.
Mr. Rogers noted that 208 parking spaces are proposed for the
development, which figure includes 28 spaces over the required Code
amount. The units themselves will range from 745 to l~349-square feet,
60% of them will be view oriented, and each will include its own laundry
facilities. He stated that two swimming pools will be provided, one on
each side of Canyon Rim Road.
Mr. Rogers remarked that the project architect is well known
in Orange County and has received many awards for his designs, and that
the design proposed for this project will also become a source of pride
in the area.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to address the Council
either in favor or in opposition to the proposedrproject.
73-907
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973t 1:30 PoM.
Mrs. Mary Dinndorf, President, Santa Aha Canyon Improvement
Association, Inc., stated that she represents a coalition of home-
owners from Peralta Hills, Nohl Ranch and Westridge who object to the
development of this 108-unit apartment complex because it is in vio-
lation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970.
She cited Section 21.001, Subdivision "g" of the Environmental
Quality Act of 1970 which requires that governmental agencies at all
levels must consider qualitative, economic and technical factors as well
as long term benefits and costs versus short term benefits and costs
and alternatives to proposed action. She related the procedure out-
lined in the E.Q.Ao requiring a governmental agency to make a finding
that any project they intend to carry out is in accord with the conser-
vation element of the General Plan and stated that in their opinion
Environmental Impact Report No. 101 does not meet this requirement.
To support this position, she set forth the following information taken
from E.I.R. No. 101:
1. Section 203 regarding impact on the water quality and
hydrology, although the existing situation was described, no alter-
native to the proposed development which would ameliorate the condi-
tion were present.
2. Section 208.2 - Recreation: Report that an ll-court
tennis center is planned, the first phase of which is to be completed,
according to the Environmental Impact Report, in November of 1973.
Mrs. Dinndorf remarked that when this report was approved, the work
had not been started on this project.
3. Section 208.1 - Traffic: According to criteria estab-
lished by the City Traffic Engineer, the proposed 108 apartment units
would generate an estimated traffic volume of 864 trips per day, how-
ever E.IoR. No. 101 made no statement regarding this resultant in-
crease in air pollution as required by the Clean Air Act of 1970.
Further Serrano Avenue is proposed to be extended which would relieve
some of the traffic congestion. However, no date is yet projected
for the completion of this extension and it could be continually de-
layed at the discretion of the developer. In addition, if the Cities
of Villa Park and Orange decide not to extend Serrano Avenue within
their jurisdictions, all traffic will have to use either Anaheim Hills
Road or Nohl Ranch Road which would create a serious traffic problem.
4. Section 208.4 - Education: Canyon High School is pre-
sently under construction with a completion target date of January
1974, however this date is impossible since construction is barely
underway.
Mrs. Dinndorf remarked that the canyon residents would like to
see some signs of good faith, such as some of the amenities and facili-
ties required for the health and safety of the citizenry under construc-
tion. She noted that although a quasi-landlocked situation exists in
the area, which would preclude, in the event of a serious fire, both
movement of emergency vehicles as well as the evacuation of residents,
Fire Station No. 9 is still a projection and not a reality.
In conclusion~ Mrs. Dinndorf contended that with Anaheim's
City Charter provisions and present political setup; there is less
opportunity for self determination through involvement in the self-
governing process for canyon residents than there is in any of the other
25 cities in Orange County. It is their opinion that Anaheim is spend-
ing more money to create problems than many other cities are spending
to solve them.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition to the
proposed project; there being no response, offered the Applicant a few minutes
for rebuttal.
Mr. James Barisic stated that since he is not an attorney, he would
not attempt to interpret the requirements of the E.QoA. of 1970 nor the ramifi-
cations thereof, but would like to submit certain facts in rebuttal.
73-908
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Regarding water run-off, Mr. Barisic stated that the main arterial
highway, Canyon Rim Road, is now nearly complete, and storm drains were installed
which are adequate to carry the run-off and are in accordance with all applicable
City standards, which are some of the more stringent standards in the County of
Orange.
Slope runoff continues to be the responsibility of the builders in
Anaheim Hills who are required to plant, irrigate and maintain all construction
grading work for as long as they own the property. Mr. Barisic felt this situ-
ation had to be an improvement over what existed in the past.
He advised that the construction drawings for the tennis facility
referred to by Mrs. Dinndorf are now complete, and membership reservations are
being accepted. Presently, the grading plans are being reviewed and when
approved the grading and construction will commence.
As far as Serrano Avenue is concerned, Mr. Barisic stated that he
could not see what effect that roadway has on the property under discussion
since it is adjacent to Anaheim Hills Road and approximately one minute away
from Santa Ana Canyon Road, an arterial highway now under construction. This
should be completed within the next few months, far in advance of when subject
project would even be under construction.
Mr. Barisic related a recent incident involving a ten acre brush fire
which was contained within 25 minutes and to which the emergency vehicles had
access on fully-paved all-weather roads. The City, County and Division of For-
estry units responded to this fire with an excellent result.
The date used for the projected completion of Canyon High School in
E.I.R. No 101 was supplied by the Orange Unified School District and was used
because it was the best information available at the time of preparation of the
report. Mr. Barisic noted that if there are any school children generated by
this project, it is expected that most of them would be of high school age, and
they will not be in residence until some time after the high school is completed
since the grading for the apartment project is not yet even complete.
Mr. Barisic pointed out that E.I.R. No. 101 was submitted as a supple-
mentary report to E.I.R. No. 80 which was previously approved and which did deal
with air pollution and various other factors in depth.
Councilman Dutton asked Mr. James Rogers if his company had developed
the property immediately adjacent on the west of Anaheim Hills Road and that
southerly extension which runs south to Santa Ama Canyon Road, these parcels
having been granted a variance in 1968 permitting development on60-foot lots.
Mr. Rogers replied affirmatively and stated that this was their Wood-
crest tract.
Councilman Dutton then pointed out that Mrs. Dinndorf, active in the
Santa Aha Canyon Improvement Association, Inc., purchased her home in the north-
erly extension of this tract, and inquired whether the developer had any problems
selling the units on that property, to which Mr. Rogers stated "no", that all of
the property with the exception of one unit has been sold.
Councilman Dutton then inquired under whose real estate license the
Woodcrest units were sold, to which Mr. Rogers replied Seymour Realty.
The Mayor then asked Councilman Thom if he wished to add anything to
the testimony presented since it was he who had requested the public hearing be
set.
Councilman Thom replied that the express purpose for which he had re-
quested hearing was to allow the Santa Aha Canyon Improvement Association, Inc.,
an opportunity to give the Council their input on this matter.
Councilman Dutton pointed out that this public hearing, as requested,
cost the taxpayers of the City of Anaheim $305 in loss appeal fees.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-526: Councilman Sneegas offered Resolution No. 73R-526 fo~
adoption, granting Variance No. 2553, subject to the conditions recommended by
the City Planning Commission.
73-909
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE
NO. 2553.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley and Dutton
Thom
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-526 duly passed and adopted.
As requested by Anaheim Hills Inc., in their communication of
October 15, 1973, which was submitted pursuant to Condition No. 11 of Planning
Commission Resolution No. PC73-221, on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded
by Councilman Dutton, the City Council authorized an exception to Sections
17.06.110 and 17.06.120 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to permit slopes to be
located at other than required locations. To this motion, Councilman Thom
voted "no". MOTION CARRIED.
AMUSEMENT DEVICES PERMITS: Applications filed by Mr. Robert W. Fellhauer, Acme
Amusement Company for amusement devices permits, was submitted and granted as
recommended by the Chief of Police, subject to provisions of Chapter 3.24 of
the Anaheim Municipal Code, to allow assorted amusement device machines at
the following locations:
a. Tic Toc Store ~51 - 944'South Nutwood Street.
b. Tic Toc Store #45 - 125 West Vermont Avenue.
c. Tic Toc Store #31 - 501 West South Street.
d. Tic Toc Store #26 - 500 North East Street.
e. Tic Toc Store ~24 - 524 South Beach Boulevard.
f. Tic Toc Store #16 - 1845 West Katella Avenue.
g. Tic Toc Store #10 - 318 Brookhurst Street.
h. Tic Toc Store #3 - 500 West Orangewood Avenue.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton,
amusement devices permits as outlined above were granted, subject to the
provisions of Chapter 3.24 of the Anaheim Municipal Code as recommended by
the Chief of Police. MOTION CARRIED.
A/~3SEMENT DEVICES PERMITS: Applications filed by James Taylor Moore, Rowe Service
Company for amusement devices permits were submitted and granted as recommended
by the Chief of Police subject to provisions of Chapter 3.24 of the Anaheim
Mmnicipal Code to allow assorted amusement devices machines at the following
locations:
a. The Tavern #6 - 727 Anaheim Boulevard.
b. Duffer's Inn #87 - 113 N. Magnolia Avenue.
c. Pistol Pete's #273 - 945 S. Knott Avenue.
d. Golden Key #236 - 2625 W. Lincoln Avenue.
e. Gaetano's #513 - 2954 W. Ball Road.
f. Crystal Pistol #435 - 426 S. Euclid Street.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Pebley,
amusement devices permits as outlined above were granted, subject to the
provisions of Chapter 3.24 of the Anaheim Municipal Code as recommended by
the Chief of Police. MOTION CARRIED.
DISL'USSION - AGCELERATION OF D~VELOPI~NT - RIO VISTA PARK; Mr. Oliver Murray,
107 Jeanine Way, submitted a petition which reportedly contained 851 signa-
tures from 611 homes in the immediate vicinity of the Rio Vista Park Site,
and requests that the City of Anaheim consider accelerating the development
of said site.
In addition, Mr. Murray described the status of the Park Site
property as being dirty and overrun with tumbleweeds.
The City Clerk called attention to the fact that the petition just
submitted is not an original.
73-910
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P,M,
Mr. John Collier, Parks and Recreation Director advised that the
original petition is in his office as this was presented first to the Parks and
Recreation Commission and that he would forward the original document to the
City Clerk for filing.. He noted that several other people along with Mr. Prender-
gast did meet with the Parks and Recreation Commission to make known their desire
for acceleration in the development of the Rio Vista Park.
Mr. Collier submitted a report which outlines the status of Park
Priorities for the years 1973, 74 and 75. He noted that Rio Vista development
was originally scheduled to occur in the 1977-78 fiscal year, although this is
not a formal commitment. An obstructive factor in the development of this site
is that the City is involved in an inverse condemnation suit initiated by Mr.
Huarte, regarding a 15 foot strip right-o~way located between the Park Site
and the School.
Mr. Collier further advised that the State Legislature has approved a
Park Facilities Bond which will be on the 1974 ballot. If this measure passes,
the City of Anaheim can expect to receive $500,000, and have proposed the following
priorities for expenditure of these funds:
1. Juarez Park
2. Rio Vista Park
3. Poncianna Park
4. Canyon Site One
Upon receipt of these additional funds, if the bond election is success-
ful, shortly after January 1975, these parks would be developed as rapidly as the
City's two crews of five men can operate with appropriate contracting. This addi-
tional money would mean the development of Rio Vista Park would be moved up to the
latter part of 1975-76 budget year with completion end budget year 1976-77.
Mr. Collier noted that Parks and Recreation receives pressure from both
ends of the community, east and west, regarding park development. He noted that
when sites are purchased well in advance of planned development, the citizens
usually expect construction activity to be forthcoming before the budgeted funds
are available. He advised that Parks and Recreation Department tries to develop
twenty acres of park per year so that the amount of increased assessed valuation
which is acquired in that year will absorb the maintenance cost of these additional
park acres.
Councilman Pebley stated that he could not blame the citizens for com-
plaining if the park.site is dirty and full of tumbleweeds. He felt it is the
City's responsibility to disc these sites twice a year to clear the weeds.
Mr. Murray contended that this would not solve the problem, and would only
create more dust and dirt.
Mrs. Irmegarde Miller stated that she lives on Rio Vista Street, and
that the primary reason she would like to see the park developed is so that the
children will have a place to play. She pointed out that the children of that
neighborhood are cut off from school activities because they attend schools in
the Placentia Unified School District. ~urther she noted that they are surrounded
by freeways and cut off from other available recreational facilities. She requested
Council to consider these factors and to develop the park so that the children of
that neighborhood would have a safe place in which to play.
Mr. Vincent Gatterdam, 2837 Dutch Avenue, stated that he lives just two~
houses from the open field which is Rio Vista Park Site. He remarked that the
site is a ridiculous eyesore in an otherwise attractive neighborhood. He stated
that the homes in the area are valued at $30,000 to $60,000 and in addition
there are 300 condominium units. Since the citizens are already paying taxes for
the park site property he stated that he could not understand why they should have
to wait four to five years for the park to be developed.
Mrs. K. Hollowell stated she lives on Dutch Avenue and that her home is
so situated as to have most of the litter and debris from this park site blown
onto her property. In addition she agreed that the field is an eyesore and added
that it looks like a City dump, strewn with broken glass and rubble. She also
stated that the neighborhood children do not have a place to play.
73-911
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P,M,
Councilman Pebley inquired as to why the children are not able to
play on the ten acre school site which belongs to Placentia School District
and is adjacent to the park site.
Mrs. Hollowell advised that the gates to the school are locked most
of the time.
Councilman Pebley suggested that the City discuss the possibility
of recreational usage of the school site after school hours, in an attempt to
arrive at a joint use arrangement such as the City has with the Anaheim Elemen-
tary School District.
Councilman Sneegas stated that he has participated in many such
discussions as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission and felt that
there are some aspects which need to be pointed out. In the particular case
being presented he stressed that the location of Pioneer Park is such that up
until the time the freeway was put through this was accessible to the people
in this neighborhood, therefore they have not been without any park for any
length of time. He stated that it would be virtually impossible to provide
parks fully developed out of general funds as the need arises and still acquire
park property looking ahead to the future. Buying park property well in
advance of the need for development has enabled the City to acquire such
property at one-fifth of the cost it would be after the surrounding develop-
ment is complete. He noted that in consideration of park priorities, the
number of people which a park would service as well as the number of streets
they have to cross to gain access to a park are reviewed and weighed in perspec-
tive to all of the other park needs within the City. He further pointed out
that the Rio Vista Park Site is within the Placentia School District and that
this is the only school district within the City of Anaheim's jurisdiction
which does not contribute towards the parks and recreation effort. He urged
that the people in the area contact their School Board in an attempt to obtain
their cooperation in this respect.
Mrs. Hollowell still felt it was not reasonable to allow this property
to look so unkempt and advised that this was promised to be a park when she
purchased her home in the area.
Councilman Pebley explained that the site was designated as a park
site, but that any promises for immediate development probably originated from
the real estate agent, certainly not the City of Anaheim.
Councilman Pebley further pointed out that if the last park bond
issue, which was on the 1970 ballot, had been passed by the citizens, the City
would have had the money to complete all of the pending parks, and at an
interest rate of 4%, however, this bond election was defeated at a ratio of
five to one.
Councilman Sneegas felt this to be indicative that the citizens are
satisfied with the rate of park acquisition and development since they do not
wish to go into debt to accelerate the program.
Councilman Thom stated that the City was able to develop the Anaheim
Hills Golf Course without a bond issue.
Mr. M~rdoch felt it necessary to clarify some of the expenditures
on parks, and stated that the 1973-74 fiscal budget provides a sum of one and
one-half million dollars ($421,000 capital and $629,000 revenue sharing)
whereas the capital for the two golf courses for this same fiscal year totals
$104,000. Operating expenses including purchase of the property for the two
golf courses totaled $230,000 per year. A revenue estimate from the parks
totals approximately $350,000 (park in lieu fees) and the estimated revenue
from the golf courses is $535,000. He stressed that this year's budget, which
is not a great deal different from any other year, shows a large expenditure
for park purposes and a very high percentage of that is for development and
acquisition of park properties, so that any impression that there is no money
being spent on parks is far from the truth.
73-912
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
At the conclusion of discussion on the matter, Mayor Dutton suggested
that the Parks and Recreation Director see that the Rio Vista Park site is
cleared of debris and.tumbleweeds which were left behind by the weed abatement
contractor.
No further action was taken by the City Council.
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 72-5E: Submitted by Joan W. Zylstra, Agent on behalf of
Thelma Slobodin, proposing to encroach into an existing public utility easement
location north of Lincoln Avenue, and west of Gilbert Street. Also submitted
was the report of the City Engineer recommending said encroachment permit be
approved unconditionally.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-527: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 73R-527
for adoption, approving Encroachment Permit No. 72-5E.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WITH THELMA SLOBODIN. (72-5E)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-527 duly passed and adopted.
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 73-6E: Submitted by Kenneth M. Keesee proposing to encroach
into an existing public utility easement with an industrial building to be
located east of Anaheim Boulevard, north of Pacifico Avenue.
Also submitted was the report of the City Engineer recommending
approval of said encroachment permit unconditionally.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-528: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 73R-528 for
adoption, approving Encroachment Permit No. 73-6E.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WITH KENNETH M. KEESEE. (73-6E)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-528 duly passed and adopted.
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 73-7E: Submitted by Mr. Sam Burglin, dba State College Car
Wash, proposing to permit an existing sign to encroach into a dedicated public
alley at the east side of State College Boulevard, north of Center Street.
Als0 submitted was report of the City Engina~r racomm~ndlng ~a~d
request be denied and the sign be relocated.
The Applicant, Mr. Sam Burglin, was recognized by the Mayor and addressed
the Council advising that the sign has been present for two to three years and
exists within an alley of which the south 20 feet are dedicated, however the 30
or 40 feet to the north are utilized for parking and driveway access. He pointed
out that this alley does not lead anywhere, and he could therefore not understand
why the encroachment permit should be denied.
73-913
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Maddox advised that the report from Street Maintenance Division
indicated that they desired the sign removed. He noted that the sign is loca-
ted within the dedicated portion of the alley and that the alley leads to com-
mercial developments and is used for trash removal, which is the primary reason
for objection from the Street Maintenance Division.
Mr. Burglin contended that the alley is 20-feet wide and there should
be no problem for a maximum eight-foot wide trash truck to negotiate same.
Following brief discussion, by general Council consent, action on
Encroachment Permit No. 73-7E was continued to November 13, 1973 to allow the
City Engineer's Office time to inspect the situation and make further'recom-
mendation.
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 73-8E: Submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Jack Mattson, proposing
to permit an existing fish pond and cover to encroach into a portion of a
public utility easement located at 1801 West Chalet Street, south of Ball Road,
east of Nutwood.
Also submitted was report of the City Engineer without recommendation
but advising that Development Services Department states that the Applicant
would have to submit plans for approval to their department and that a variance
for minimum rear yard setback might be required; and that the Building Division
advises that permits must be taken out and two sets of construction plans sub-
mitted to determine if the structure is built to Code.
The Applicant, Mrs. Jack Mattson, was recognized by the Mayor and
she indicated that no wrong was intended in construction of this cover over
the fish pond, but that she was not aware of the technicalities involved. She
advised that it was because of difficulties with children from the adjacent
junior high school throwing foreign items into the fish pond that the cover was
erected. She submitted photographs of the fish pond and cover which were re-
viewed by Council and returned.
Following discussion as to whether or not the covering would be clas-
sified a structure, at the suggestion of Mr. Roberts, the City Council determined
that Encroachment Permit No. 73-8E be continued to November 13, 1973 to allow
Development Services Department time to inspect the situation.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Actions taken by the City Planning Commission at
their meeting held October 15, 1973 pertaining to the following applications
were submitted for City Council information and consideration:
1. VARIANCE NO. 2555.AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: Appli-
cation by Donald T. and Geraldine M. Woods for the following Code waivers to
construct a single-family residence on R-O zoned property located on the south
side of James Way, at James Place, was submitted together with application for
Exemption Declaration Status:
a. Side yard setback.
b. Rear yard setback.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-230,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and granted said
variance subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Stephenson,
seconded by Councilman Dutton, it was the finding of the City Council that fha
impact of said project would be trivial in nature and that no environmental
impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Variance No. 2555.
2. VARIANCE NO. 2556 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: Appli-
cation by Gene Wiseman for the following Code waiver to construct a patio on
R-S-5000 zoned property, located on the south side of Clifpark Way, east of
State College Boulevard, was submitted together with application for Exemption
Declaration Status:
73-914
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
a. Minimum side yard setback.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-231,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and granted said
variance subject to one condition.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Pebley,
seconded by Councilman Stephenson, it was the finding of the City Council that
the impact of said project would be trivial in nature and that no environmental
impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Variance No. 2556.
3. VARIANCE NO. 2557 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 103: Application by
Kenneth T. and Emily H. Conner for the following Code waiver to permit establish-
ment of eight R-E zoned lots on the north side of Crescent Drive, east of Peralta
Hills Drive, was submitted together with Environmental Impact Report No. 103 and
Committee Analysis thereof:
a. Maximum distance of dwelling from a dedicated street.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-232,
recommended that a supplement to Environmental Impact Report No. 103 be provided
the City Council that is acceptable and adequately discusses the potential drain-
age problem and addresses proposed mitigating measures prior to adoption by the
City Council of Environmental Impact Report No. 103 and said supplement. Pur-
suant to Resolution No. PC73-232, the City Planning Commission granted Variance
No. 2557 subject to conditions.
On recommendation of the Acting City Attorney, who noted that Variance
No. 2557 pertains only to the distance of a dwelling unit from a dedicated street
and is not involved with drainage, the City Council took no action on Variance
No. 2557 and deferred action on Environmental Impact Report No. 103 to be con-
sidered with Tentative Tract No. 8470.
4. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8470 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 103 (VARIANCE
NO. 2557~: Owners, Kenneth T. and Emily H. Conner; property located on the
north side of Crescent Drive, east of Peralta Hills Drive; containing eight pro-
posed R-E zoned lots. On request of the Applicant, action on Tentative Map,
Tract No. 8470 and Environmental Impact Report No. 103, was continued to
November 13, 1973, on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman
Stephenson. MOTION CARRIED.
5. VARIANCE NO. 2558 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 102 (RECLASSIFICATION
NO. 66-67-25 (3) ): Application by Vernetta M. Dargatz for the following Code
waiver to establish an electrical foundry in the M-1 Zone, on property located
on the south side of Coronado Avenue, adjacent to the Riverside/Orange Freeway
interchange to the west, was submitted together with Environmental Impact Report
No. 102 and E.I.R. Review Committee Analysis thereof.
a. Permitted uses in the M-1 Zone.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-233,
recommended adoption of Environmental Impact Report No. 102 as the Council's
statement amd gramted said variance subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT: On motion by Councilman Dutton~ seconded by
Councilman Sneegas, the City Council accepted Environmental Impact Report No.
102 and E.I.R. Review Committee Analysis thereof together with the City Planning
Commission recommendation and adoPted same as the Statement of the Council.
MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Variance No. 2558.
6. VARIANCE NO. 2559 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: Appli-
cation by Barclay's Bank for the following Code waiver to construct a canopy over
drive-in teller windows of an existing bank building on M-1 zoned property located
at the northwest corner of Orangethorpe Avenue and Raymond Avenue, was submitted
together with application for Exemption Declaration Status:
73-915
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
a. Minimum setback.
The City Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-234,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and granted said
variance subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Sneegas,
seconded by Councilman Stephenson, it was the finding of the City Council that
the impact of said project would be trivial in nature and that no environmental
impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Variance No. 2559.
7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1426 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION
STATUS: Application by Carlsburg Financial Corporation for the following Code
waiver to establish a semi-enclosed restaurant with on-sale beer on C-1 zoned
property located on the east side of Euclid Street, south of Catalpa Drive,
was submitted together with application for Exemption Declaration Status:
a. Minimum height of free-standing sign.
The City Planning Cormnission pursuant to Resolution No. PC73-229,
recommended that no environmental impact report be required and granted said
conditional use permit subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EXEMPTION STATUS: On motion by Councilman Sneegas,
seconded by Councilman Stephenson, it was the finding of the City Council that
the impact of said project would be trivial in nature and that no environmental
impact report or statement is required. MOTION CARRIED.
The City Council took no further action on Conditional Use Permit
No. 1426.
8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT - LEWIS ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION: Environ-
mental impact report prepared by the Engineering staff for the construction of
an electrical distribution substation, switch rack and dispatch center on the
southwest corner of Cerritos Avenue and Lewis Street (Lewis Electrical Sub-
station), a project of the City of Anaheim, was submitted and reviewed by the
City Council together with E.I.R. Review Committee Analysis recommending said
report be adopted as the Council's statement.
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson,
the environmental impact report for the Lewis Electrical Substation as sub-
mitted was adopted as the environmental impact statement of the Council as
recommended by the City Planning Commission. MOTION CARRIED.
9. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ON CITY EXPANSIONS: Recommendation of the City
Planning Commission that consideration be given in any future expansion of a
substation or other City facilities that the landscaping and wall treatment be
upgraded to be more in conformance with the City's Site Development standards,
as was noted on the Edison Company in the development of their facilities, was
submitted for City Council review.
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Sneegas, the
City Planning Commission recommendation regardimg Development Standards on
City expansions was ordered received and filed. MOTION CARRIED.
10. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE - TITLE 18 - ZONING: On
motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Dutton, public hearing
was set for November 27, 1973, 1:30 P.M., to consider amendment to Title 18,
Chapter 18.52, M-l, Light Industrial Zone, Section 18.52.060, Site Development
Standards, Subsection (3), Fences and Walls. MOTION CARRIED.
11. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE - TITLE 18 - ZONING: On
motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Dutton, public hearing
was set for November 27, 1973, 1:30 P.M., to consider amendment to Title 18,
Chapter 18.28, R-2, Multiple Family Residential Zone, Section 18.28.050, Site
Development Standards, Subsection (10), Off-Street Parking Requirements.
MOTION CARRIED.
73-916
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6~ 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
FINAL MAP~ TRACT NO. 5778: Developer, Mark III Homes, Inc.; tract located on the
south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, east of Anaheim Hills Road; containing 75
proposed R-1 zoned lo.ts.
The City Engineer recommended approval and reported that said final
map conforms substantially with the tentative map previously approved, that
bonds have been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval and required fees
paid.
On recommendations of the City Engineer, Councilman Dutton moved that
Final Map, Tract No. 5778 be approved, subject to approval of required bond by
the City Attorney. Councilman Sneegas seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINAL MAP~ TRACT NO. 7666: Developer, J. W. Klug Development Company, Inc.; tract
located east of Imperial Highway, south of Esperanza Road and north of La Palma
Avenue; containing 72 proposed RS-5000 zoned lots.
Mr. Patrick Bowman, Supervisor of Building and Construction, Placentia
Unified School District, requested permission to address the Council relative
to this final map and was recognized by the Mayor.
Mr. Bowman requested that the Council continue action on Final Map,
Tract No. 7666 to December 7, 1973, which is the date to which action on the
tentative map was originally extended. The reason for this request is to allow the
Placentia Unified School District an opportunity to approach the developer re-
garding an elementary school site within the tract.
He noted that residential development between Esperanza Road and La
Palma Avenue is estimated to generate 519 elementary school children. At the
present time, the School District is bussing 64 school children from the trailer
court on La Palma, and the ratio of elementary school children from the 52 homes
in Oakpark is .47 children per house, so that the need for an elementary school
is clearly defined.
Mr. Bowman advised that other tracts in the canyon area are in rela-
tively small parcels and no school site was available which would not destroy
the tract. However, subject development was filed in four tract map segments.
In addition, its location adjacent to the projected Fairmont overcrossing and a
school in the middle of the development, will eliminate the need for bussing of
children to school. They believe this would be the best of the available site
for location of an elementary school.
The Council was concerned as to why the School District had not approached
the developer prior to this time, since the tentative map has been on file for
approximately two years.
Mr. Bowman advised that the developer did not obtain a letter from the
Orange County Flood Control District stating that this land will be above the
100 year flood plain until October 25, 1973. Prior to this, they were unable
to consider said property as a school site since to their knowledge it was loca-
ted below the 100 year level.
Mr. Murdoch pointed out that it is usually mutually beneficial for the~
school district and developer to work together to plan a school site.
After consulting the engineer for Tract No. 7666, Mr. Jeff Millett, of
Millett, King Associates, 1335 West Valencia, Fullerton, and ascertaining that
a continuation will not detrimentally affect the development, and upon learning
that Mr. Millett is willing to work with the Placentia Unified School District,
on motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Dutton, action on Final
Map, Tract No. 7666 was continued to November 20, 1973 and a one-year extension
of time was granted to Tentative Map, Tract No. 7666, expiring December 7, 1974.
MOTION CARRIED.
Regarding the discussion earlier in the meeting relative to the Rio
Vista Park site, Mr. Bowman stated that he was not aware that the elementary
school located adjacent to the park property was locked and not available for
after-school recreational space, and that he would look into the matter to ascer-
tain why the people of that area cannot make further us~ of this school property.
73-917
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES November 6, 19737 1:30 P.M.
PROPOSED SENATE BILL SB-430 CONDOMINIUM REGULATIONS: Notice of public hearing
regarding proposed legislation (SB-430) in Sacramento on November 12, 1973
before the Senate Committee on Local Government was submitted together with
report from the Development Services Department with certain findings and con-
clusions.
The City Council indicated concurrence with the conclusions and
recommendations as presented in the Development Services Department memorandum
dated November 6, 1973 and, on motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by
Councilman Pebley, authorized a letter indicating same to be submitted as
written testimony at the hearing on proposed legislation SB-430.MOTIONCARRIED.
DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8153, REVISION NO. 1: (Tentative Tract
No. 8153, Revision No. 1, located on the north side of Nohl Ranch Road, west
of Villa Real Drive, was approved April 10, 1973, however due to the terrain
and concern expressed by the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association, when the
developer's grading plan was submitted to obtain a permit from the City, he
was informed that a study would be required and a plan for drainage of the area
approved prior to the initiation of any actual improvements.) Request from
Mr. Brian Bittke, President of the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association for
an evening meeting to discuss the drainage plan and the reimbursement district
concept was considered by the City Council on August 21, 1973, at which time
such discussion was deferred until the City receives approval of the Drainage
Master Plan from the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Donald Steffensen, Vice President, Lusk Corporation, advised that
Tract No. 8153, a 45 lot project, drains into Nohl Ranch Road. However there
is an off-site fill area easterly of the project which will alter to some de-
gree the drainage from Peralta Hills. Therefore the Engineering Division felt
it appropriate for the Lusk Corporation to design facilities which would pro-
vide drainage through Peralta Hills to Santa Ana Canyon Road.
Following several meetings with the City staff, Mr. Steffensen re-
ported that they have completed a drainage design which will not.only serve
this particular off-site fill area but the larger area of the Nohl property as
well and hopefully it will eliminate drainage problems of future Lusk develop-
ment.
Because of the time of year and lead times involved in purchase of
pipe, Mr. Steffensen advised that they would like to be authorized to proceed
with the grading of Tract No. 8153 and installation of the off-site fill area
as well as to install the necessary silting basins and revetments prior to the
on-set of winter rains. He referred to his letter of October 22, 1973 addressed
to the City Engineer, in which the Lusk Corporation agrees to enter into a con-
tract with the City of Anaheim for installation of the drainage facilities pro-
posed, and to obtain bonds to assure the City of installation of said drainage
facilities prior to October 15, 1974. He further advised that the Lusk Cor-
poration has met with the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association to keep them
apprised of the drainage plans as well as other information relative to develop-
ment of Lusk properties in the area, and they are in agreement with the drainage
concept proposed. He also reported that approval has been recommended by the
City Engineer.
Mr. Murdoch summarized that the Lusk Corporation wishes to proceed
with grading and installation of interim drainage facilities~ which would pre-
clude the possibility of flooding onto adjacent properties, with which Mr.
Steffensen concurred.
Mr. Rowland Krueger, 561Peralta Hills Drive, representing the Peralta
Hills Homeowners Association stated that the Association has reviewed the drain-
age plans and revisions thereof and now feel that these are reasonable and there-
fore they support the request to proceed with grading at this time on the basis
proposed, with proper bonding and appropriate precautions. He remarked that
the Association does recognize that there are potential hazards associated with
an interim drainage system but from discussions held with the Lusk Corporation,
the Association feels that the developer will take care of these problems as
they arise and will adequately protect the downstream properties.
73-918
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Krueger referred to the request previously submitted (August 21,
1973) by the Peralta Hills Homeowners Association relative to an evening dis-
cussion of the drainage reimbursement district concept, and reiterated that the
Association is still interested in participating in such discussion with the
City Council.
Mr. Murdoch noted that the Planning Commission will review the drain-
age reimbursement district concept in approximately three weeks and it will be
scheduled for discussion by the Council shortly thereafter.
On recommendation of the City Engineer, Councilman Pebley moved that
the Lusk Corporation be authorized to proceed with grading of Tract No. 8153,
Revision No. 1 and off-site fill area, subject to the developer entering into a
contract with the CityofAnaheim, including a bond, for the installation of the
drainage facilities as proposed, said contract to assure the City that these
facilities will be installed prior to October 15, 1974 and further subject to
the developer providing the interim protection devices proposed. Councilman
Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-529 - DEEDS OF EASEMENT:
No. 73R-529 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN
DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Harry E. and Dorothy Homewood;
Jefferson Investment Affiliates; Louis C. and Lynn P. Bell; Inmont Corpor-
ation; American Medical International, Inc.; 1600 East Lincoln Company;
Open Road Industries, Inc.; Vernetta M. Dargatz; Robert W. Marvin, Jr. and
Dorothy M. Marvin; Texaco Ventures, Inc. and Anaheim Hills, Inc.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-529 duly passed and adopted.
PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - ONE SIX BY TEN TRAILER; THREE 84-INCH TRIPLEX MOWERSi ONE
ROTARY MOWER AND THREE 25-INCH MOWERS: The City Manager reported on the recommended
purchase of one six by ten trailer; three 84-inch triplex mowers; one rotary
mower and three 25-inch mowers for the Parks and Recreation Department and ad-
vised that B. Hayman and Company has submitted a quotation for said equipment
in the amount of $7,886.24, including tax. He thereupon recommended the purchase
be authorized.
Mr. Murdoch reported that these single vendor items were first reviewed
by the Mechanical Maintenance Division to ascertain whether or not this equipment
could be obtained through the competitive bidding approach and it was felt that
the City's requirements could best be served by purchasing them from the sole
supplier. '~
On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Thom, purchase
was authorized in the amount of $7,886.24, including tax, as recommended by the
City Manager. MOTION CARRIED.
PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - ONE 87-INCH LOCKE MOWER: The City Manager reported on informal
bids received for the purchase of one 87-inch Locke mower for the Anaheim Hills
Golf Course and recommended acceptance of the low bid from Motor Cultivator Com-
pany, $2,504.25, including tax.
On motion by Councilman Stephenson, seconded by Councilman Dutton, the
low bid of Motor Cultivator Company was accepted and purchase authorized in the
amount of $2,504.25, including tax. To this motion, Councilman Thom voted "no".
MOTION CARRIED.
PURCHASE OF COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT: The City Manager reported on ~he recommended
purchase of communications equipment and advised that Ross Communications has
73-919
C__ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
submitted a quotation for said equipment in the amount of $6,196.94, including
tax. He thereupon recommended the purchase be authorized.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Dutton, p~r-
chase was authorized in the amount of $6,196.94, including tax, as recommended
by the City Manager. MOTION CARRIED.
PURCHASE OF MATERIALS - ALUMINIUM URD CABLE: The City Manager reported on informal
bids received for the purchase of aluminium URD cable for the Electrical Divi-
sion as follows and recommended acceptance of the low bid:
VENDOR
TOTAL AMOUNT; INCLUDING TAX
General Electric Supply, Anaheim ........ $50,691.90
Okonite Co., Los Angeles ......... 74,419.80
Westinghouse Electric Supply, Anaheim ....... 55,970.78
Maydwell-Hartzell, Los Angeles .......... 54,698.28
Graybar Electric, Anaheim ......
..... 51,542.61
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Stephenson,
the low bid of General Electric Supply Company was accepted and purchase auth-
orized in the amount of $50,691.90, including tax. MOTION CARRIED.
PURCHASE OF MATERIALS ~ ACSR CONDUCTOR FOR THE LEWIS 230 KV SUBSTATION: The City
Manager reported on the recommended purchase of ACSR Conductors for the Lewis
230 KV Substation, that no bids were received for this conductor because of
the minimum manufacturing quantities required, and the fact that manufacturers
of this type of conductor will not supply the short lengths required for the
Lewis Substation. Consequently arrangements have been made to purchase this
material from Southern California Edison at a cost of $10,727.66, including
sales tax. He thereupon recommended that the purchase be authorized from
Southern California Edison.
On motion by Councilman Sneegas, seconded by Councilman Dutton, the
purchase was authorized in the amount of $10,727.66, including tax as recommen-
ded by the City Manager. MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-530 - AGREEMENT - VTN CONSOLIDATED INC.: Councilman Sneegas
offered Resolution No. 73R-530 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH VTN CONSOLIDATED INC., A
CORPORATION, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT. (Engineering services for a traffic devices inventory system)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None '-
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-530 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-531 AMENDMENT TO THE ELECTRICAL RATES~ RULES AND REGULATIONS:
Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-531 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RATES,
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRIC ENERGY
AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 71R-478 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NOS.
73R-25 AND 73R-373.
Roll Call Vote:
73-920
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
Councilman Thom requested that the record show his "Aye" vote to be
qualified, i.e., he concurs and votes yes on that portion of the increase
necessary to recoup the current revenue lag; but not for that portion of this
increase which will finance the $90,000 San Joaquin Nuclear Power Plant Feasi-
bility Study.
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-531 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-532 o AMENDMENT TO THE WATER RATES~ RULES AND REGULATIONS:
Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-532 for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RATES~
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF WATER AS ADOPTED
BY RESOLUTION NO. 72R-600 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NOS. 73R-255 AND
73R-387.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-532 duly passed and adopted.
AMENDMENT TO THE 1973-74 BUDGET: Mr. M. R. Ringer, Finance Director, presented a
recommended amendment to the Budget for the 1973-74 Fiscal Year which includes
an additional appropriation of 5½ million dollars to power costs, Utilities
Department and shows an appropriation of 90 thousand dollars for the San Joaquin
Nuclear Power Plant Feasibility Study, both of said items to come from electrical
rate increases authorized September 7 and November 6, 1973.
On motion by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Sneegas,'amend-
ment to the 1973-74 Budget was authorized to show an increase in the total budget
amount of 5½ million dollars; to include an additional appropriation of 5½ mil-
lion dollars under power costs-utilities; to include a 90 thousand dollar appro-
priation for the San Joaquin Nuclear Power Project Feasibility Study.
To this motion, Councilman Thom voted "Aye", however qualifying his
vote to exclude the appropriation of 90 thousand dollars for the San Joaquin
Nuclear Power Project Feasibility Study.
MOTION CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed on motion
by Councilman Pebley, seconded by Councilman Stephenson:
a. Before the Public Utilities Commission - Investigation on the
Commission's own motion into the Planning, Construction, Operations, Practices,
Aesthetics, and Economics of overhead and underground transmission facilities of
all electric Public Utilities in the State of California.
By general Council consent, on recommendation of the City Manager, the
City representative was authorized to attend the investigation before the Public
Utilities Commission.
b. Financial and Operating Reports for the Month of September, 1973,
· for the Engineering Division and Water Division.
MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 3223: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3223 for adoption.
73-921
City Hall, Anaheim, California ~ COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973~ 1:30 P.M.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18, CHAPTER 18.18,
OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (Permitted primary
structures and uses; permitted accessory structures and land uses;
front-on lots)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3223 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3225: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3225 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13.08,
SECTION 13.08.020(q) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC
PARKS. (Prohibited Conduct Generally; no selling or offer for sale
of any merchandise, article or things, without permission of City
Council)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILM~N:
NOES: COUNCILM~N:
ABSENT: COUNCILMBN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3225 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3226: Councilman Dutton offered Ordinance No. 3226 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 32,
SECTION 14.32.272(r) RELATING TO PARKING DURING SCHOOL HOURS
RESTRICTED. (Romneya Drive, south side - area Thomas A. Edison
School)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3226 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 3227: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3227 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 14.32,
SECTIONS 14.32.190 AND 14.32.152 RELATING TO PARKING. (No Parking
Anytime: Coronado Street~ south side; Two-hour Parking: Coronado
Street, south side)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNC ILM~N:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None b~
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3227 duly passed and adopted.
73-922
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 3229: Councilman Sneegas offered Ordinance No. 3229 for first reading.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-25 (3) - M-l)
CONTINUED REPORT - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD SELF-.SERVICE SIGNS (VARIANCE NOS. 2490, 249]
AND 2496): Mr. Roberts reported that field inspection of the four service stations
in question was made at noon this date and three of these were found to be in
compliance. One of the stations was still displaying the pump topper sleeves.
It remains to be determined whether this is a communication problem and further
report will be submitted in one week.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-533 - CONCESSIONAIRE - ANAHEIM HILLS GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE: Mr.
Murdoch submitted the contract agreement with Yates Investments, Inc., to provide
food and beverage services at the Anaheim Hills Golf Course Clubhouse a~ pre-
viously authorized. Mr. Murdoch pointed out that this contract calls for a min-
imum payment of $550 and remains at 8½%; the amounts of insurance required have
been increased; the contract has been clarified to show that 80% of the electri-
cal bill and the entire gas bill will be collected in addition to the minimum
monthly payment; the length of the contract will be reduced to a five year term
with five year option.
Acting City Attorney Alan Watts stressed that when last discussed, the
contract was contemplated between the City and Mr. Yates as an individual, how-
ever, since that time he has formed a corporation.
Councilman Thom felt it would be judicious for Council to review the
corporation's financial statement prior to acting on the contract.
Councilman Pebley was of the opinion that a corporate financial state-
ment is not a good indicator of the status or operation of a business.
Mr. Murdoch pointed out that a bond would be required.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-533: Councilman Pebley offered Resolution No. 73R-433 for
adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH YATES INVESTMENTS, INC. FOR THE OPERATION
OF A FOOD AND BEVERAGE CONCESSION AT THE ANAHEIM HILLS MUNICIPAL GOLF
COURSE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-533 duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NOS. 73R-534, 73R-535 AND 73R-536 - CORRECTION OF ERROR IN "J" STEP:
Personnel Director Garry McRae presented resolutions to correct a cleri-
cal error in the "J" step of certain job classifications in resolutions previous-
ly adopted.
Councilman Pebley offered Resolution Nos. 73R-534 through 73R-536, both
inclusive for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-534: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-488, NUNC PRO TUNC, BY CORRECTING THE
"J" STEPS OF JUNIOR CLERK AND PLANNING AIDE.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-535: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-490, NUNC PRO TUNC, BY CORRECTING THE
"J" STEPS OF VARIOUS JOB CLASSES.
73-923
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-536: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-491, NUNC PRO TUNC, BY CORRECTING
RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR VARIOUS JOB CLASSIFICATIONS.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 73R-534 through 73R-536, both
inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NOS. 73R-537 THROUGH 73R-540 - AMENDMENT TO PERSONNEL RULE NOS. 6, 9~
15 AND 16: Personnel Director Garry McRae pSesented resolutions intended to amend
Personnel Rule Nos. 6, 9, 15 and 16 as they affect the Police Department. He
reported that these amendments are necessitated by the fact that the resolutions
previously adopted (73R-497 through 73R~501) were contingent upon the signing
of the memorandum of understanding by NOvember 1, 1973. Since this was not
accomplished, these amendments are required to revert said personnel rules,
affecting the Police Department only, to the rules and working conditions
which existed on October 4, 1973.
Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution Nos. 73R-537 through
73R-540, both inclusive for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-537: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-497, PERSONNEL RULE 6 - PREMIUM PAY.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-538: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-498, PERSONNEL RULE NO. 9 - PROBATION.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-539: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-500, PERSONNEL RULE NO. 15 - HOLIDAYS.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-540: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73R-501, PERSONNEL RULE NO. 16 - VACATION.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 73R-537 through 73R-540, both
inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-541 - TUSTIN-MIRALOMA NO. ~2 ANNEXATION (UNINHABITED): Councilman
Dutton offered Resolution No. 73R-541 for adoption, approving the Tustin-
Miraloma No. 2 Annexation.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED
TUSTIN-MIRALOMA NO. 2 ANNEXATION.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-541 duly passed and adopted.
73-924
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 6, 1973, 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 73R-542 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATE EAST LA PALMANO. 2 ANNEXA-
TION: Councilman Stephenson offered Resolution No. 73R-542 for adoption, setting
December 18, 1973, 1:30 P.M. for public hearing on the proposed East La Palma
No. 2 Annexation.
Refer to Resolution Book.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACKNOWLEDGING
RECEIPT OF A PETITION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRI-
TORY TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, DESIGNATING THE TERRITORY AS THE EAST LA
PALMA NO. 2 ANNEXATION; DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TERRITORY PRO-
POSED TO BE ANNEXED AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE DAY, HOUR AND PLACE WHERE
AND WHEN ANY PERSON OWNING REAL PROPERTY WITHIN SUCH TERRITORY SO PRO-
POSED TO BE ANNEXED'MAY APPEAR BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AND SHOW CAUSE
WHY SUCH TERRITORY SHOULD NOT BE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNCILMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Stephenson, Sneegas, Pebley, Thom and Dutton
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 73R-542 duly passed and adopted.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Sneegas moved to recess to Executive Session.
Councilman Stephenson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:07 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being present.
(6:05 P.M.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Thom moved to Adjourn to Thursday, November 8, 1973 at
11:00 a.m. Councilman Pebley seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 6:08 P.M.
" City Clerk
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES November 8~ 1973~ 11:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular
session.
PRESENT:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Stephenson, Pebley and Thom
COUNCILMEN: Sneegas and Dutton
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Daoust
Councilman Pebley called the meeting to order.
RECESS EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Pebley moved to recess to Executive Session.
Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (11:03 A.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Dutton called the meeting to order, all Councilmen being present
with the exception of Councilman Sneegas. (Mayor Dutton having entered during
Executive Session.) (11:50 A.M.)
DISCUSSION REGARDING SALARY NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE ANAHEIM POLICE ASSOCIATION: Prior
to any motion for adjournment, Councilman Thom referred to the Publicized recent